3rd Party Protest

The Racing Rules prescribe certain things. It's wise to know them, at least the basics. This area discusses the finer points of the racing rules for sailing fast.

Moderators: Capt. Flak, bigfoot55, Chuck Luscomb

3rd Party Protest

Postby bigfoot55 » Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:45 pm

Third Party protests.
Sometimes a skipper is seen to have violated a rule and does not get protested. Maybe the fouled skipper is just not knowledgeable, intimidated or maybe ‘too nice a person’.

If you are in the same regatta what can you as a third party do?

If you are a skipper in the same heat, you can protest the offending skipper in the normal manner, staring your number, the boat number you are protesting and you should identify the number of the boat fouled. If the offending skipper declines, does not acknowledge and do the required turn(s), report the violation to the protest committee after the heat is over. The race committee can also protest a boat in this manner.
You will need witnesses of course. Skippers in the same regatta but in different heats watching can be witnesses even though they are not in the heat.

Why should you do this? It is simply a matter of fair play. Every boat is affected by any skipper who gets an advantaged position as a result of not taking a penalty turn. It is not fair to any skipper in the regatta, not just that heat.

Two Rules come into play. 60 and Appendix E6.1
60.1
A boat may
(a) protest another boat, but not for an alleged breach of a rule of Part 2 or rule 31 unless she was involved in or saw the incident. Appendix E changes this to restrict it to only a boat scheduled to be in that heat.

60.2 A race committee may
(a) protest a boat, but not as a result of information arising from a request for redress or an invalid protest, or from a report from an interested party other than the representative of the boat herself;
(b) request redress for a boat; or
(c) report to the protest committee requesting action under rule 69.2(a).

Appendix E6.1 Right to Protest
Rule 60.1 is changed to:
A boat may
(a) protest another boat, but not for an alleged breach of a rule of Part 2, 3 or 4 unless she was scheduled to sail in that heat
Tom Phillips
265
St Augustine, FL
User avatar
bigfoot55
 
Posts: 1360
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 4:48 pm

Re: 3rd Party Protest

Postby Jon Luscomb » Wed May 01, 2013 10:24 am

I am aware of why this came up on the board, and it is an intersting question. I found the below on Scuttlebutt. Here we Go:

Three small keelboats, S, P, and X, are going upwind in light air. S(tarboard) and P(ort) are on a collision course. X is a few boatlengths away. P hails to S "Tack or Cross?. S decides that she wants to continue towards the left side of the course, and realizes that if P leebows her she will have to tack away onto port, so she responds "Cross!", and bears down and ducks P, allowing P to cross. Had S not altered course, she would have hit P.

X then yells "Protest P and S!" and files a protest against both. You are on the jury. What is your decision?

In the incident that happened this past weekend, I heard that the Starboard boat "voluntarily" tacked away and underneath the Port boat on to port tack and sailed on. I heard he said to the Port boat that he was going to "tack anyway". I did not see the incedent, nor did I hear any conversation between the boats because I was too far back! Anyway, it seems that these two scenarios are similar and I would like to hear Kenny Morrison's opinion on both scenarios.
I have sailed a lot of Laser, Finn and J-24 regattas and the above happens all of the time for tactical reasons. I thought it was legal. :(

Here are the comments from two prominent RRS rule guys below:

The situation in question - a starboard tack boat agreeing to duck a port tack boat on an upwind leg - happens all the time on the race course. But the rules are not as understanding. Here are two opinions:

From Jos M Spijkerman, International Umpire/Judge:

Rule 60.1 states that a boat may protest another for an alleged breach of a rule in part 2 if she sees the incident (or was involved). So X has the right to protest. She protests both boats, because she wants to have both stories, and - more importantly - both to become "party" in a protest.


The PC cannot do anything else then conclude that P did not keep clear. The fact that she had to ask for the crossing alone would already mean that S might need to take avoiding action. And that is already not keeping clear.

The facts found that S also ducked and otherwise would have hit P only reinforces that. But even if S did not have to duck, P did not keep clear according the definition. Rule 64.1 dictates that any boat that was a party to a protest is found to have broken a rule SHALL be disqualified!

I understand this might be perceived as "Why is X interfering" and "Leave well enough alone", but the basic principle is not only to follow the rules, but also to ENFORCE!

From Matt Knowles, US SAILING Racing Rules Committee:

Jos makes a very articulate argument and I agree with him. I think in this case the rules force an unfortunate outcome. One boat "keeps clear" of another when "the other can sail her course with no need to take avoiding action." Without a doubt S had to take avoiding action. Therefore P broke rule 10, and must be disqualified per rule 64.1

Now, you can hedge and say "her course" was to duck, but you would have to face the reality that it is only because of P's presence that she is required to duck. S's desired "course" is to keep sailing upwind!

I don't think this scenario is unrealistic either. In my mind the way this is most likely to come up is if, late in a series, P were fighting for a top spot with X, and X saw the incident and decided to press an aggressive 3rd party protest. In fact, I'd be quite surprised if this has never come up before.

In the Jacksonville scenario, the S boat had to take avoiding action and chose to tack...So, It looks to me like in this case a third party protest was warranted and that P would score a DSQ without the ability to drop that score. Was S wrong too by not protesting? Also, It raises the question for me on X in the Jacksonville scenario: Since X saw the incident and called out "someone needs to do a 3rd party protest" a bunch of times ( I heard that, I must have been Catching up), could X be protested by another ( call it a 4th party) for not doing a 3rd party protest and "enforcing the rules (I'm serious). Where does it stop?

Kenny! Help!

I guess ignorance of the rules is no defense...We all learn something new everyday!

Best to all.
Jon Luscomb
45
"I would rather wonder why I won than to know exaclty why I lost!"
User avatar
Jon Luscomb
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 6:39 pm

Re: 3rd Party Protest

Postby s vernon » Thu May 09, 2013 1:06 pm

http://forum.sailingscuttlebutt.com/DIS ... 94_P11213/

Here is an interesting discussion that is a couple of years old. i.e. old rules in case there have been any changes, and I doubt that. I will include the first post but anyone interested needs to read more of it at the linked discussion above and perhaps at the link below as well.

THIRD PARTY PROTEST -- “TACK OR CROSS”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Matthew Knowles, Unruly blog

Here is one that I've been asked about by two people separately in the last few months:

Three small keelboats, S, P, and X, are going upwind in light air. S(tarboard) and P(ort) are on a collision course. X is a few boatlengths away. P hails to S "Tack or Cross?".

S decides that she wants to continue towards the left side of the course, and realizes that if P leebows her she will have to tack away onto port, so she responds "Cross!", and bears down and ducks P, allowing P to cross. Had S not altered course, she would have hit P.

X then yells "Protest P and S!" and files a protest against both. You are on the jury. What is your decision?

ANSWER BELOW.
JURY DECISION
The situation in question - a starboard tack boat agreeing to duck a port tack boat on an upwind leg - happens all the time on the race course. But the rules are not as understanding. Here are two opinions:

* From Jos M Spijkerman, International Umpire/Judge:
Rule 60.1 states that a boat may protest another for an alleged breach of a rule in part 2 if she sees the incident (or was involved). So X has the right to protest. She protests both boats, because she wants to have both stories, and - more importantly - both to become "party" in a protest.

The PC cannot do anything else then conclude that P did not keep clear. The fact that she had to ask for the crossing alone would already mean that S might need to take avoiding action. And that is already not keeping clear.

The fact found that S also ducked and otherwise would have hit P only reinforces that. But even if S did not have to duck, P did not keep clear according the definition. Rule 64.1 dictates that any boat that was a party to a protest is found to have broken a rule SHALL be disqualified!

I understand this might be perceived as "Why the F is X interfering" and "Leave well enough alone", but the basic principle is not only to follow the rules, but also to ENFORCE!

* From Matt Knowles, US SAILING Racing Rules Committee:
Jos makes a very articulate argument and I agree with him. I think in this case the rules force an unfortunate outcome. One boat "keeps clear" of another when "the other can sail her course with no need to take avoiding action." Without doubt S had to take avoiding action. Therefore P broke rule 10, and must be disqualified per rule 64.1

Now, you can hedge and say "her course" was to duck, but you would have to face the reality that it is only because of P's presence that she is required to duck. S's desired "course" is to keep sailing upwind!

I don't think this scenario is unrealistic either. In my mind the way this is most likely to come up is if, late in a series, P were fighting for a top spot with X, and X saw the incident and decided to press an aggressive 3rd party protest. In fact, I'd be quite surprised if this has never come up before.

More comments here: http://www.unrulyracing.com/2011/02/thi ... -duck.html
Scott
User avatar
s vernon
 
Posts: 471
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 9:18 pm
Location:

Re: 3rd Party Protest

Postby MichaelJ2K » Thu Dec 04, 2014 10:49 am

This is good information. At the last club outing of the season, I witnessed a lot of boat contacts and gang up's at the start line but no calls were made by the affected parties. Since it was the last race of the season, no one seemed to care much about the situations. However, it fosters bad habits that will certainly have an affect in a published regatta. Regardless of the type of race, the RC should insure to enforce the rules of sailing and encourage all to be aware.
Mike Denest
EC12 #899
User avatar
MichaelJ2K
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 9:44 pm
Location:

Re: 3rd Party Protest

Postby greerdr » Fri Dec 12, 2014 4:34 pm

Earlier in this discussion was a statement that a DSQ could not be a "throw-out".
I submit this is incorrect.
A DSQ for losing a protest is discardable;for gross misconduct is not discardable.
As to the P/S situation:this is a more complex question.I think I want the left side and don't want a skipper to lee bow and slow me relative to the rest of the fleet.
I may well say "you are good" to the port tacker and modify my course a few degrees for a moments to advance my strategy.
I would be disappointed to hear a 3rd party protest.
R.C.Greer
greerdr
 
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 5:39 pm

Re: 3rd Party Protest

Postby tag1945 » Sat Dec 13, 2014 5:00 am

Your Reading Assignment:"

Rule 2 FAIR SAILING
A boat and her owner shall compete in compliance with recognized principles of sportsmanship and fair play. A boat may be penalized under this rule only if it is clearly established that these principles have been violated. A disqualification under this rule shall not be excluded from the boat's series score.

69.1 Obligation not to Commit Gross Misconduct
(a) A competitor shall not commit gross misconduct, including a gross breach of a rule, good manners or sportsmanship, or conduct bringing the sport into disrepute. Throughout rule 69, ‘competitor’ means a member of the crew, or the owner, of a boat.

69.2 Action by a Protest Committee
(a) When a protest committee, from its own observation or a report received from any source, believes that a competitor may have broken rule 69.1(a), it may call a hearing. If the protest committee decides to call a hearing, it shall promptly inform the competitor in writing of the alleged breach and of the time and place of the hearing. If the competitor provides good reason for being unable to attend the hearing, the protest committee shall reschedule it.
(b) A protest committee of at least three members shall conduct the hearing, following the procedures in rules 63.2, 63.3(a), 63.4 and 63.6.
(c) If it is established to the comfortable satisfaction of the protest committee, bearing in mind the seriousness of the alleged misconduct, that the competitor has broken rule 69.1(a), it shall either
(1) warn the competitor or
(2) impose a penalty by excluding the competitor and, when appropriate, disqualifying a boat, from a race or the remaining races or all races of the series, or by taking other action within its jurisdiction. A disqualification under this rule shall not be excluded from the boat’s series score.

Tom Germer
AMYA #6571
User avatar
tag1945
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 3:22 pm
Location: The Villages, Florida

Re: 3rd Party Protest

Postby greerdr » Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:27 pm

I submit that a port/starboard conflict is NOT a "misconduct".
The ROW boat sustained damage (forestay) and burdened boat retired-all is right in the world-good sportsman like conduct.
This DSQ is discardable.
But here is a rebound question: How many points is it worth-the current fleet or all boats in the regatta?
R.C.Greer
greerdr
 
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 5:39 pm

Re: 3rd Party Protest

Postby tag1945 » Sun Dec 14, 2014 8:45 pm

To determine if a rule was due to Gross misconduct;
Rule 69.2(b) A protest committee of at least three members shall conduct the hearing, following the procedures in rules 63.2, 63.3(a), 63.4 and 63.

As far as how to score, we should be using the AMYA Heat Management System of 2007

3.4 Scoring of Race 2 and Following Races

Scoring shall be from the Order of Finishing Places for each race using the RRS A4 Low Point Scoring System except RRS A4.2 is replaced by:

(a) Boats recorded as DNF, RAF, OCS, DNS or DNC shall score one more point than the last boat in their heat would have scored if all boats scheduled to sail in the heat had finished correctly.

(b) DNC boats removed from those scheduled to sail and boats recorded as BFD, DSQ, DNE or DGM shall score one more point than the last boat in the lowest heat would have scored if all the boats competing in the event had finished correctly.
Tom Germer
AMYA #6571
User avatar
tag1945
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 3:22 pm
Location: The Villages, Florida


Return to Sailing with the RRS

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron