Thomas Armstrong, in another post said 'I've always found that the limitations of 61.4 are too restrictive. I would like to read a discussion on how these restrictions were defined'.
The bar for redress is high. It always has been. The 'redress' that a boat can get when disadvantaged by another boat breaking a rule without physical damage or lack of sportsmanship is the penalisation of the other boat on valid protest.
Prior to the 1961 rewrite of the rules:
- The IYRU rules (my 1947 version, rule 41 Man Overboard and Accidents) was, as far as I can see, the only relevant rule and it provided redress for any yacht not responsible for an accident that had injured her chance of winning any prize. There was no provision for redress for any improper actions.
- The NAYRU rules (1952 rule 59 Protest against the race committee), on the other hand, provided redress for a yacht that had been prejudiced by an infringement by the Race Committee.
The 1961 rewrite provided:
Rule 12 Yacht Unduly Prejudiced
If the race committee decides that he finishing position of a yacht through no fault of her own, has been materially prejudiced by rendering assistance, or by being disabled by another yacht which should have kept clear, it may order te race to be resailed or make such other arrangement as it deems proper.
Rule 68 Protests
1. A protest can be made by any yacht against another or against the race committee.
...
5.(b) If the race committee decides that [an infringement of a racing rule or a sailing instruction by the race committee] occurred and that he result of the race was altered thereby, it shall cancel the race or order it to be resailed, or make such other arrangements as it deems proper ... .
In the 1964 version, the right to protest against the race committee was removed, and the wording of rule 68.5 was changed to refer to 'an action or omission of the race committee', and 'seek redress'.
In 1981 the provisions of old rule 12 Yacht Materially Prejudiced and old rule 68.5 were combined into an new rule 69 Requests for Redress, in more or less the form familiar to us.
It's fascinating to know how rules develop into what we have now. It helps with understanding the motives and aims and meanings.
Given that I'm a bit interested in processes of rules writing, it's interesting to see how, in major rewrite projects (1961, and 1995), some rules don't get combined and rationalised.
This redress one is an example, where the combination took place outside the major rewrites in 1981.
The other example is RRS2 and RRS 69, which scream to be rationalised, and still haven't been, after two major rewrites.
During the second half of the last century and the 1st quarter of the current one, many countries have developed laws aimed at protecting victims and even to try to repair inflicted damage, when possible. Thing like "you drove past a red light, so you have to pay for other car repairs" and such.
I race IOM class, where twenty one-meter radiocontrolled boats race a small course twice, in no more than 15 minutes. We do up to 20 races a day. This means plenty of crossing and mark situations, and its very common that two boats get tangled to each other. As a result both boats lose several places on that race. Of course one of them is at fault and takes penalty turns or is DSQ, according to the RSS. But the other boat, which has no damage, continues sailing the course, but ends up losing several places due to the other's fault on that race. So there are always question about redress to be given in these situations. I have learnt to "sail alone", meaning to sail very far away from others to avoid tangles, as I know that even if I am not at fault, I would lose many points.
I am not trying to make any point here - I would just love to hear if other's have thought about the possibillity for other types of redress, and if there have been any formal discussiona about this. Just bein curious.
Thanks again, John!