• Language language language
  8 Comments
  Michael Moradzadeh Yesterday 06:09
• Why is the "red flag" needed?
  33 Comments
  Angelo Guarino Fri 21:38
• Case 104 - Appeals to a National Authority
  2 Comments
  Jerry Thompson Thu 15:23
• Which way to cross finish line where course altered by land?
  23 Comments
  Michael Moradzadeh Tue 17:35
• Retiring
  3 Comments
  Gordon Davies 25-Nov-29 19:32

• Language language language
  Rob ... I've also thought it interesting that some RRS, especially when directing requirements of the RC, use the word "will" instead of "shall". 
  Angelo Guarino Today 13:34
• Why is the "red flag" needed?
  > 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.
  Jim Champ Today 12:11
• Case 104 - Appeals to a National Authority
  additional facts can be drawn from agreed diagrams.
  
  
  Michael Butterfield Thu 16:02
• Which way to cross finish line where course altered by land?
  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
  Kim Kymlicka Wed 02:44
• Retiring
  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
  Michael Butterfield Mon 11:36

Forums Leader Board

This Month