Note: This forum is not affiliated with World Sailing and comments on this forum do not represent an official interpretation of the rules, definitions, cases or regulations. The only official interpretations are those of World Sailing.
Rule 40.2.b ......at all times while afloat that day
Yes, they break the rule. Technically, they also beak the rule if they are on a floating dock without a PFD. This is a rule that had a lot of unintended consequences.
Was the Y flag flying ashore or from the committee boat? Also, 40.1 references "each competitor." Would a boat be considered "competing" if the racing is done?
The question is, of course, how long after the finish the Rules can apply to a boat. At Pac Cup, this has been the subject of debate, or at least concern. We insist on good behavior all week at our host clubs, and we require boats to come directly to the inspection dock after finishing, without stopping or taking on or discharging crew or gear. We have penalized boats for breaking those requirements, but they have not gone up on appeal.
I think it's reasonable that the SI's would say that a boat can't change anything until after inspection - I wouldn't expect an appeal to be successful. And insisting on good behavior falls outside of the NOR or SI's, but is common sense. I think I recall a rule 69 investigation regarding behavior at a yacht club - my understanding is that 69 allows for that kind of allegation before, during, or after racing.
The preamble to part 4 says it applies to boats racing unless the rule states otherwise. None of rule 40 specifically states otherwise. Common sense says: 40.1 refers to competitors - if the event is over, you can't be competing. The definition of racing doesn't apply and you can't be subject to the NOR or SI's any longer. 40.2 (a) refers to while racing 40.2(b) refers to at all times while afloat that day in the context of 40.1 "competitors". Therefore 40.2(b) can't apply after the event is over. If other safety rules of the club apply at other times while on or in their premises under their jurisdiction, that's a different matter. 40.2(c) is also in the context of when the CLASS RULES, NOR, OR SI apply.
If you're sailing your boat within the context of a competition or an event governed by its specific rules, then you're subject to those, otherwise you're on your own and subject to your government's boating rules.
Hi Phil and Phil. I think I respectfully disagree on this. 40.2(b) says “while afloat for the Day” not while racing.
I think the goal was possibly to assure that competitors were subject to this rule until they were home safely and not simply finished with the last race of the event.
So the rule is equally applicable retroactively to a boat arriving in the morning before racing without PFDs on. Then I agree that the rule needs to be tightened up.
It's amazing to me how many people want to twist the simple words of a rule into what they want the rule to say. As a wise judge once told me 'read what the words say, not what you want them to say'.
40.2(b) is really simple. If the flag is flown or the rule is invoked in the NoR or SI then you have to wear PFDs 'while afloat that day'. There is no ambiguity, no 'while racing', no mention of when people are competitors. If you are afloat on that day you must be wearing a PFD or break the rule.
People do not switch on and off being competitors. We have a definition of what a competitor is, i.e. 'a person who races or intends to race in the event.' You become a competitor when you start 'intending to race' and, importantly, it never ends. You are a competitor in that race forever. 50 years after the event, if it is found that you cheated, you can be penalized.
As far as the preamble to Part 4 goes, the rule very clearly states otherwise. 'That day' is clearly a different time frame than 'while racing'.
As far as possible penalties, if you break the rule you are penalized in the race nearest in time to when the rule was broken. If it is after the end of the last race of the series, then you are penalized in the last race of the series. See the last part of RRS 60.5(c).
Clearly, RRS 40.2(b) has situations when it is not appropriate. It is not appropriate when boats are coming from all over an area to a central racing venue. If it takes a boat 2 hours to motor to and from the racing venue, then this is not a good option. If you are racing a small dinghy where everyone is coming from a single club, the boats may not launch until the D flag is displayed and are all escorted back to shore, then this may be a good option.
For events where boats are coming from all over, I generally recommend saying that RRS 40.1 applies to competitors while boats are in the racing area and are preparing to race, are racing, or have been racing.
I would say the intent is to cover the sail out to the racing area and back to the dock, assuming boats sail out of a common club for day racing (as a few of the rules imply). We cannot assume that anytime afloat meant any time in perpetuity! I know the intent in may class rules written that way is to cover from the time they leave the dock until they return to the dock from racing and it's sometimes explicitly stated that way which clears it up. In the case of boats not returning to a host club, I would think the event, and the rule naturally end once the competitor is leaving the racing area for the day. In the case above, the boat had (apparently) complied with the rule retuning to the club and completed her obligations under the rules as the race day is done even if the sun hasn't set..
Was "Y" still hoisted? Because if not the RC or protester would have a tough case enforcing it.
Why?
Race Committee presents the photo they took when they displayed the flag with it's time and date stamp, (your race committee does take photos of signals ashore, don't they?) or brings in the visual signals officer that displayed the flag and he or she gives evidence that the flag was displayed.
It doesn't say 'when' or 'while' flag Y is displayed.
I don't think there would be any argument that the requirement did not apply before flag Y was displayed, and I don't think there is a good argument that the requirement should apply after the event is concluded [and boats are sailing home], but on the face of the rule, it says 'at all times while afloat that day', so the end of the requirement is not in doubt: it is at the end of the day.
Reply to: 20665 - Craig Priniski ... I don't think there is a good argument that the requirement should apply after the event is concluded [and boats are sailing home],
"Sailor dies on way home from Regatta" is still not a great headline.
I've certainly known dinghy events where two clubs share a race area. Where the sailor might sail into the prize giving club but need to get home. Definitely that would apply for bigger boats that might be more tempted to take off their floatation aids. There will be some very large boats where that may be entirely sensible.
Do I want my event associated with "poor" practice? Do I want my Regatta all over the TV for the wrong reasons?
But at the same time, do I want to be re-opening a protest committee to deal with the guy in 20th place who decided not to wear a lifejacket home? Or will I only be told about the guy who won, who didn't comply on his way home?
I can see the textual argument for day being 24 hrs, although I’d be really hesitant to ignore the protest limit and open a hearing after the regatta unless there was something more reckless involved. If the event is closed the OA’s authority is ended too, but there’s daylight to say that unless you formally close the event “the day” and rules continue. But if we want to be that literal, if conditions change and I remove the flag, it’s no longer in effect. If I otherwise remove that same signal, it would have the same impact deliberate or an omission .
if we want to be that literal, if conditions change and I remove the flag, it’s no longer in effect. If I otherwise remove that same signal, it would have the same impact deliberate or an omission .
Nup: there's no scope for the race committee to switch off RRS 40.2(b) once they've displayed the flag.
I can see the textual argument for day being 24 hrs, although I’d be really hesitant to ignore the protest limit and open a hearing after the regatta unless there was something more reckless involved. If the event is closed the OA’s authority is end...
There are going to be procedural and administrative difficulties for the OA if the event is concluded and the race committee and protest committee have dispersed. There is now no committee that can protest, and unless the OA appoints and assembles a new protest committee, nobody to hear a protest.
A competitor could protest. This is not an 'incident in the racing area'. The protest time limit is two hours after the relevant information is available to the protestor, and may be extended by the protest committee for good reason.
Judges Manual G.2.3, while referring specifically to RRS 69 (which, by the way, may be appropriate for some egregious breach of RRS 40.2(b)) is helpful.
G.2.3 The Time and Place of the Act of Misconduct The act of misconduct must be associated with the event. It would therefore normally occur within the period immediately prior to the event, commencing with the person’s arrival at the venue for the purpose of the event, and may extend beyond their departure from the venue.
Rule 90.3(e) defines the point after which there are no further changes... notwithstanding the
provisions of rules 90.3(a), (b), (c) and (d).
Indeed, but RRS 90.3(e)
has to be switched on in the NOR
allows 24 hours after the end of the event
And RRS 90.3(e) does NOT switch off the requirement of RRS 63.2(a) that all protests shall be heard.
If the event has ended and the protest committee has left the event, as an example, RRS 69.2(k) says the OA may appoint the same or a new protest committee ... . I think that confers a discretion to not appoint a protest committee and the protest would lapse. It would be interesting to see what an Appeals Committee would do with an appeal on the grounds that the protest committee has failed to hold a hearing or to make a decision.
The judge’s manual is not part of the RRS they are guidance only. Also you now took a rules infraction after the event and declared it misconduct?
We're judges. We take whatever guidance is available for what it's worth, and the World Sailing Judges Manual is worth quite a lot.
See Calum's post.
I'm not suggesting protesting a dead sailor, and I wouldn't expect an OA to want to do anything for other than an egregious breach.
But if the headline runs 'Coastguard commander criticizes sailing club for not ensuring life jackets are worn' that's bringing the sport into disrepute.
Remember the OA and by extension committees have authority only for the event. You’re suggesting opening a new protest after the protest time limit for something that occurred after the protest time limit. That’s not something the rules intend. And to be clear you’re not reopening a hearing it was never a valid protest in the first place.
To answer The original question, it depends if the Y flag is still flying. Or in the case argued elsewhere, if it is persistent after being lowered, unlike other signals. But if for the sake of the argument, Y flag is up still, then they technically broke the rule, but it should not be enforced unless there were aggravating circumstances as it was after the time limit.
Neither was I. I was suggesting the reason to enable 40.2(b) was to avoid the headline. Or at least to avoid the subsequent articles of "racer wore lifejacket during race, but took it off to sail home and then drowned"
and I wouldn't expect an OA to want to do anything for other than an egregious breach.
Neither would I. And I struggle to decide what an egregious breach is! Someone burning their lifejacket in protest perhaps!
However, does that fact it is in the RRS and enabled by the SI mean the OA might be forced to investigate? I can imagine the scenario where to bitter rivals are competing at an event. The prizes come down to the final race. The 'gold medal winner' sails home without his lifejacket on. Can silver (his bitter rival) protest?
And in my other doomsday situation. A club (the OA) has hosted the same event for 3 years. They have enabled 40.2(b) identically for 3 years. They did so to reduce the risks of an adverse incident being attributed to their event (it might well be stated on the risk assessment for instance). In years 1 and 2, it was known that sailors then sailed without lifejackets on the way home. No adverse incident occurs in year 1 and 2. But no actual enforcement of the rule took place because the breach wasn't felt egregious.
In year 3 a sailor falls overboard without a lifejacket on, while sailing home. At the subsequent enquiry, the OA are asked to attend and state they considered the risks, they even enabled 40.2(b) knowing that should mitigate the risks. How might failure to enforce 40.2(b) affect them¿
I'm based at an inland dinghy club. We have a 100% PFD rule for on the water and on the jetty (our jetty doesn't float). There are times it isn't enforced (it's a nice sunny day, the risks are low, the sailor is very competent and just walking along the jetty to collect something and return ashore... ...but rules are rules... ...not that I expect disqualification!
It feels like [NP] [DP] could be helpful here. But it also feels like if sailors are leaving your water 40.2(b) might not be helpful even if the risk manager feels it is
It is presumably possible to impose a penalty if you wanted to. Appeals etc can change results after the prize giving.
Serious infractions such as doping (covered by Rule 6) would often not be possible to determine for weeks afterwards.
The question might be "do you want to".
You definitely don't want to be having other competitors raising protests about it.
Also, 40.1 references "each competitor." Would a boat be considered "competing" if the racing is done?
And insisting on good behavior falls outside of the NOR or SI's, but is common sense. I think I recall a rule 69 investigation regarding behavior at a yacht club - my understanding is that 69 allows for that kind of allegation before, during, or after racing.
40.1 refers to competitors - if the event is over, you can't be competing. The definition of racing doesn't apply and you can't be subject to the NOR or SI's any longer.
40.2 (a) refers to while racing
40.2(b) refers to at all times while afloat that day in the context of 40.1 "competitors". Therefore 40.2(b) can't apply after the event is over.
If other safety rules of the club apply at other times while on or in their premises under their jurisdiction, that's a different matter.
40.2(c) is also in the context of when the CLASS RULES, NOR, OR SI apply.
If you're sailing your boat within the context of a competition or an event governed by its specific rules, then you're subject to those, otherwise you're on your own and subject to your government's boating rules.
40.2.b does not specifically state otherwise.
I think the goal was possibly to assure that competitors were subject to this rule until they were home safely and not simply finished with the last race of the event.
Then I agree that the rule needs to be tightened up.
40.2(b) is really simple. If the flag is flown or the rule is invoked in the NoR or SI then you have to wear PFDs 'while afloat that day'. There is no ambiguity, no 'while racing', no mention of when people are competitors. If you are afloat on that day you must be wearing a PFD or break the rule.
People do not switch on and off being competitors. We have a definition of what a competitor is, i.e. 'a person who races or intends to race in the event.' You become a competitor when you start 'intending to race' and, importantly, it never ends. You are a competitor in that race forever. 50 years after the event, if it is found that you cheated, you can be penalized.
As far as the preamble to Part 4 goes, the rule very clearly states otherwise. 'That day' is clearly a different time frame than 'while racing'.
As far as possible penalties, if you break the rule you are penalized in the race nearest in time to when the rule was broken. If it is after the end of the last race of the series, then you are penalized in the last race of the series. See the last part of RRS 60.5(c).
Clearly, RRS 40.2(b) has situations when it is not appropriate. It is not appropriate when boats are coming from all over an area to a central racing venue. If it takes a boat 2 hours to motor to and from the racing venue, then this is not a good option. If you are racing a small dinghy where everyone is coming from a single club, the boats may not launch until the D flag is displayed and are all escorted back to shore, then this may be a good option.
For events where boats are coming from all over, I generally recommend saying that RRS 40.1 applies to competitors while boats are in the racing area and are preparing to race, are racing, or have been racing.
Race Committee presents the photo they took when they displayed the flag with it's time and date stamp, (your race committee does take photos of signals ashore, don't they?) or brings in the visual signals officer that displayed the flag and he or she gives evidence that the flag was displayed.
But RRS 40.2(b) says 'flag Y was displayed'
It doesn't say 'when' or 'while' flag Y is displayed.
I don't think there would be any argument that the requirement did not apply before flag Y was displayed, and I don't think there is a good argument that the requirement should apply after the event is concluded [and boats are sailing home], but on the face of the rule, it says 'at all times while afloat that day', so the end of the requirement is not in doubt: it is at the end of the day.
"Sailor dies on way home from Regatta" is still not a great headline.
I've certainly known dinghy events where two clubs share a race area. Where the sailor might sail into the prize giving club but need to get home. Definitely that would apply for bigger boats that might be more tempted to take off their floatation aids. There will be some very large boats where that may be entirely sensible.
Do I want my event associated with "poor" practice? Do I want my Regatta all over the TV for the wrong reasons?
But at the same time, do I want to be re-opening a protest committee to deal with the guy in 20th place who decided not to wear a lifejacket home? Or will I only be told about the guy who won, who didn't comply on his way home?
provisions of rules 90.3(a), (b), (c) and (d).
John C had it right... "This is a rule that had a lot of unintended consequences!"
A competitor could protest. This is not an 'incident in the racing area'. The protest time limit is two hours after the relevant information is available to the protestor, and may be extended by the protest committee for good reason.
Judges Manual G.2.3, while referring specifically to RRS 69 (which, by the way, may be appropriate for some egregious breach of RRS 40.2(b)) is helpful.
G.2.3 The Time and Place of the Act of Misconduct
The act of misconduct must be associated with the event. It would therefore normally occur within the period immediately prior to the event, commencing with the person’s arrival at the venue for the purpose of the event, and may extend beyond their departure from the venue.
And RRS 90.3(e) does NOT switch off the requirement of RRS 63.2(a) that all protests shall be heard.
If the event has ended and the protest committee has left the event, as an example, RRS 69.2(k) says the OA may appoint the same or a new protest committee ... . I think that confers a discretion to not appoint a protest committee and the protest would lapse. It would be interesting to see what an Appeals Committee would do with an appeal on the grounds that the protest committee has failed to hold a hearing or to make a decision.
See Calum's post.
I'm not suggesting protesting a dead sailor, and I wouldn't expect an OA to want to do anything for other than an egregious breach.
But if the headline runs 'Coastguard commander criticizes sailing club for not ensuring life jackets are worn' that's bringing the sport into disrepute.
Neither was I. I was suggesting the reason to enable 40.2(b) was to avoid the headline. Or at least to avoid the subsequent articles of "racer wore lifejacket during race, but took it off to sail home and then drowned"
Neither would I. And I struggle to decide what an egregious breach is! Someone burning their lifejacket in protest perhaps!
However, does that fact it is in the RRS and enabled by the SI mean the OA might be forced to investigate? I can imagine the scenario where to bitter rivals are competing at an event. The prizes come down to the final race. The 'gold medal winner' sails home without his lifejacket on. Can silver (his bitter rival) protest?
And in my other doomsday situation. A club (the OA) has hosted the same event for 3 years. They have enabled 40.2(b) identically for 3 years. They did so to reduce the risks of an adverse incident being attributed to their event (it might well be stated on the risk assessment for instance). In years 1 and 2, it was known that sailors then sailed without lifejackets on the way home. No adverse incident occurs in year 1 and 2. But no actual enforcement of the rule took place because the breach wasn't felt egregious.
In year 3 a sailor falls overboard without a lifejacket on, while sailing home. At the subsequent enquiry, the OA are asked to attend and state they considered the risks, they even enabled 40.2(b) knowing that should mitigate the risks. How might failure to enforce 40.2(b) affect them¿
I'm based at an inland dinghy club. We have a 100% PFD rule for on the water and on the jetty (our jetty doesn't float). There are times it isn't enforced (it's a nice sunny day, the risks are low, the sailor is very competent and just walking along the jetty to collect something and return ashore... ...but rules are rules... ...not that I expect disqualification!
It feels like [NP] [DP] could be helpful here.
But it also feels like if sailors are leaving your water 40.2(b) might not be helpful even if the risk manager feels it is