• Redress for UFD Penalty Caused by Contact Before the Start: Protest Committee Responsibilities and Applicable Rules
  21 Comments
  Tiziano Menconi Yesterday 18:16
• A protests B, C & D; B protests A & C; C protests only D .. but not all valid
  36 Comments
  Angelo Guarino Yesterday 12:20
• Best Scoring System to Select Champion Boat from multiple Divisions
  14 Comments
  John Allan Mon 18:02
• "Rules Governing the Duration of Flag D Display Ashore Before Start"
  30 Comments
  Tiziano Menconi Mon 12:07
• Consequences of an OA Breaking RRS 89.1 and Interaction of RRS 75
  38 Comments
  Angelo Guarino Fri 12:14

• Redress for UFD Penalty Caused by Contact Before the Start: Protest Committee Responsibilities and Applicable Rules
  Ang, Good get.  Unlike RRS 60.5(c)(1), RRS 30.4 doesn't have an 'unless she is exonerated' exception.  So, for the race committee there is no error to correct, and it will need a direction from the protest committee.
  
  Also, under RRS 43.1(a) someone has to make a judgement about 'compelled':  it's not sufficient that X broke RRS 12 and 14, which a Penalty Taken for might show, but certainly will not contain enough information about compulsion.
  John Allan Today 03:42
• A protests B, C & D; B protests A & C; C protests only D .. but not all valid
  1.  Combine all the hearings into a single hearing per RRS63.2(b).  Note it in the 'Procedural Matters'. Every boat is a party on that basis.
  2.  Note the invalid hearings in 'Procedural Matters'.
  3.  Continue the hearing on the basis of a single valid hearing.  If, at any time it's found that the incidents were not related, stop the hearing, excuse the non-related parties and continue.
  4.  Finish hearing.  Go home.
  
  The rules allow the hearings to be combined if they are of the same incident.  In combining the protests, the PC is essentially locking in the parties as parties. Once this step is taken, it's done and fixed unless it turns out that there were multiple incidents.
  
  "We have at least one valid protest about an incident in which any of you may have broken a rule.  It's our job to resolve that.  In fact, we could have held that valid protest while you wait outside, and then protested you under 60.4(c)(2) and brought you back in.  Instead (to save time), since you have already been given all the rights per 63.1 and are in here now, we will combine all the protests into one hearing.  You a party in 'Grand Unified Hearing'.  Stay in, and let's get it over with."
  
  Look.  If all the boats who were in that incident are already present at the hearing room, there is no point in inserting the steps of 60.4(c)(2) and 63.2(d), when they have already been afforded all their 63.1 rights.  (60.4(c)(2) and 63.2(d) is there to ensure that a new boat, not a party, is given the 63.1 rights.)  The fact 60.4(c)(2) is available to the PC is the reason why no to add it.
  
  

  World Sailing Judges Manual January 2025
  F.1.2  Hearing More Than One Request Concurrently
  The protest committee may combine hearings which arise from the same or very closely connected incidents into one hearing. Examples are a protest and a counter-protest, or several protests that appear to relate to the same incident, or multiple requests for redress related to the same issue. If the protest committee has doubts about whether protests or redress requests are about the same incident, assume that they are, and start the hearing with all the parties. Provided that at least one is valid, the hearing may proceed with the named parties. 

  
  
  Benjamin Harding Today 03:39
• "Rules Governing the Duration of Flag D Display Ashore Before Start"
  Thank you Roger.
  
  The RYA legal advice is a wonderful resource, but it is voluminous.
  
  I quite understand how RRS 3 may not work for persons under age.
  
  Could you point me towards the exact document that says 'personally legally responsible'.
  
  I"m still very interested in the answer to Lawnin's question
  
  

   How do you know which countries hold the RO legally responsible when boats are not racing? 

  
  What are the criteria you use to assess the obligations in different national jurisdictions?
  
  Can you briefly tell us what (sorts of) national jurisdictions have different (sorts of) obligations?
  John Allan Yesterday 22:35
• Best Scoring System to Select Champion Boat from multiple Divisions
  Niko,
  
  You suggested:
  
  "Gotcha. Since they all have handicaps, would you consider scoring them based on their adjusted average speed over the night? Basically handicapping the whole fleet against each other.
  To me, that seems more fair than comparing them based on the place they finish within their fleet of completely different competitors."
  
  I like your suggestion and I plan to run some tests vs the method I have been using around the Most Competitive Fleet.
  
  Thank you.
  Jerry Thompson Yesterday 18:28
• Aggiornati i testi suggeriti in italiano per i verbali
  Perfetto
  Grazie Claudio
  Tiziano Menconi Yesterday 05:05

Forums Leader Board

This Month