Relive RLIR 2020Updated 466 days ago

Protest

Case 1

  Race 2 Racing
Case HI FI protested EVOLUTION and JELIK 5, claming that they had not finished in accordance with the rules. They had looped the entire finishing line before finishing and Hi Fi claimed that this did not satisfy the requirement of rule 28.1 ‘Sailing the Course’ (A boat shall start, leave each mark on the required side in the correct order, and finish, so that a string representing her track after starting and until finishing would when drawn taut (a) pass each mark on the required side, (b) touch each rounding mark, and (c) pass between the marks of a gate from the direction of the previous mark)
Discussion To loop the entire line before finishing in the direction from the last mark is permissible and complies with rule 28.1 and the definition of ‘finishing’.
Decision The protest was dismissed.

 

Case 2 & Case 3 (heard together)

  Race 2 Racing
Case EVOLUTION RACING and JELIK 5 requested redress claiming that the late display of the Shorten Course signal ("S" flag) at the leeward mark caused them to sail a longer course than they would have done had the signal been displayed at the proper time.
Discussion The jury heard evidence from Mark Pryke, the race officer, who said he had decided to shorten the course some time prior to the signal being made. He waited till the leading boats were approaching the shortened course finishing line and then gave instructions by radio to the personnel on board the shortened course finishing boat.
Mark’s Evidence – The flag was displayed on the starboard side of the finishing boat and may not have been seen by the two leading boats EVOLUTION RACING and JELIK 5. Mark said that the flags supplied by the Organising Authority were not as big as he would like. After some 30 seconds a radio exchange was made between the finishing boat and Mark Pryke on the Committee Boat, and the flag was moved to the stern of the finishing boat where it was seen by EVOLUTION RACING and JELIK 5. By this time they were astern of the finishing boat. They then sailed around the mark and through the line.
DECISION on ELIGIBILITY FOR REDRESS
The race committee’s action in not displaying the flag in such a way that it could be easily seen by the approaching leading boats is an omission. Although the boats may have made a tactical error in deciding on their approach to the leeward mark, that does not constitute ‘fault of her own’ in terms of rule 62.1.
DECISION on REDRESS
Only in exceptional circumstances, where no other suitable arrangement is available, will the Jury decide that a race is to be abandoned.
The fairest arrangement is to let the results stand with no time adjustments for the applicants.
Decision EVOLUTION RACING and JELIK 5 are eligible for redress.

 

Case 4

  Race 2 IRC 1
Case KOULL BABY requested redress claiming that the Race Committee made an error in showing an S flag (meaning ‘shorten course’) with an N flag (meaning ‘all races are abandoned’) at the windward mark. She claimed she had correctly sailed the course and finished the race.
Discussion Mark Pryke the Race Officer gave evidence; he had been assured by the personnel on the boat adjacent to the mark that only the N flag had been displayed. Peter Wintle from KOULL BABY said he was sure there was an S flag displayed in addition to the N flag. Furthermore there was no reason to abandon the race as KOULL BABY had good wind on the final leg. The Jury did not investigate whether flag S was displayed. It was agreed by both parties that N was displayed. N on its own means ‘All races that have started are abandoned…’ Mark said, the race committee had intended to abandon racing for all classes except the Racing Class.
Mark explained that with all the information he had to hand, the Race Committee’s decision to abandon the race was proper. The Jury accepts that this was so. The conditions were light and fluky and the race committee’s decision to abandon was reasonable. The action of displaying the N flag, did not prejudice KOULL BABY. The fact was that N was displayed, and the race for IRC 1 (with other classes) was abandoned. Whether or not S was displayed does not affect that fact.
Decision The Request for Redress is denied.

 

Case 5

  Race 2 IRC 1
Case KATSU protested KOULL BABY claiming that KOULL BABY on port tack did not keep clear of KATSU on starboard tack.
Discussion Prior to the incidence both KATSU & KOULL BABY were on port tack, with KATSU to leeward, shortly before starting signal. KATSU tacked on to starboard tack and on completion of her tack, KOULL Baby was 1.5 boats length distant and on a collision course. KOULL BABY promptly tacked to starboard. KATSU was forced to luff to avoid contact between her port bow and KOULL BABY‘s starboard quarter. No contact occurred. On the completion of her tack KATSU was required by Rule 15 to give room to KOULL BABY to keep clear. By luffing to avoid contact KATSU complied with this requirement.
Decision No rule was broken; protest dismissed.

 

Case 6

  Race 2 IRC 1
Case KATSU protested KOULL BABY claiming KOULL BABY touched the mark and did not exonerate herself by doing a penalty.
Discussion KATSU claimed that while rounding the windward mark KOULL BABY‘s spinnaker sheet flew and touched the mark. A crew of KUKUKERCHU also gave evidence stating that KOULL BABY‘s spinnaker sheet touched the mark. Both the protestor and the witness accepted that neither the hull nor the boom, nor any of the sails, of KOULL BABY, touched the mark.
Decision The jury was not satisfied that any part of KOULL BABY hit the mark; protest dismissed.

 

Case 7, Case 8 & Case 10

  Race 3 IRC 2
Case CASE 7 & 8SKYBIRD & CABARET 6 protested PHOENIX claiming PHOENIX did not cross the finishing line and therefore did not sail the course as required by rule 28.1(a) (Rule 28.1(a): ‘A boat shall start, leave each mark on the required side … and finish …’; Definition of ‘Finish’: ‘A boat finishes when any part of her hull … crosses the finishing line in the direction of the course from the last mark…’)
CASE 10PHOENIX protested all other boats in the fleet for receiving outside assistance.
Discussion The race officer had broadcast advice to the fleet as to where to finish, but this was heard too late for PHOENIX to benefit from it. PHOENIX, the leading boat, did not sail through the finishing line, but was scored as having finished as she passed through the line extension. Other boats that were following PHOENIX did benefit and finished correctly.
Addressing the validity of the protests, SKYBIRD & CABARET 6‘s protests were lodged long after the close of protest time. They protested only after the results were published showing PHOENIX as having finished. The Jury has power to extend the time limit for lodging protests, if there is a good reason to do so, but the representatives of both boats accepted that they had made no attempt to inform the protestee of their protests. (Rule 61 requires that a protestor shall inform the protestee at "the first reasonable opportunity".)
In the case of PHOENIX‘s protest, PHOENIX had decided to lodge a protest only after she became aware that she was being protested by two boats for not crossing the finishing line. PHONEIX had knowledge of the matter at the finish of the race and therefore there was no good reason for the Jury to extend the time limit.
Decision All three protests are invalid and the hearing closed.

 

Case 9

  Race 4 Club Cruiser
Case HAFFIMAN protested CORUISK claiming CORUISK failed to keep clear in a port-and-starboard incident.
Discussion Addressing the validity of the protest, the protestor said that the protest flag was displayed approximately half an hour after the incident. This does not meet the requirements of rule 61.1(a) which requires a flag to be displayed at the first reasonable opportunity. (The reason for this requirement is to give an opportunity to the protestee to exonerate herself by taking a penalty. The representative from CORUISK said the hail was not heard and had they seen a flag they would have taken a penalty)
Decision The protest is invalid and the hearing closed.

 

Case 11

  Race 6 Club Cruiser
Case HAFFIMAN protested CORUISK claiming CORUISK failed to keep clear in a port-and-starboard incident.
Discussion HAFFIMAN was on starboard and CORUSIK on port were on a converging course which would have brought the two of them very close and may or may not have led to a collision. HAFFIMAN, bore away to guard against risk of collision. In such situations the port tack boat is expected to "keep clear" as per Rule 10. Corusik, failed to "keep clear".
Decision Protest upheld. CORUSIK DSQ as per Rule 64.1(a).

 

Case 12

  Race 5 Ocean Rover
Case SAIPIN protested RUSALKA claiming RUSULKA used engine power during the race.
Discussion Addressing the validity of the protest, the protestor said that he neither hailed ‘protest’ nor displayed a red flag. This does not meet two requirements of rule 61.1(a) hailing & display of protest flag, at the first reasonable opportunity. (The reason for this requirement is to give an opportunity to the protestee to exonerate herself by taking a penalty.)
Decision The protest is invalid and the hearing closed.
After close of the protest hearing, the jury interviewed Kevin of RUSULKA on the matter of turning on engine power during the race and satisfied itself that RUSULKA’s decision to use engine power briefly in reverse gear, was merely to restore rudder action.

 

Case 13

  Race 5 Ocean Rover
Case RUSULKA protested SAIPIN claiming SAIPIN the windward boat did not keep clear.
Discussion Addressing the validity of the protest, the protestor said that he neither hailed ‘protest’ nor displayed a red flag. This does not meet two requirements of rule 61.1(a) hailing & display of protest flag, at the first reasonable opportunity. (The reason for this requirement is to give an opportunity to the protestee to exonerate herself by taking a penalty.)
Decision The protest is invalid and the hearing closed.

International Jury: Kit Lock (SIN-IJ), Ilker Bayindir (TUR-IJ), Ravi Santhanam (IND-NJ), GS Julka (IND-NJ), Bryan Willis (GBR-IJ), chairman.

RLIR news / subscribe to receive daily updates