Forums

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

  •  Paul Zupan  said Created: Today 01:38 
    Reply to: 21335 - John Allan
    But I'm wondering where you would draw the line and why.  When do you think it becomes inappropriate to help.  Consider the possibility that perhaps a competitor would not have been able to file a valid protest were it not for the judge helping.  Is that fair to the respondent?

    This is what I had in mind about helping a competitor to deliver a protest was:
    • give them a Hearing Request Form and a pen//lend a laptop/tablet/phone
    • Tell them they need to
      • identify the protestee:  write sail number, name, on the HRF
      • Write the Race number
      • Write the time and place of the iincident
      • Identify the incident  Rule Number, Rule Heading that you think was broken (get them to say this:  do not tell them what rule to write)

    That is to say, assist competitors to meet the minimum requirements for their protest to be valid 

    I guess that that is where the boundary between permissible help or facilitation, and improper coaching falls
     
     What if the judge corrects the description of the incident

    Once ever a judge starts talking about the description of incident or diagram, they have crossed the line.

    such that the competitor realizes that they are incorrect in their analysis and instead decide not to file the request because they would be disqualified.  Is that fair to the respondent?  What if the judge coaches the competitor on how to present the case to the panel?

    That's way out of court.

    Once a protest validly gets into a hearing, judges can and should 'help' parties present their cases by asking good questions to get out all the relevant facts.

    The point I'm making here is, where do you think the line should be drawn, if at all.

    Minimum requirements to get a valid protest, no further.
    Today 23:02
  • John,
    Thank you for providing the link to the article posted by Graeme Hayward and originally written by Mary Pera.  It is sad that neither of them are with us any more.  
    Today 02:56
  • I think I probably hint at it in my OP, but I think some of these shifts are fully appropriate, while others are maybe appropriate, even if potentially at odds with the phrasing in Case 103:
    1. IMO, age restrictions of the fleet mathematically shift the level of competency we're looking for. A 10yo will not be at the same level as a 25yo.
    2. same here, except I think the only difference between a 20yo and an adult is the level of athleticism expected... we should expect a high level of athleticism in racing where all sailors are college-aged
    3. same again for me. If we limit boats to 2 people, then we must also force them to give each other extra room for a douse. Indeed, 2 people is BY DEFINITION appropriate for the boat, as no more are allowed in that event!!!! To say otherwise would be to force collisions at leeward marks!
    4. Same. If you are required to have no more than two people, then you are only required to have two competent people, and room needs to account for that.
    5. Trickier, but easy to handle. I wouldn't go to the group average, but I would definitely want at least a percentage of the participants to be capable of sailing within the definition of room... otherwise what are we doing?
    6. Yeah. I think we need to hold championship sailors to a higher standard. If you're going to show up and compete for a high level national or world championship, then you're agreeing that you can sail above the level of "competent".
    7. same as #6

    TLDR:
    • IMO it is appropriate within the statements from Case 103 to adjust "competent crew" to fit age and other crew restrictions as required by the event/fleet/SI's, etc. (statements 1-4)
    • I also feel it makes sense to do so for statements 5-7, but I'm not sure that syncs up with Case 103.


    Mon 19:08
  • Will enable this today...
    Mon 16:15
  • Thank you Chin In.
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more