Snowflakes and sailing

[SteveC]

Anyone any thoughts on whether R69 is being increasingly enforced for (in my opinion) ridiculously PC reasons.

I heard of a 69 hearing at a recent event where a person was found guilty of a 'heat of the  moment' shout (no other rule breach) that was deemed a minimal (no further action) breach yet took over 4 hours to resolve by the jury.

Fair enough if it was *actual* gross misconduct, however this was more akin to a start line in a cruising class shouting "up up up" and when the boat in the wrong was ignoring the suggestion, then shouting "will you fvkking go up!!"

Have sailors become so fickle that they are 'deeply offended' by this (as was recorded on the protest form).

Is seems, having chatted to a few pros about this, that there is a mandate from the ISAF to clamp down on such behavior, lest some poor snowflake get offended by it. 

Is this what we have become?

What will happen to these poor easily offended people on a north Atlantic offshore with a 30ft following sea in 30kts with a kite up and the shyt hits the fan?

I really fear for them and I don't think the answer is for sailing federations to simply make more cotton wool available.

Any views on this?

 

[Mach 5]

Did he go up? 

Used to be Yachting was a gentleman's sport.. 

 

[SteveC]

I don't see what the problem is here. 

Every competitor has the right to protest.  Looks like the jury got it right and the protestor will think twice about calling that again.  You are projecting one incident to call the sport in general, seems a small sample to base your conclusions on. 

The system appears to be working. 

I'm posting here describing what I saw, and the aftermath, not making any conclusions.

I would simply like to hear others experience on the matter and, if there are increasingly similar rulings, what that means for the sport in general.

 

[Somebody Else]

I think the barger should have come fucking up.

Or how about the leeward boat protest the boat that wouldn't come fucking up for a rule 69 infraction for causing leeward traumatic worrying that he would scratch his gelcoat.

 

[sunseeker]

Anyone any thoughts on whether R69 is being increasingly enforced for (in my opinion) ridiculously PC reasons.

I heard of a 69 hearing at a recent event where a person was found guilty of a 'heat of the  moment' shout (no other rule breach) that was deemed a minimal (no further action) breach yet took over 4 hours to resolve by the jury.

Fair enough if it was *actual* gross misconduct, however this was more akin to a start line in a cruising class shouting "up up up" and when the boat in the wrong was ignoring the suggestion, then shouting "will you fvkking go up!!"

Have sailors become so fickle that they are 'deeply offended' by this (as was recorded on the protest form).

Is seems, having chatted to a few pros about this, that there is a mandate from the ISAF to clamp down on such behavior, lest some poor snowflake get offended by it. 

Is this what we have become?

What will happen to these poor easily offended people on a north Atlantic offshore with a 30ft following sea in 30kts with a kite up and the shyt hits the fan?

I really fear for them and I don't think the answer is for sailing federations to simply make more cotton wool available.

Any views on this?

“Gross” is no longer a requirement for rule 69.

The standard is now only “misconduct”.

Good luck finding a universal understanding of exactly what defines “misconduct”.

 

[ScowLover]

It should be noted that "Gross Misconduct" was reduced to "Misconduct" in the last iteration of the rule book. It seems World Sailing is encouraging more rule 69 hearings. 

It is also notable that as a member of a protest committee and receiving a rule 69 report, you might look to the US Sailing Judges Manual, but it has been withdrawn for revision and "will be replaced soon." It is hard to know what "soon" is given that it has been pulled for revision since the beginning of 2017. 

World Sailing's Judges Manual is here: http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/JudgeManual1710182-[23619].pdf 

From that documnent:

Examples of occasions when action under rule 69 would be appropriate, should the protest committee become aware of evidence, are presented in Case 138. Some include:

• lying at a hearing

• knowingly infringing a rule with intent to gain an unfair advantage

• threatening behavior, or physical contact

• falsifying measurement documents

• failure to comply with a reasonable request of a race official

• deliberately damaging another boat

• abuse of officials

• theft

• offensive drunken behavior

• fighting

 

[SteveC]

There should be more Rule 69 protests, it would improve the sport.

Years ago I was luffing on the line in a 26 footer with less than 30 seconds to the gun.  Another boat screams in from the top side of the line screaming words like 'Rooomm room get out of the fucking way you got not fucking rights fuck you!"  So to narrowly avoid a collision I had to bear away as did a couple of other boats just before the gun went.  The offending boat got a great start to windward of us while we were gassed by the fleet.

Now the worst part was that the offenders knew the rules but decided that no one was going to protest in that semi-social event and took full advantage of that.  Worked before and it worked again.  I still regret not protesting.  I was too lazy.  In fact I was at fault for not protesting a competitor who broke the rules.

Should be more protesting to clean up the sport.

In fairness that is not the same. They were clearly in the wrong there in terms of the start line rules regardless of R69.

How would you feel if you or one of your fellow competitors had responded with "WTF are you doing, you have no rights????!!!! and then lost a hearing over it? 

Bear in mind a R69 hearing is not a "protest" under the rules, and the protestor has zero to lose by doing it.

In your case, I would agree that they (barging boat) should be reported, clear bullying tactics, I'm not so sure about an innocent boat responding.

 

[SENDITBOYS]

Rule 69 has two good uses, if you ask me:

1) For absolutely egregiously offensive shitbags who need removing from the fleet. 

2) As a get-out-of-jail-free card in the event someone protests me and does so with colourful language. 

 

[SteveC]

“Gross” is no longer a requirement for rule 69.

The standard is now only “misconduct”.

Good luck finding a universal understanding of exactly what defines “misconduct”.

Yes, sorry, my bad there.

Exact current wording is:

(a) A competitor, boat owner or support person shall not commit an act of misconduct.
(b) Misconduct is:
(1) conduct that is a breach of good manners, a breach of good sportsmanship, or unethical behaviour; or
(2) conduct that may bring the sport into disrepute.

 

[Guest]

How about not bringing trigger words like "snowflake" into the question, that blurs clear thinking and makes it political when its about sportsmanship. Its all horses for courses, in our club races swearing at each other is technical language among familiar boats, you don't call the commodore a cunt unless you want a 69 hearing. You have to read the situation and to be fair its probably better for the sport all round to not swear at competitors. When was the last time you heard pro golfers, F-1 drivers, tennis players, top sports people in any field use foul language unless they lose self control?   

That said, the appropriate course of action is to protest him for failing to keep clear and have a quiet word in the bar, not convene a full flags and trumpets hearing                                                                                                                                 

 

[SteveC]

2) As a get-out-of-jail-free card in the event someone protests me and does so with colourful language. 

You cannot actually use it in those terms, it will have no bearing on an unrelated protest. It may, however cause grief for the other party - maybe rightly so - but if you did it vindictively then I have an issue.

 

[Kirwan]

Everyone is LOOKING to get offended these days, so they can whine their 'righteous indignation'.

The biggest crybabies are the ones who use the term 'Snowflake'... projection is a form of self delusion to hide one's hypocrisy. 

We once called "up", and the response was "If you were more Corinthian, we'd give you room"  (although we had no pro/paid sailors on board).

 

[SteveC]

If people are sensitive about the use of 'snowflake' I'll humbly apologize for that and admit it was for clickbait purposes..

That said, the appropriate course of action is have a quiet word in the bar, not convene a full flags and trumpets hearing                                                                                                                                 

This I agree with ^^

I'm no spring chicken either, but yeah back in the day we used to resolve matters over a beer and there was never ill feeling.

 

[Sail4beer]

 I still regret not protesting.  I was too lazy.  In fact I was at fault for not protesting a competitor who broke the rules.

Should be more protesting to clean up the sport.

Like LB15 and WOXI or Comanche? Whichever boat it was..

Just saying...

 

[jerseyguy]

Anyone any thoughts on whether R69 is being increasingly enforced for (in my opinion) ridiculously PC reasons.

I heard of a 69 hearing at a recent event where a person was found guilty of a 'heat of the  moment' shout (no other rule breach) that was deemed a minimal (no further action) breach yet took over 4 hours to resolve by the jury.

Fair enough if it was *actual* gross misconduct, however this was more akin to a start line in a cruising class shouting "up up up" and when the boat in the wrong was ignoring the suggestion, then shouting "will you fvkking go up!!"

Have sailors become so fickle that they are 'deeply offended' by this (as was recorded on the protest form).

Is seems, having chatted to a few pros about this, that there is a mandate from the ISAF to clamp down on such behavior, lest some poor snowflake get offended by it. 

Is this what we have become?

What will happen to these poor easily offended people on a north Atlantic offshore with a 30ft following sea in 30kts with a kite up and the shyt hits the fan?

I really fear for them and I don't think the answer is for sailing federations to simply make more cotton wool available.

Any views on this?

"What will happen to these poor easily offended people on a north Atlantic offshore with a 30ft following sea in 30kts with a kite up and the shyt hits the fan?"

Profoundly unlikely the folks you describe would ever be in that location in those conditions

 

[Glenn McCarthy]

I wrote elsewhere on the 'net 5 years ago, "A RRS69 penalty shall apply ONLY after a guilty finding in a court of law."

Somebody punches you at a regatta? Call a cop, go to court have her get a guilty finding for assault. Then a RRS69 applies.

Somebody vandalizes your boat or car at a regatta?  Call a cop, go to court and have them found guilty for vandalism.  Then RRS69 applies.

Too often, people do not want to involve police and want some judges at the club to be in charge of enforcement.  BS.  You want these people out?  Nail to the effen cross!

 

[Sail4beer]

You railed against him in the WOXI thread for letting one of them cross and not protesting. 

That’s what I am saying

Glad you owned up to it 

 

[SteveC]

The sport is defined by a very good set of rules, if you are not prepared to sail under them go find another sport that is governed by the chats in the bar.

Circling back to the topic at hand, it's also everyone on the racecources' option not to protest or report. 

We all do it, especially at club level, it's good manners sometimes. 

I don't get your view that we are all duty bound to officially protest every infringement,

 

[SteveC]

"A RRS69 penalty shall apply ONLY after a guilty finding in a court of law."

That's not in the current world RRS, with the exception of international events  where there is an international jury and an exemption was granted.