Firstly, I'm not convinced that there wasn't a change of course by L; albeit that the helmsperson may not have induced it. My (assumed) findings subject to a clearer answer to the above : L (ROW) lost control of her mainsheet and suddenly altered course and heeled quickly to windward. There was contact between the mast tops of W and L that caused damage. W failed to keep clear of L. L failed to avoid contact with W. My conclusion : W was keeping clear of L until L lost control of her mainsheet. In not keeping clear of L, W broke RRS 11 and 14. L failed to avoid contact with W and broke RRS 14 (and probably 16.1). My decision : The contact with W was caused through no fault of her own (not having time to avoid the contact, albeit not ROW boat, thus need to find on 16.1) and L broke a rule of Part 2. W is exonerated (RDG) for breaking RRS 14 (and probably 11). L is DSQ for breaking RRS 14 and possibly 16.1 as well.
1.W was compelled to break 11 and exonerated under 43.1(a). 2. L did broke 14 as she caused contact but exonerated under 43.1(c) as no damage or injury. 3. L *did not* break 16.1( because she did not change course).... How to determine L change course?
My (assumed) findings subject to a clearer answer to the above :
L (ROW) lost control of her mainsheet and suddenly altered course and heeled quickly to windward. There was contact between the mast tops of W and L that caused damage. W failed to keep clear of L. L failed to avoid contact with W.
My conclusion :
W was keeping clear of L until L lost control of her mainsheet. In not keeping clear of L, W broke RRS 11 and 14.
L failed to avoid contact with W and broke RRS 14 (and probably 16.1).
My decision :
The contact with W was caused through no fault of her own (not having time to avoid the contact, albeit not ROW boat, thus need to find on 16.1) and L broke a rule of Part 2.
W is exonerated (RDG) for breaking RRS 14 (and probably 11).
L is DSQ for breaking RRS 14 and possibly 16.1 as well.
Let the debate begin.
1.W was compelled to break 11 and exonerated under 43.1(a).
2. L did broke 14 as she caused contact but exonerated under 43.1(c) as no damage or injury.
3. L *did not* break 16.1( because she did not change course).... How to determine L change course?