Translation missing: en.posts.shared.post_not_found

Powered by
WIND


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • > I could argue that "as soon after the incident as possible" in rule 44.2 is always later than "at the first reasonable opportunity" 

    Interesting. I put it the other way interpreting  "as soon ... as possible" approximating to "pretty much immediate unless circumstances are difficult". Just goes to show the difficulties of rule writing I suppose. 

    "As soon as" is arguably problematic for the precautionary penalty, where a boat does not believe she broke a rule, but takes a penalty anyway. Such a penalty cannot be initiated until another boat has communicated her belief a rule has been broken. I doubt anyone would argue against it being legitimate to delay taking a penalty until after an immediate dialogue between boats has happened and the crew has time to evaluate the rule situation, but that doesn't seem to be what the rule says. Unless, I suppose, its considered that a dialogue between boats including a protest hail is part of the incident.
    Today 12:11
  • Following up on Joseph's comment, when a rule is changed the NoR should say  "This changes RRS xx." "This amends RRS xx" would definitely be less desirable. But when the change to the NoR is posted, it's preferable, in my opinion, to call that change "Amendment n".   

    Callum makes some good points, but to be really pedantic, rules should say "shall" rather than "must", because "must" has multiple meanings, as in "I must not know what I'm doing." Also, a rule in the NoR specifying when PFDs must be worn doesn't change rule 40.  Rule 40.1 specifies that PFDs must be worn, and Rule 40.2, titled When Rule 40.1 Applies, says "Rule 40.1 applies if ... (c) a rule in the class rules, notice of race or sailing instructions states that it applies." Finally, that rule should be in the NoR, not the SIs, because it might affect a competitor's behavior before they come to the event -- they might, for example, buy a more comfortable life jacket than the one they currently own.
    Today 06:36
  • additional facts can be drawn from agreed diagrams.

  • The change of direction to finish may be due to the nature of Case 82. If the SI's clearly write this, then there is no questions or arguments.
    Kim
    Wed 02:44
  • see below.
    RYA 2001/2

    Rule 2,  Fair Sailing
    Rule 60.3(b),  Protests: Delivering a Protest

    When a boat believes that she may have broken a rule and retires in compliance with the Basic Principle, she may revoke her retirement within protest or declaration time if she later realises that she did not in fact break a rule.
    However, if she is not acting in good faith, she breaks rule 2, Fair Sailing.
    ASSUMED FACTS

    Boat A lodged a protest against boats B and C for sailing the wrong course. Boat B did not believe she had done so, but ‘did the sportsmanlike thing’ and retired. Boat C did not retire. Within protest time, boat A checked her facts with the race committee, and found that her protest was unjustified. She withdrew her protest against boat C.

    QUESTION

    Was boat B then entitled to ‘unretire’?

    ANSWER

    The rules are silent with regard to ‘unretiring’. When a boat retires in compliance with rule 44.1, Penalties at the Time of an Incident: Taking a Penalty, for having gained a significant advantage or causing serious damage in the act of touching a mark or breaking a rule of Part 2, that is irrevocable.

    When a boat retires for some other reason, as in this case, and has indicated her retirement either to the race committee or to another boat, she may reverse this decision before the end of protest time or declaration time, whichever is earlier, provided that she has not broken any other rule in the meantime. For instance, retiring during a race, using her engine, and then resuming racing would preclude ‘unretirement’.

    However, if she has no good reason to ‘unretire’, she breaks rule 2, Fair Sailing, and the protest committee should, if necessary, extend the protest time limit for any boats that did not proceed with a protest against her because of her initial retirement.

    Question from Royal Southampton YC

Forums Leader Board

This Month

1 Michael Moradzadeh 3K
2 Eric Rimkus 1.8K
3 Jim Champ 1.35K
4 Matt Sargent 1.25K
5 Michael Butterfield 1.25K
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more