PART 5
Race officials themselves are not automatically conflicted. When the race committee protests, the fact that a member of the protest committee is also a member of the race committee does not make that person an interested party1
.
A race committee can protest a boat on the basis of ‘information arising from…the representative of the boat herself’, despite that person being clearly conflicted. So a boat believing herself in danger of being protested by the race committee for touching a mark cannot seek to invalidate such a protest by lodging with the race committee an admission of having indeed touched the mark. That sounds improbable, but consider a race where declarations, with details, are required for taking a turn penalty for touching a mark. Suppose a boat admits in writing to having touched mark 2 and to having done a turn – and the race committee saw a defective turn (too late, or not after having got clear) but did not see the original infringement. As discussed under rule 44, it is not possible to protest just for a defective turn: the protest has to be for the unexonerated touching of the mark. The race committee can use the admission to support such a protest.
RYA 1969/11 shows the rule at work. The sailing instructions required boats to sign a declaration after finishing to confirm that they had complied with the rules. After a race lasting two days, Barada lodged her signed declaration, adding the sentence: ‘Except that during the hours 0200 to 0500 we were forced to sail without navigation lights…’. The protest committee protested her and found that she had broken rule 48.1, Fog Signals and Lights. It imposed a 5% time penalty. Barada appealed on the grounds that the protest was invalid and that no provision was made in the sailing instructions for that penalty.
Barada’s first ground of appeal was dismissed. Her second ground of appeal was upheld, but not to her advantage, as her penalty was changed to disqualification.
Barada stated in her declaration that she had not shown navigation lights. This admission entitled the protest committee (or the race committee) to protest her, as permitted by rules 60.2(a) and 60.3(a). Those rules preclude a race committee or a protest committee from protesting based on information from a person with a conflict of interest, and Barada’s representative had a conflict of interest, as defined, since her report opened her to protest and penalisation. However, those rules make a specific exception for information from the representative of the boat herself. The protest committee’s protest was therefore valid.
The only penalty a protest committee may impose for breaking a rule, unless otherwise stated in the racing rules or in the sailing instructions, is disqualification.
It is good practice for a race committee to seek redress for a boat that goes to help another, especially as the boat giving help may be too modest to ask for it herself. Requesting redress for a boat is also advisable when the race committee realizes that its own act or omission has improperly affected one or more boats, as for instance when a mark drifts a substantial distance and is not replaced promptly enough. While the boats are entitled to ask for redress themselves, the fact that there is also a request from the race committee sends a strong signal to the protest committee as to the desired outcome, which may be a fairer one than as if the race committee had simply abandoned the race.
A race committee cannot bring an action under rule rule 69, Allegations of Gross Misconduct, but it can not only report to the protest committee what it believed has happened but can also specifically ask the protest committee to act. If there is not already a protest committee in being to consider the matter, the race committee may first have to appoint one, and even if there is already a protest committee at work handling normal protests, the race committee might want to appoint a different committee in order to have members with suitable skills and experience. Nevertheless, it is for the protest committee to decide whether to call a hearing.
Also, a race committee is in the same position as a competitor in that it can report to the protest committee that it believes that a support person has broken a rule, for which the protest committee might (or might not) call a hearing under rule 60.3(d).
1 US 18 172 RYA The Racing Rules Explained
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220 |
Page 221 |
Page 222 |
Page 223 |
Page 224 |
Page 225 |
Page 226 |
Page 227 |
Page 228 |
Page 229 |
Page 230 |
Page 231 |
Page 232 |
Page 233 |
Page 234 |
Page 235 |
Page 236 |
Page 237 |
Page 238 |
Page 239 |
Page 240 |
Page 241 |
Page 242 |
Page 243 |
Page 244 |
Page 245 |
Page 246 |
Page 247 |
Page 248 |
Page 249 |
Page 250 |
Page 251 |
Page 252 |
Page 253 |
Page 254 |
Page 255 |
Page 256
