A significant area where a judge will interface with junior sailors is in the protest room. All sailors, but especially junior sailors, should expect a consistent and fair process, using language they can understand.

The protest hearing should be formal, and the judges should be firm, respectful, and helpful to all participants.

Junior sailors may not have had previous experience in a protest hearing. Ask at the start of the hearing, if this is their first hearing. If it is, the chairman should inform the parties and their coaches and witnesses of the process that will be followed, both initially and as the hearing proceeds.

Judges should use the vocabulary of the rules throughout the hearing and when communicating the facts found, conclusion and decisions. This will avoid misunderstanding.

A younger sailor may not have a full understanding of the terminology, rules and procedures. For example, it may be appropriate to ask questions that using defined terms and giving their meaning as well. “Was your spinnaker ahead of the other boat’s rudder?” may be a better question than, “Were you overlapped?”

Anticipate and arrange for interpreters prior to hearings between sailors with no common language. Where possible, have a judge who speaks the same language as the competitor(s) act as an interpreter. Otherwise, qualified coaches and other team supporters may be used as interpreters.

When judging any sport, being in the right position at the right time is crucial to doing a good job. For on-the-water rule 42 judging, the objective is to place boats in positions where they are close to potential problems. This requires: 

While it is clearly not possible to monitor all the boats all of the time, it is an achievable goal for the Judge boats to cover the course such that every racing boat is aware of their presence at some time during each race. The best way to be effective is to position your boat near the front of the fleet and motor along at a similar speed to the competitors. The Judges should pay closer attention to the leaders, but look with a wide vision, to scan as many competitors as possible. 
 
In many regattas with multi-fleets the Judges have insufficient resources to cover all of them. If choices have to be made Judges should prioritize starts, downwind legs, and finishing legs. 
 
When penalizing a boat, the driver must balance the need to be close enough to the competitor to signal the penalty clearly, while remaining sufficiently far away to stay clear of the penalty turns that the competitor may perform. 
 
Judges operating boats are responsible for ensuring that they minimize their engine wash, and that they position their boat in a manner that will minimize the effects of their wind shadow. 
 
Judge boats should try to cross boats at right angles maintaining a predictable course when close to competitors. Jury boats should be a minimum of five boat lengths away when crossing in front and one boat-length away when crossing behind. On downwind legs, be aware that in surfing conditions, competitors will often make dramatic course changes to take best advantage of the waves. If you find yourself too close to the boats, your best option may well be to stop and let the competitor sail around you. When doing this, the Jury boat driver can raise both hands up high as a signal to the competitors that the Jury boat has stopped. 
 
Except at the start and during the first beat, Jury boats should position themselves so they are visible to the maximum number of competing boats. 

In hearings, youth sailors should be respected as individuals and not patronized. The hearing should be formal, and the judges should be firm, respectful, and helpful to all competitors. Youth sailors may not have had previous experience in a hearing. Ask at the start of the hearing if this is their first hearing. If it is, the chair should inform the parties and their coaches and witnesses of the process that will be followed, both initially and as the hearing proceeds.

Anticipate and arrange for interpreters prior to hearings between sailors with no common language. Where possible, have a judge who speaks the same language as the competitor to act as an interpreter. Otherwise, support team members may be used as interpreters.

Judges should use the vocabulary of the rules throughout the hearing and when communicating the facts found, conclusion and decisions. This will avoid misunderstanding. A younger sailor may not have a full understanding of the terminology, rules and procedures. Provide explanations when needed. Ask questions that use defined terms by giving their definitions.

While giving the decision at the end of the hearing, the chair should check that all parties have understood the reasons for the decision.

The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 resulted in many more protest committees making use of video conferencing technology for hearings. We anticipate more developments as technology progresses, especially with advances in business meeting and education applications. What follows are some lessons learned. Since this is an evolving process, updates and improved systems will continue to be developed.

Remote hearings should be conducted with video conference systems and simultaneously transmitted to all the persons involved in the hearing. A video conference system is a program, protocol or device that uses the internet to transmit multimedia streams that include at least voice and video of the persons involved. Other streams may be included, like a video feed of the protest room table or a virtual whiteboard.

It is essential to have a strong broadband connection to make remote hearings work. This may require some pre-event assistance from the organizers. It is best if the protest committee has access to a strong WIFI network that is not shared broadly. It is the responsibility of parties and witnesses to have a strong internet connection available. A party or a witness using internet while driving in a car usually results in intermittent coverage at best.

It is easy to imagine a future when more hearings might be done over the internet with parties and judges in many different places. If present, the on-site protest committee member has a major role in setting this up. The following is a non-exhaustive checklist of the additional duties:

a) Preparation of the hearing is a key component to making this system work. It will take more time than an in-person hearing.
b) For hearings occurring during an event, pre-arrange a default time for hearings when you expect off-site persons to be available. Consider the time zones for all persons involved;
c) Send copies of the hearing request form and other documentation to the offsite protest committee members and parties;
d) If the parties will use video evidence, try to get copies in advance to forward to the off-site protest committee members and parties;
e) Make sure that all the parties and witnesses are alone in the room, without communicating with others;
f) Make use of the waiting room function of the video conference platform to move witnesses in and out of the hearing and not listening to other evidence. 
g) Make sure everyone, both at the hearing and off-site, understands the procedures.

In some situations, a video conference remote hearing might not be possible, for example, during oceanic races. Only in this case should remote hearings be processed through emails. This process should be specified in the notice of race or sailing instructions as detailed in the chapter of this Manual, Judging Oceanic and Offshore Races.

Being in the right position at the right time is crucial to judging rule 42. The objective is to place jury boats in positions where they are in the line of sight of boats racing and close to potential problems. This requires:

It is not possible to monitor all the boats all the time. However, it is an achievable goal for the jury boats to cover the course such that every racing boat is aware of their presence at some time during each race. The best way to be effective is to position your jury boat near the front of the fleet and motor along at a similar speed to the boats. The judges should pay closer attention to the leaders, but look with a wide vision, to scan as many boats as possible.

In events with multi-fleets the judges may have insufficient resources to cover all of them. If choices must be made, judges should prioritize starts, downwind legs, and finishing legs.

Judges operating boats are responsible for minimizing their engine wash and positioning their boat in a manner that will minimize the effects of their wind shadow.

Jury boats should try to cross boats at right angles maintaining a predictable course when close to them. Jury boats should be a minimum of five boat lengths away when crossing in front and one boat-length away when crossing behind. On downwind legs, be aware that in surfing conditions, boats will often make dramatic course changes to take best advantage of the waves. If you find yourself too close to the boats, your best option may be to stop and let the boat sail around you. The driver can raise both hands up high as a signal to the boat that the jury boat has stopped.

Except at the start and during the first beat, jury boats should position themselves, so they are visible to the maximum number of competing boats.

When penalizing a boat, the driver must balance the need to be close enough to the boat to signal the penalty clearly, while remaining sufficiently far away to stay clear of the penalty turns that the boat may perform.

When a protest is delivered to the race office a judge reviews the protest to determine if the protest is suitable for arbitration. The hearing should be scheduled, and the arbitration meeting is held when the parties arrive. The scheduling of hearings can anticipate that some protests will be withdrawn during arbitration prior to a hearing. At large events, have more than one judge ready to arbitrate protests.

If one of the parties does not attend, or chooses not to attend, the arbitration meeting does not proceed, and the protest proceeds at the scheduled time. The protestee is given access to the hearing request and time to prepare before the arbitration meeting begins.

Hold the arbitration meeting in a quiet location, away from other competitors and observers. Standing, rather than sitting around a table, usually shortens the duration of the meeting. Only the parties to the protest give testimony. Witnesses are not allowed. Evidence given during the arbitration meeting should not be overheard by any potential witnesses if it goes to a hearing. A judge trainee or judge assessor may be allowed to observe the meeting if the parties do not object.

The rules do not address whether observers are allowed at an arbitration meeting. They are usually discouraged. If they are permitted, e.g., a parent at a youth event, then they must acknowledge that they must only observe. Also, the intent of rule 63.4(e) is clear and an observer at an arbitration meeting may not be a witness at a subsequent protest hearing.

The judge should have available the notice of race, the sailing instructions and any amendments to them, a current rule book, boat models and a watch to keep track of the time. When a boat accepts a Post-Race Penalty, it may be recorded on a form, the on-line form or on the back side of the original protest form, then signed by the boat’s representative. The back side of the protest form also has a tick box for the protestor to request to withdraw the protest.

The first step is to confirm that the judge has no conflict of interest.

The judge explains to the parties how the arbitration meeting is conducted, that it should take about 15 minutes, and that the parties will be deciding the outcome of the meeting.

The next step is to determine if the boat caused injury or serious damage. If it is possible that rule 44.1(b) applies, then rules T1(a) and T2 do not permit the boat to take a Post-Race Penalty. In that case, the arbitration meeting would not be held, and if it was in progress, it would be closed.

During the arbitration meeting, the judge might find that the protest is not suitable for arbitration. It may involve a rule not suited to arbitration, or the Post-Race Penalty is not appropriate. The arbitration meeting is then closed, and the protest, if not withdrawn, proceeds to a hearing.

The next step is to give an opinion on the validity of the protest. This includes the possibility that the protest committee will find the protest is invalid. For example, if the protest form and the protestor’s testimony clearly indicate that the protestor did not comply with the requirements of rules 60.2 and 60.3, the judge will advise the parties that the protest committee will likely find the protest invalid. The protestor then may request to withdraw the protest or proceed to the protest committee for a hearing. In either case, the arbitration meeting ends.

If the protest is clearly valid or clearly invalid after the protestor’s initial statement, then the judge’s task of giving an opinion on validity is easy. However, it is much more common that the protest is neither clearly valid nor clearly invalid. In such cases, consider:

The judge will decide, based on the balance of probabilities, if the protest meets the validity rules. When the judge is in doubt that the protest is suitable for arbitration, it proceeds to a hearing.

If the judge’s opinion is that the protest is valid and if rule 44.1(b) does not apply, then the arbitration meeting proceeds. In this step, the judge takes each party’s evidence, in turn, using model boats. The judge asks any necessary questions but keeps tight control of the conversation.

The judge will offer one of these opinions as set out in TT3 3 as to what the protest committee is likely to decide:

The judge applies the principles of exoneration to a boat that has been compelled by the other boat to break a rule.

If the meeting is not closed, Appendix T requires that the judge must give an opinion as to what the protest committee would be likely to decide. Stating that “the situation is too complicated” is not an option.

A good way for the judge to give the opinion is by saying “If this goes to a protest hearing, the protest committee will likely decide . . .”

After hearing the opinion of the judge, a party to the protest may decide to take a Post-Race Penalty at any time prior to the start of hearing.

A party that has been given the opinion that they are likely to be penalized for breaking a rule will sometimes consult with their coach or others after the arbitration meeting has ended and will often return to take a Post-Race Penalty before the start of a protest hearing. Remember that a boat may accept a Post-Race Penalty up to the start of the protest hearing.

Also, regardless of whether a Post-Race Penalty is taken, a protestor may ask to withdraw the protest and the judge who arbitrated may allow the withdrawal.

Once the protest is withdrawn, inform the protest committee that the protest will not go to a hearing, and inform the scorer that there is no score change from this protest. The judge may then discuss any aspect of the protested incident with the parties, if time allows. If time is limited, arrange to meet the parties later.

If the protest is not withdrawn, it must be heard by the protest committee.

Sometimes a protestor may choose not to withdraw the protest, on the misunderstanding that the protestee would be scored DSQ in the protest hearing. The judge should explain that if a boat has taken an applicable penalty, such as the Post-Race Penalty, then rule 60.5(c) applies. Then the boat may not be penalized further unless the protest committee finds that the Post-Race Penalty was not applicable, normally because rule 44.1(b) or rule 2 applied.

If the protest goes to a hearing, the judge who arbitrated may participate as a member of the hearing panel. If so, the judge must not discuss any aspects of the arbitration meeting with any members of the protest committee before or during the hearing.

Parties to the hearing may include statements and evidence that were presented in the arbitration meeting. Any discrepancies from information presented in the protest hearing may be questioned by parties and the protest committee.

Radio sailing differs from all other forms of sailing, as the crew handling the boat is not on board. Competitors and race officials stand side by side on the bank. As a result, radio sailing has developed specific rules set out in Appendix E, along with practices for judges and umpires.

No more than 24 boats may compete on the water at any one time. A system of heats is used allowing events to be run with up to 84 competitors. In many cases an incident must be resolved by the protest committee before the next heat can start, as one or more competitors involved may be scheduled to sail. Amongst other elements, these heat systems modify Appendix A, Scoring. These changes introduce a significant difference in the points for retiring or being disqualified.

Most racing is run without umpires. However, radio sailing has developed the use of observers, who may be competitors not sailing in that heat. They hail and record contacts between boats, and between boats and marks. Unresolved incidents are reported to the race committee who may protest. These reports are made available to parties to any protest hearing before the hearing opens. A party to the hearing may then choose to retire. This procedure is set out in the IRSA System for Reducing the number of Protest Hearings (SYRPH).

A small number of events are umpired, including World and some Continental Championships for which an international jury would be appointed. When racing is umpired, observers work closely with the umpires. Observers will normally recognize boats rapidly and anticipate impending situations. They may also recognize slight contact more easily than an umpire. Therefore, the building of mutual respect is vital to establishing a good working relationship.

Umpiring for Radio Sailing has been developed over a period of 20 years. The basic principles are now clearly established, as development continues.

Procedures for umpiring are set out in the DR21 02 Test Rule for Umpired Radio Sailing, which can be found on the World Sailing website. (Search “radio sailing”, click submit, “Documents”.)

These rules recognize that umpires cannot resolve all incidents. If there is no decision from an umpire, then the competitor still has the right to a hearing. Umpiring is intended to modify normal procedures as little as possible. In this way, the Test Rule for Umpired Radio Sailing retains the use of competitor observers, who work closely with the umpires.

There are two further developments: