Forums

The Racing Rules of Sailing
1829 Posts
Rule 18 and Room at the Mark
176 Posts
Protest Committee & Hearing Procedures
110 Posts
Race Committee & Race Management
79 Posts
Rules 2 and 69
49 Posts
Match and Team Racing Rules
46 Posts
Training Materials, Presentations and Classes
59 Posts
Share Your SI/NOR Language
49 Posts
Event Management & Forum System (Q's, Comments & Suggestions)
173 Posts
Regole e dintorni - Italian Channel
50 Posts

Forum Guidelines

Note: This forum is not affiliated with World Sailing and comments on this forum do not represent an official interpretation of the rules, definitions, cases or regulations. The only official interpretations are those of World Sailing.

Powered by WIND

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • Aggravated Rule 69 Incidents
    Notwithstanding criminal or civil law, as chairman, I would not ignore the report, but I would not immediately penalise the boat either. I would initiate a Rule 69 misconduct process.

    Step 1 – Is there a reason to act?

    Yes.

    The information comes from the club manager, who reports that:

    •  the tactician was allegedly intoxicated, 
    •  allegedly used foul and abusive language, and
    •  allegedly threw a beer bottle at the bartender. 
    If true, this is far more than poor manners. It may amount to:

    •  assault or attempted assault, 
    •  physical violence, 
    •  unlawful activity, and
    •  conduct bringing the sport into disrepute. 
    Case 138 lists as examples of misconduct:

    •  "Engaging in any unlawful activity (for example, theft, assault...)" 
    •  "Engaging in any activity which may bring the sport into disrepute" 
    •  "Physical or threatened violence" 
    •  "Foul or abusive language that causes or may cause offence." 
    This scenario potentially involves four of those examples.

    Step 2 – Which rule applies?

    Rule 69, not Rule 2.

    Rule 2 concerns fair sailing and conduct that directly affects the competition.

    Case 138 is explicit:

    "An action that is considered to be an act of misconduct and that does not directly affect the competition should be subject to action under rule 69." 

    An argument in the clubhouse an hour after racing does not affect the fairness of that day's racing, so Rule 2 would normally not be the correct basis.

    Step 3 – Should the hearing be held tonight?

    Probably not.

    At 10:00 p.m., with the club closing, it would be difficult to conduct a fair Rule 69 hearing.

    Rule 69 requires procedural fairness. The protest committee should:

    •  notify the person of the allegation, 
    •  identify the alleged misconduct, 
    •  allow adequate time to prepare, 
    •  hear witnesses, and
    •  determine the facts using the comfortable satisfaction standard discussed in Case 122. 
    Trying to do that, as everyone is being asked to leave the premises, would not usually be appropriate.

    Step 4 – What should the chairman do tonight?

    I would:

    1.  Obtain a brief written statement from the club manager. 
    2.  Ask the bartender and any obvious witnesses to provide contact details or brief written accounts before they leave. 
    3.  Preserve any CCTV if available. 
    4.  Notify the tactician that the protest committee intends to consider Rule 69 and that a hearing will be scheduled as soon as practicable. 
    5.  Adjourn until the hearing can be conducted properly. 

    Step 5 – If the allegations are proved

    If the committee is comfortably satisfied that the tactician:

    •  abused the bartender, and 
    •  threw a beer bottle, 

    I would find this to be misconduct under Rule 69.

    Possible penalties under Rule 69.2(h) range from:

    •  a warning, 
    •  exclusion from one or more races, 
    •  DNE scores, 
    •  exclusion from the event, 
    •  or other appropriate sanctions, depending on the seriousness of the conduct. The committee must also consider whether the matter should be reported to the national authority under Rule 69.2(j). Case 139 gives examples of when such reporting is appropriate. 

    Does intoxication matter?

    Not by itself.

    There is no rule prohibiting being intoxicated. However, intoxication is not a defence to misconduct. The committee judges the competitor's conduct, not the reason for it.

    My decision as chairman

    I would immediately commence Rule 69 proceedings, preserve the available evidence that evening, and convene a properly constituted Rule 69 hearing at the earliest practical opportunity. If the allegations were established to the committee's comfortable satisfaction, I would regard throwing a beer bottle at a bartender after racing as a serious act of misconduct, likely warranting exclusion from the remainder of the event and careful consideration of a report to the competitor's national authority.

    Today 03:20
  • Winging the jib with a boom crutch
    Hi Niko, I Agree with Jim. "No part of a person’s body is a ‘device’. It is therefore permissible for a competitor to hold a sheet outboard".
    In fact, the index to the Case Book links Case 4 to both Rule 49 and Rule 55.3 and separately lists Case 97 as addressing another permitted device (a jockey pole attached to a spinnaker guy). This reinforces the jurisprudence's distinction between human action and mechanical devices. 
    Today 01:28
  • Conflict between NOR and SI
    Nice work on the AI summary ;-)
    Today 00:00
  • Sail proper course in the zone without interference
    G is plodding along downwind, trailing, setting up for a routine port tack rounding.  She should be set up for a windward drop, maybe with the pole off, in which case she will have no problem gybing back after luffing to keep clear of Y, or maybe she will still have the pole up: if she leaves the pole up too long after the drop, she'll be in trouble.  Dropping the pole quickly and tacking the headsail over the pole requires people to know what and how to do it.  I think that is right on the cusp of 'competent but not expert', but maybe it's a little on the 'very competent' side.

    I know this isn't relevant to the question, but I agree with this analysis but take it one step further.  If it was a dipole boat, Blue's pole would be in the process of coming off at position 2.  When Yellow starts the tack, Blue jibes onto starboard and starts dousing the spinnaker on the port side, crosses in front of Yellow, then jibes back.  This sets up a faster rounding (wide to tight) for Blue. I also agree this would need a 'very competent' crew.
    Yesterday 13:58
  • FIFA Asks World Sailing How They Should Resolve Red Card Issue
    Interestingly, I have just researched MLS Rules - The mid-90's American modified 'soccer' rules.  It didn't really work.

    However, MLS did have a countdown timer as Ang describes as well as some other variations to the traditional game.  MLS Penalties were pretty funky.

    The MLS rules lasted 4 years.

    ------------
    In this research, I find that the football rule makers, IFAB, remains institutionally conservative and deliberately resistant to game changes.
     ------------

    I'm also finding that what I see as poor sportsmanship is, in some places, seen as the art of being street-smart and 'doing whatever it takes to win for your team'.  Perhaps all those dives and feigned injuries I saw Columbia doing the other night were heroic... to Columbians.  Tactics celebrated as "viveza" or "gamesmanship".

    If half the footballing world are happy with that, things will never change.

    On-field tactics such as shirt-pulling, heckling the ref, appealing when knowingly last touched, diving and feigning injury will always be worth-a-go.  If you can't beat them, join them.  Off the field, the unseen underworld will continue to prop up the sport, rightly or wrongly.

    I don't think there is a solution coming any time soon.
    Fri 16:11
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more