Forum: The Racing Rules of Sailing

RRS 10 and 14 interaction

Paul Hanly
Nationality: Australia
A protest committee has found the following facts:
1. P, a First 30 doing 5 knots close hauled in a 12 knot breeze is on course to make contact with S, another First 30 doing 5 knots in the same breeze.
2. The sea state is slack tide, with large ripples of about 15cm driven by the wind.
3. There are no other boats within 20 boatlengths and no other obstructions within 20 boatlengths
4. Without a change in course contact will occur just a metre forward of the mast step of S.
5. S has hailed once when the bow of P was 5 boatlengths from where the contact would occur.
6. P does not have a crew member at the leeward headsail winch.
7. P has not changed course or made any clear response to the hail.
8 When S's bow was 4 boatlengths from where contact would occur, S, believing that a collision was quite likely without changes in course and believing that P is not keeping clear, hails protest, tacked away in a seamanlike but not more aggressive fashion and then displayed her red flag within 55 seconds.
9. P tacked commencing when P's bow was 2 boatlengths from the point where contact would have occurred if there had been no course change by either boat.
10. The incident occurred in the late afternoon but in full daylight with good visibility. Navigation lights were not yet required.

S protested on the basis of P's breach of 10 and her obligation to avoid contact under 14.
P argued that she was keeping clear and did not breach 10.

You are a member of the protest committee and are now tasked to apply the rules, also giving consideration to 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, the definition of keep clear, and case 50, all of which were mentioned by the protestor during their evidence.

What is your decision and reasoning?

(My previous Opening Post was clearly lacking in sufficient detail and asked too many questions. Apologies for having another go in trying to get some idea of a benchmark on this issue for twilight yacht sailing so I can be a better member of the protest panel at my club)
Created: 18-Apr-15 02:38

Comments

Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
1
Paul, here is my WAG at it.

First, you have S hailing at 4 BL's and tacking away .. then then P tacking at 2 BL's. Are we to assume that it took S 2 BL's between the hail and the tack away?

4 BL's is way too far away to claim anything from either party. 4 BL's is 120 feet at 5 kts of boat speed in calm, easy conditions .. S's protest and then tack-away is way too early and thus not giving P opportunity to keep clear.

Moving at 5 kts, no other boats around, easy seas and winds, S needs to wait to about 1 BL before altering her course .. certainly before tacking away and claiming she was forced to.

This is different from a tactical duck to maintain speed and position (which would be started sooner) or a lee-bow tack (which would be started later)..

S might want to maneuver earlier or later for tactical reasons, but she can't do that and claim she was forced to by P.

Looking at Case 50 .. at position 2 . the boats are about 1 BL or less away.

S has to give P an opportunity to keep clear.

Ang

Created: 18-Apr-15 04:56
Jeff Keenan
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • National Umpire
3
No matter the facts, this protest will never get past validity. 55 seconds to pull a protest flag is about 50 seconds too long in the absence of contact/damage/injured crew.
Created: 18-Apr-15 05:27
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0

No matter the facts, this protest will never get past validity. 55 seconds to pull a protest flag is about 50 seconds too long in the absence of contact/damage/injured crew.

Yea .. that too. That said, given that time nearly any scenario (absent contact/damage/injury) could have been described.

Reminds me of those tests in middle school where the first sentence is "read the entire test before proceeding" .. then it's followed with a bunch of silly stuff to do .. and the last sentence is "now that you've read the test, turn the paper over, put your pencil down and fold your hands on the desk.

Ang

Created: 18-Apr-15 06:02
John Mooney
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Umpire
  • Regional Race Officer
0

A diagram may be useful, so does this one meet your facts properly? If so, couple of thoughts:

First, I agree with the others that this protest would likely fail validity. 55 seconds is an eternity on a 12 knot day when nothing is preventing the display of a flag. As far as the incident itself is concerned:

  1. The conditions you describe are ideal for maneuvering: flat water and enough wind for the boats to be maximally responsive and fully in control.
  2. I haven’t sailed a First 30, but these are modern, fin-keeled, tiller-steered boats, with rudders hung either astern (“new” First 30) or well aft, away from the keel (“old” First 30). In either case, they should turn quite crisply at need, in the hands of a moderately competent skipper and crew. In the accompanying diagram, I’ve given them just under two boat lengths to complete a tack, which seems generous to me (I’ll bet they could tack in one or less in these conditions). At 5 kts boat speed, two boat lengths is about 7 seconds.

So, as I understand your description of the incident, S hails at pos.1, and then protests and begins her tack at pos.2. P begins her tack at pos.3. (in this diagram, the mark “1” is the hypothetical point of contact if nobody changes course).

As you can see, the closest point of approach between the two boats is greater than three boat lengths, or more than ninety feet. If I were on this PC, I would agree with Angelo that P has kept clear and no rule has been broken in this case, partly because S has tacked away before P had any need to keep clear. Given two boat lengths to complete a tack, P could have sailed almost as far as she did before tacking and still kept clear, and S could have held her course for another two boat lengths before she needed to begin her tack to avoid contact.

As I observed in the other thread, though, that’s my judgement call, but others might judge differently, so YMMV.

Created: 18-Apr-15 11:53
Paul Hanly
Nationality: Australia
0
Ang & John, Thanks for your comments.
John, thanks in particular for your diagram.
The diagram also helped me get Bill Handley's comments in my earlier thread.
It shows that with two lengths allowed for the tack it is seaman like and puts S's windward side about 1.7 lengths below where P's leeward side would have tracked.
Allow 0.25 as the distance to keep clear and S should have sailed another 1.45 boat lengths, so should have commenced her tack at about 2.55 boat lengths from the projected point of contact if P had not already commenced changing course.
I now feel confident I have a benchmark I can work from.
As to time to display I think in an amateur twilight race and a tack to avoid contact up to 30 seconds after the tack completion would be reasonable as being within the first reasonable opportunity, otherwise on so many occasions you would never deal with the substantive issues involving safety. Not a single boat in a fleet of 60 to 70 each Weds has a mounted flag unfurl able in 5 seconds. Almost everyone has to get someone to get to and dig in a sheet bag, find the flag, scramble across a heeled cockpit to the back stay, mount the flag and unfurl it. There is no disadvantage to anybody in allowing 30 seconds and immediacy is not required for the flag, just for the hail of "protest".
Created: 18-Apr-15 15:36
Beau Vrolyk
Nationality: United States of America
0
John,

Thanks for your description of the First 30 and its tacking ability. While identifying a boat's Brand or type works well if that sort of boat is well known to the Jury, it can be problematic on appeal if the Appeal Committee doesn't know the characteristics of the boat. For example, had these been 150 foot long schooners, this could have been a dangerously close tack.

This next bit is a little off topic, if you're short on time don't bother reading:
While I do understand that many Juries feel that a Protest Flag must be displayed within seconds, as both a competitor and as a frequent jury member I would suggest that this may be an unreasonable requirement. Rule 61.1(a) most certainly says:

"...shall hail ‘Protest’ and conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity for each"

but does "reasonable" really mean 5 seconds? Yes, I know there are cases that guide us on this, but I'd respectfully suggest that judgement be used. I would further suggest that a protest not fail validity on what many competitors feel is a trivial technicality. Rule 61.1(a) is clearly trying to tell competitors and Judges that a boat who is protesting another boat needs to inform them, the intent being that this will allow a protested boat to take a penalty if she wishes. While it does go into detail about the means, the intent is clear.

Why would a jury fail an otherwise reasonable protest because the Protest Flag was shown 10 seconds, or 30 second, or 55 seconds after the hail? Wouldn't a simple question to the boat being protested of the form: "When did you learn that there was a protest against you?" or "Did you hear the hail of "Protest?" or "Did you know you were being protested by Boat X?" suffice to determine if they had been "informed". If they answer: "No", then it is most certainly reasonable to determine if there was a failure of the protesting boat to inform under the rule; but I've personally had many boats answer "Yes". I hold that this would clearly indicate that the prime directive in Rule 61.1(a) had been met by the protesting boat.

"A boat intending to protest shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity."

I further hold that tossing an otherwise reasonable protest without a hearing by finding a failure of validity in this way is not in the interests of having the fairest possible races. Simply put, I don't believe that our current expectation that "first reasonable opportunity" to display a red flag be measured in single digit seconds is actually reasonable in every circumstance. Nor do I find this yielding the fairest possible outcome for the competitors; which is our primary goal as a jury.
Created: 18-Apr-15 16:53
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0

As to time to display I think in an amateur twilight race and a tack to avoid contact up to 30 seconds after the tack completion would be reasonable as being within the first reasonable opportunity, otherwise on so many occasions you would never deal with the substantive issues involving safety. Not a single boat in a fleet of 60 to 70 each Weds has a mounted flag unfurl able in 5 seconds. Almost everyone has to get someone to get to and dig in a sheet bag, find the flag, scramble across a heeled cockpit to the back stay, mount the flag and unfurl it. There is no disadvantage to anybody in allowing 30 seconds and immediacy is not required for the flag, just for the hail of "protest".

Paul, I would be careful there. The US Appeals 67 and 82 are informative (though not forceful on you Aussies). Rummaging around for the flag isn't a reasonable expectation usually. - Ang

Created: 18-Apr-15 17:00
Jeff Keenan
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • National Umpire
0
Refer to RRS 61.1 (a) "...conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity...". Going to find protest flag after incident is not considered reasonable. If your local PC is allowing protests to continue with competitors waiting 55 seconds to pull protest flag, they're doing you a great disservice as any regatta above Wed night club level will not allow.
Created: 18-Apr-15 17:09
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Beau,

I'm VERY sympathetic to your argument and from one who is very sensitive to the trends of fewer and fewer protests (and thus erosion of rules) ... I hear what you are saying.

BUT, I think the flag is important. You get people calling things from boats .. sometimes you have crew (in the heat of the moment) calling "starboard". .. "protest" . (and other unmentionables). I think the flag is very important to define "intent" when boats are large enough (i.e. larger crew compliment) to require them. As the Protestee, you hear "protest" coming from the boat, unless you are staring at the other boat's crew, you might be hard pressed to know who said it .. was it the skipper or the pit-man.

Talk is cheap ... flying the flag is a purposeful and affirmative act by the skipper or tactician in charge illustrating clear intent .. thus it needs to be done quickly.

IMO .. there is no excuse for the skipper to not have it handy .. if not on the backstay, in their pocket then or hanging on the inside of the companionway or sitting plainly on the chart table.

Ang
Created: 18-Apr-15 18:47
Jim Archer
Nationality: United States of America
0
If the PC felt that 55 seconds was the first reasonable opportunity, given that most people produce the flag much more quickly, I would expect them to have made finding of fact to substantiate why 55 seconds was the first reasonable opportunity. Is that a reasonable thought?

I found it interesting that the skipper on S was more concerned about hailing "protect" than getting his boat of harms way. He could have tacked and then hailed and had a crew member deploy the flag. Many skippers just don't plan a flag deployment ahead so, as someone else said, someone is hunting for the flag below deck.


Created: 18-Apr-15 18:55
Jim Archer
Nationality: United States of America
0
Oh, I have never sailed a First 30 but I own a First 36.7. In the described conditions there was plenty of time left. But again, it's a whole different view from the helm.
Created: 18-Apr-15 18:56
Ron Kallen
Nationality: United States of America
0

I don’t know if there is a gotcha here, but here goes: P tacked late to avoid contact. At 2 boat lengths from the point of contact, P tacks away but S had already completed her tack on to port to avoid contact. At 4 of her boat lengths from contact, S had under 14 seconds to avoid contact, assuming that S was about 8 feet ahead. Believing that contact was inevitable, she tacks and displays a flag “within 55 seconds” (which seems sufficiently prompt after completion of a tack and everyone is in their new position. All that matters is P knows they are being protested.). S could have waited until 2 boat lengths from contact, which would give her only about 7 seconds to scramble her crew and do a crash tack to avoid contact, without further watching and waiting to see if P was about to tack away. S should not have to be a mind reader. If S waited until 1 boat length while moving at 5 knots, she had less than 4 seconds to execute a tack to avoid contact. This is much too risky. What if there was a wind shift at that moment or if the tack was poorly executed? At 3 boat lengths (90 feet or about 10 seconds from contact), now in the midst of a tack, S had no way to know that P was about to tack one boat length later. Bottom line: If the aim of the rules is to avoid injury or damage, then the protest, IMHO, should be allowed at 4 both lengths if there is ‘generosity of spirit’ on the part of the protest committee (I know. I know.) But if S waited another 30 feet until separation was only 3 boat lengths, it was even more reasonable for S to believe a collision was inevitable, in view of the lack of “signs of life” aboard P and then tack away and hoist the protest flag. Although contact did not occur, S believing that it was inevitable, acceded to Rule 14 by initiating an avoidance maneuver. This maneuver then triggered her protest under Rule 10, since S was not granted the right of way by P, the “keep clear” boat. This accords with the second sentence of Case 50. The protest should be allowed.

Created: 18-Apr-15 22:43
John Mooney
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Umpire
  • Regional Race Officer
0
Beau, you're very welcome, but the description is more theory than practical knowledge. It's true that not everyone will be familiar with the characteristics of the boats involved in a specific protest, though you're probably aware that one of the recommendations to those serving on PCs is to gain some of that familiarity with the boats in question, if possible. FWIW, if I'm judging at the event of a class I'm unfamiliar with, I try to find one or two of the class hot dogs to give me a quick tutorial about how the boats sail, and any peculiarities I should know about. My experience is that doing such research is universally well-received (or at least, that everyone is very polite about not calling me an idiot! :) ). I suppose it might be worthwhile to include such characteristics as facts in the decision of such a case as an aid to appeals committees and competitors attempting to understand the decision (though I admit I haven't yet done so). I couldn't agree more that in a full-keeled boat with a wineglass hull and a keel-hung rudder, or one with a complex sailplan, the situation Paul poses would be entirely different. I think that's one reason that hard and fast rules about distances or times aren't part of what makes a "seamanlike" maneuver or a "reasonable" judgement - there are just too many variables to accommodate.

Also, like Ang, I'm very sensitive to your observation that it's frustrating to competitors to disallow a protest for failing the validity tests. However, I agree with him that the rules don't give us a great deal of latitude about that sort of thing, and I do think it can affect fairness. Consider that at roughly 3.5 seconds per boatlength, after 55 seconds, these two boats are separated by roughly 16 boat lengths. That's almost 500 feet. It's all very well if everyone understands that there will definitely be a protest on the basis of a hail, but that requires that the hail be heard and that (as Ang points out), the hail of "protest" is not just something said by the snacktician in the heat of the moment. Those uncertainties are taken care of (in boats over 6 meters) by the display of the flag, and if that display happens almost two football fields away, it may well go unnoticed (particularly since the protested boat has other things on her agenda than watching for a protest flag).

Like you, I've had plenty of boats say they were aware that they were likely being protested on the basis of a hail, but according to the rules, they didn't *know* it until the flag went up. Consider this situation: a foul occurs at a weather mark, and "Protest" is hailed immediately. The ostensible protestee delays her spinnaker set to see if she will be protested (i.e., to see a flag). She doesn't see it for 15 or 20 seconds, and so proceeds to set the chute. 30 or 40 seconds later, up goes the flag. That delay easily triples the cost of, and virtually removes the option of taking an on-the-water penalty. That's not fair either, and I'm finding it difficult to imagine a protocol that allows for differing judgements about timeliness in so many different circumstances without seeming like a manifestly unfair crap shoot to everyone concerned. In short, as much as I hate frustrating competitors who want to have their protests heard, I think the cure is worse than the disease here. I submit that it's better to say that the protest is invalid, and then try to find the time to render what is clearly identified as a theoretical rules judgement for the edification of the competitors, if they're so inclined. I'm willing to bet that the protestor will have a flag mounted on his backstay at the next start, and that's a positive development.
Created: 18-Apr-15 23:16
John Mooney
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Umpire
  • Regional Race Officer
0
Ron, our judgements differ, and that's what makes a horse race, as they say. There are only two things I would take issue with in your description:

1 - From a rules perspective, the maneuver begins when the boat changes course, not when the crew start moving toward their maneuvering positions. If I were S, in Paul's scenario, I would hold my course considerably longer than you would in these conditions, but I would very likely have crew standing by the leeward jib sheet well in advance of any course change, both as a lookout and to minimize the time necessary to complete a tack, once I had made the decision to do so. I submit that not to do that is to be unseamanlike. What's more, as regards both the time it takes to prep a tack and the importance of "signs of life" on the other boat, I would point out that in small racer-cruisers like this, cross-sheeting the jib is not at all uncommon, so a boat that shows no "signs of life" may be well prepared to tack at any time.

2 - The decision that one boat would view as embodying "generosity of spirit" on the PC's part would likely be viewed by the other as being unduly harsh. I think that's why we don't find such terms in the rule book.
Created: 18-Apr-15 23:39
Paul Hanly
Nationality: Australia
0
Jim, the reason for hailing "protest" before tacking is that 14a uses the words " until it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear".
61.1 says " she shall hail ‘Protest’ and conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity for each"
So it seems that when S decides to tack, P is already not keeping clear and so S should hail" protest" straight away, not wait to complete the tack.

I did not want a response that said S's first reasonable opportunity to hail (as opposed to display the protest flag) was the moment S decided P was "not keeping clear" and that a skipper can hail "tack" and "protest" as they commence their tack. I tried to construct the circumstances so that there was no disallowance of the protest on the basis of anything in 61.1. I clearly failed on the time allowed for display of the flag in many people's opinion. Our committee is strictish on the hail by the skipper, but more generous with the time for the flag, erring perhaps on the side of having the issues to do with safety on the water dealt with. I expect that a hail on completion of the tack would also suffice for many of our protest committee panel members. (5 divisions, so ideally 2 panel members from each division so we can always avoid conflicts of interest, even during holiday periods).

I don't think allowing time for a crew member to retrieve a flag from a specific sheet bag in the cockpit nominated by the skipper after completing (including pulling on the sails expeditiously,) a tack to avoid a collision, and then putting it on the backstay is unreasonable in mixed yacht fleet twilight racing where nearly all competitors are 6m or longer in all but perhaps one division. I certainly think that only allowing 5 seconds would be totally unreasonable in such circumstances. I wasn't talking about allowing time to go below decks, or search multiple places. A sheet bag will also often have sheets or halyard ends also stored in it, hence my reference to rummage. I think allowing the time for a quick rummage to get the flag from beneath the sheets/halyards/furling control line is not unreasonable in the context of twilight sailing.

I do note that at a rules briefing at our compulsory pre-season skippers briefing an international judge did suggest having the protest flag already in a container on, or furled on, the backstay before commencing sailing. No one has done that because it is antithetical to the ethos of twilight sailing in both clubs I sail at. Each of those clubs have fleets of 60 to 70 boats each race night. People are not looking to gain advantage by protesting as they might in a one design state title or above. They protests when a breach is egregious, repeated or causes contact. I would certainly expect a tighter time frame at a one design state title regatta or above but would still think 5 seconds is too tight to require the flag if boats are in close proximity. 5 seconds is plenty of time for the hail in most circumstances at any event.
Created: 18-Apr-16 00:59
Paul Hanly
Nationality: Australia
0
Thanks all. You have been very patient and helpful.
Created: 18-Apr-16 01:05
Paul Hanly
Nationality: Australia
0
On the point of the time allowed for the flag display. I do now see the distances involved and the criticality in situations with fast moving boats, or when there is a spinnaker launch at stake.

5 nm =30,380 feet so 5 kts = 8.43 ft/sec (30380/3600). one boatlength takes 3.54 secs (30 in the facts above)/8.43). A seamanlike tack takes say 4 boatlengths = 14 secs plus one boatlength to have sails roughly trimmed totals 17.73 seconds. Now raise the flag and I would say 15 seconds is reasonable in twilight (no spinnakers) sailing based on a little simulation I just did. That is 33 secs rounded from the hail. Based on John's diagrams the skippers are about 4 boatlengths apart at that time (remember P tacked away, otherwise they would be closer and if P (now on stbd) turns and looks the view of the red flag on S's (now on port) backstay is unobstructed.

Maybe what is reasonable depends on what S had to do to avoid and how far away P is from the backstay when the flag has been raised. If they are sailing alongside one another as W and L now, is it reasonable to take 60 seconds if P (now W) can see the flag plain as day when it is raised?

Or maybe it is just what is reasonable on the part of S and p is irrelevant. If a different P can't see the red flag because he is too far away because they are faster boats or the view is obscured by an intervening boat then it is just tough luck for P.

Is it unreasonable of S not to have the flag furled on the backstay before racing just in case she wishes to protest? In the absence of a specific rule or sailing instruction I would say no. So in that case reasonable has to allow time to recover the falg from a sensible storage place and display it.

As to whether the spinnaker issue should be taken into account in determining whether the flag was displayed in time, it might depend on whether P had failed to keep clear. If she failed to keep clear then she ought to have been sailing clear to do take her penalty as she ought under Basic Principle 1 and a breach of Basic Principle 1, to seek advantage by waiting to take a penalty until after seeing whether a protest flag has been raised on a timely basis ought be a breach of RRS 2 Fair sailing but I guess if the protest doesn't proceed because of the flag timing, then the issue of the Basic Principle and Fundamental Rule never gets ventilated.
Created: 18-Apr-16 02:32
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Paul asked,

“Is it unreasonable of S not to have the flag furled on the backstay before racing just in case she wishes to protest? In the absence of a specific rule or sailing instruction I would say no.”

Flying the flag at the first reasonable opportunity is a sailing move, not too dissimilar from a tack or gybe.

2 boats are sailing even 6 BL apart on port to windward . The leeward boat tacks to STB at the windward layline, but the windward boat can’t tack away to keep clear because his crew dropped the winch handle overboard on the last tack .. nobody went to get the replacement in anticipation of its need ... and his spare is “somewhere down below”. Had he been prepared, he could have easily kept clear.

A red flag is part of racing, just like a winch handle it has to be handy to meet your obligations in a reasonably timely manner. Doesn’t have to be on the back stay, but since “first reasonable opportunity” is spelled out in the RRS, it has to be easily and quickly at hand.

There really is little excuse for it not to be as the expectation is clear.

Ang
Created: 18-Apr-16 03:47
Michael Butterfield
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • International Judge
  • International Umpire
  • International Race Officer
0
one of the few times I received a letter of complaint about my actions was when in an offshore fleet I said a boat did not shout protest when avoiding a collision. The complaint was I would not even listen to him. I compounded my problem by asking the port boat if they knew they had broken a rule but knew "protest" had not been hailed. An attempt to get an admission to formulate a rule 2 hearing. I was accused of accepting what the other boat said but not listening to the starboard boat.
I have history on this therefore and have a new view on this, reinforced by the number of boats who say to me they never hear the hail of protest.
Here there was a hail but I just share the above. I am happy generally to find offshore boats are out of hailing distance.
I would only question the 55 seconds if this was raised by the other boat, as you do have to finish the tack away and then get the flag which does have a time. If the other boat does not raise the validity itself as it should at the commencement of the hearing why should we not give the benefit of the doubt and listen to the protest?
I
Created: 18-Apr-16 09:48
Ant Davey
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • International Judge
  • Umpire In Training
0
I have been in a number of hearings where 30 seconds was considered far too long to display a red flag. Certainly in the Solent and surrounding waters, if you intend to protest there is an expectation from the PCs that I've served on that the red flag is furled around a shroud or backstay and simply pulling off a piece of tape or line is all that is needed to display it. In the absence of damage or injury, five seconds is considered enough time to display. If a hail is not heard, but a flag is seen this gives the offending boat the opportunity to take an appropriate penalty under Rule 44.2, which must be done as soon as reasonably possible. If S has tacked and sailed away, the crew on P aren't going to be able to see a small red flag that may be being displayed 150 metres away.
In the absence of any other boats, not taking a penalty until one minute after the incident (55 seconds plus time to set up to tack) would be deemed far too late, and that would be a breach liable to disqualification. That can't be fair and equitable.

Ant
Created: 18-Apr-17 22:28
Jeff Silverman
Nationality: United States of America
0
S took way too long to put their protest flag up, making it an invalid protest.
Created: 18-Apr-19 17:50
[You must be signed in to add a comment]