Bill Handley Rules OK
Bill Handley
Hi - my name is Bill Handley a National Judge living in Cornwall UK. I spend my summers racing boats ranging from an RS 400 asymmetric dinghy to a Falmouth working boat called Florence, 28 ft long with an 18 ft bowsprit, gaff rigged, weighing 11 tons, no engine and built in 1895. I also race a variety of keel boats and sports boats.
When not racing I put my judging hat on and attend events in the UK and the rest of Europe as a judge (either on or off the water) and do a bit of partial fleet umpiring.
I have put together some interesting cases that I have come across in my judging roles which I hope will be useful to others. All the cases quoted have been confirmed by either ISAF or RYA appeals cases or have been the subject of ISAF Q&As so the results may be considered to be fairly authoritative. Some are written up in the form of a question and others just as a case study - no reason for this other than some situations lend themselves more to one approach than the other.
The diagrams for the cases have been constructed using the excellent Tactical Sailing Situations software and I do advise anyone wishing to become seriously involved with the rules to visit their website and down load this software for what is a very modesr fee.
Finally if anyone wants to discuss further aspects of a case, would like me to create a case around their specific issue or would like some additional explanation I will be more than happy to enter in to direct correspondence by email on rs400714@aol.com This is the same address to use if wanted to engage me for work in connection with judging events, publication of articles, vetting and production of race documents, rules talks and other related subjects.
INDEX
Case 1 - Start Line - the limitations on a right of way boat changing course at the start
Case 2- Windward Mark - the obligations on a leeward boat to bear away
Case 3 - Rules when tacking - considerations of the rulea that apply when tacking from port to starboard
Case 4 - No luffing rights - the rights and obligations when a boat established a leeward overlap from astern
Case 5 - Not so clear ahead - a very complex case study of a leeward mark rounding showing how a boat may enter the zone clear ahead and still have to keep clear of the boat clear astern because of hoe the rule changed in the 2009/12 rules.
Case 6 - Hold your course - The rights of a starboard boat to change course, the effect of the hail "hold your course" and a discussion on hailing in general
Case 7 - Starboard boat as an obstruction - the rights of a port tack boat to bear away to avoid a starboard boat
Case 8 - Tacking clear ahead at a widward mark - looking at the limited rights of aclear ahead boat to tack at a windward mark
Case 9 - Overlapped or clear ahead at the zone - examining when boat might be overlapped or clear ahead at a leeward mark
Case10 - Four sub cases dealing with the rights and obligations of boats whan hailing for room to tack at an obstruction
10a - When the hailed boat refuses to respond
10b - When the hailing boat delays tacking
10c - When the hailed boat responds "you tack"
10d- At a finish line when one boat can fetch the Committee Boat
Case 11 - Fair sailing - Penalties when a boat deliberatly breaks a rule at the start to win a series
Case 12 - Sailing the course - Where a boat is forced the wrong side of a mark by another boat breaking a rule.
Case 13 - When a right of way boat is forced over the line on a Black Flag start.
Case 14 - Leeward mark out of control - the rights and obligations of an inside boat that loses control at the leeward mark
Case 15 - Sailing the Course - The course to sail when the SIs require a mark to be looped.
Case 16 - Shortened Course - When the Committee boat is stationed on the "wrong" side of a rounding mark.
Case 17 - Individual Recall Error - Redress when a RC makes an error in signaling an indiviadual recall
Case 18 - A boat not flying a spinnaker luffing one that is
Case 19 - Dummy Tack - The risks involved in trying to escape cover using a dummy tack
Case 20 - Gybing at a leeward mark - a case study on the different rights of an inside boat depending on which side the mark has to be passed
Case 21 - Leeward gate Indecision - the rights of a boat at a leeward mark to change her mind as to which mark to go for.
Case 22 - Keep clear of boats that are racing - the rights and obligations whan a boat racing meets one that has not yet started racing
Case 23 - Damage after a general recall - a look at the penalties and rights of redress in these ciecumstances
Case 24 - An IDM at the start - Dangers of poorly drawn SIs when an IDM is laid
Case 25 - Propulsion Rules - when they no longer apply at the finish
Case 26 - An IDM at the finish - problems when an IDM at the finish is on the non course side of the line
Case 27 - Missing out the last mark - what the RC should do if it sees a boat sail the wrong course
Case 28 - Mark room at the finish, a change from the old rules
Case 1 Start Line - changing course
Situation
On a windward start line Blue is making a start on port tack. Yellow has arrived early and is reaching along the start line on starboard tack. In position 1 the start gun goes. Blue continues to sail on port tack without changing course. Yellow luffs onto a close hauled course and in position 3 comes into conflict with Blue.
Question
In a valid protest what would the decision be -
a) Disqualify blue
b) Disqualify yellow
c) Disqualify blue and yellow
d) Do not disqualify either boat.
Answer
b) Disqualify yellow
Explanation
Throughout the incident the boats are on opposite tacks so the right of way rule 10 applies and blue has to keep clear of yellow - defined as allowing yellow to sail her course (any course of her choosing) without yellow having to take avoiding action.
In position 1 blue is keeping clear of yellow as if both boats had continued on their courses blue would have passed ahead of yellow.
In position 2 the same is true even after yellow has started to change course. This can be demonstrated by creating an alternative position 3 for yellow directly ahead and on the same course as yellow's position 2 - again blue is passing ahead.
Between position 2 and position 3 yellow further changes course in such a way so that blue is no longer keeping clear of her.
Rule 16.1 places a general limitation on yellow as right of way boat so that if she changes course she must give blue room to keep clear. Yellow changes course so close to blue that between positions 2 and 3 blue has no opportunity to keep clear and yellow therefore breaks rule 16.1
As yellow has broken rule 16.1 she should be disqualified. Blue has broken rule 10 by failing to keep clear of yellow but as she has been compelled to break that rule by yellow breaking rule 16.1 blue is exonerated under rule 64.1(c)
It does not matter that yellow is sailing her proper course - there is no general right or requirement for a boat to sail her proper course. Nor does it matter that it was apparent to all that yellow would alter course in this way - blue only has to respond to what yellow is doing and not what she may do in the future.
If the boats were further apart and the Protest Committee found as a fact that after yellow had altered course blue had time to keep clear but failed to do so then the PC would disqualify blue under rule 10 and find that yellow had broken no rule - when she changed course she gave blue room (time and space) to keep clear.
Case 2 Windward mark - bear away 
Situation
Blue and Yellow are approaching the windward mark on a close hauled course with yellow overlapped to windward. The proper course for both boats is to bear away to the next mark which is some way to leeward. In position 3 blue continues to sail on a close hauled course while yellow hails him to bear away.
Question
Does blue have to bear away ?
Answer
This is a bit of a trick question as the answer is that from the facts provided you just can't tell. There is no doubt that the proper course ( the course they would sail to finish as quickly as possible) for both boats is to bear away however there is no general rule that requires a boat to sail her proper course.In certain circumstance ( rule 17) a boat may not sail above her proper course, in other circumstances ( rule 18.4) a boat my not sail beyond her proper course before gybing and if entitled to mark-room a boat may sail her proper course at the mark but to repeat - there is no general rule that requires a boat to sail her proper course.
The answer in this cased will be determined on whether or not one of the specific circumstances requires blue to sail any particular course in relation to her proper course which is to bear away.
1) If the overlap was established by yellow from clear astern and to windward then none of the specific circumstances exist and blue may continue to sail close hauled with yellow required to keep clear under rule 11.
2) If on the other hand the overlap was established by blue from clear astern and to leeward within two of her hull lengths of yellow then blue is subject to rule 17 and for the duration of the overlap may not sail above her proper course unless in doing so she promptly sails astern of yellow which clearly isn't happening in this case. Blue must bear away and sail no higher than her proper course.
It must be clearly understood that at no time does the requirement of yellow to keep clear of blue under rule 11 change. Even if blue breaks rule 17 by sailing above her proper course in situation 2 above yellow must still keep clear and her only sanction against blue is to protest. If she fails to keep clear she breaks rule 11 and in a valid protest would also be disqualified.
Case 3 - Rules when tacking
Not a question but just an illustration of how the four basic right of way rules apply in a very common situation like tacking. This is why it is never enough having worked out which of the r-o-w rules apply in any situation ( bear in mind that one and only one will apply in any situation) but to keep your eye on the ball because the rule that applies and therefore the relevant rights and obligations will similarly change.
The manoeuvre in question is a tack from port to starboard by yellow and her rights and obligations in respect of blue who continues to sail close hauled on port. Given that this manoeuvre will only take about 5 seconds in a dinghy and not much longer even in a large keel boat it makes it clear just how quickly the rules can change.
Position 1 - Both boats are on port tack with yellow clear ahead of blue (see 90 degree stern line) so that blue has to keep clear of yellow under rule 12.
Position 2 - Yellow is starting to tack but has not yet gone beyond head to wind and is therefore still on the same tack as blue. Blue is now overlapped to windward of yellow (see 90 degree stern line) so that blue still has to keep clear of yellow but now under rule 11
Position 3 - Yellow has gone beyond head to wind but is not yet on her close hauled course and is therefore subject to rule 13. Crucially under rule 13 yellow now has to keep clear of blue.
Position 4 - Yellow is now in close hauled starboard and meets blue on close hauled port. The right of way switches again and blue must now keep clear of yellow under rule 10
Of course it isn't just the right of way rules that are in play. Because yellow acquired her right of way in position 4 through her own actions then under rule 15 she must initially give blue room to keep clear which as can be seen from the diagram she is not.
In a valid protest yellow would be disqualified under rule 15. Blue has broken rule 10 in position 4 by not keeping clear of yellow but as she was compelled to do so as a result of blue breaking a rule she is exonerated under rule 64.1(c). Blue does not have to anticipate that yellow will become r-o-w boat and does not have to start keeping clear until she actually becomes keep clear boat see ISAF Case 27.
Case 4 No Luffing Rights
Situation
Yellow and blue are sailing on a reach on their proper course to the next mark which is some way ahead of them. yellow establishes an overlap from clear astern and to leeward of blue about one hull length away. Yellow then luffs gently in a manner such that blue could keep clear. Blue hails " no luffing rights"and does not respond adequately to the luff. Yellow continues to luff and makes contact where there is no damage or injury.
Question
In a valid protest should the decision be -
a) Disqualify yellow
b) Disqualify blue
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
c) Disqualify both
Explanation
In position 1 yellow is clear astern of blue and has to keep clear of her under rule 12 and this she does.
In position 2 blue is now required to keep clear of yellow under rule 11 which she does. Yellow has to initially give blue room to keep clear under rule 15 and must not sail above her proper course because she established the overlap from clear astern, to leeward and within two of her hull lengths - rule 17.
In position 3 yellow breaks rule 17 by sailing above her proper course - her only defence in a protest would be to argue that suddenly changing course was her proper course (the course she would sail to finish as quickly as possible if blue were not there) which as she has been sailing straight towards to next mark for some time would be hard to prove. Blue has to keep clear under rule 11 which she does but hails "no luffing rights".
In position 4 yellow continues to luff breaking rule 17. Blue refuses to respond to the luff and fails to keep clear breaking rule 11. Blue is not entitled to exoneration under rule 64.1(c) as she was not compelled to break rule 11 - she was given plenty of room (time and space) as windward boat to keep clear but chose not to, instead trying to enforce her imagined rights under rule 17.
Blue has also broken rule 14 by failing to avoid contact which was avoidable. Yellow has also broken rule 14 but because she is right of way boat and there has been no damage or injury she should not be penalized - see rule 14.
Decision
Both boats have broken rules with no exoneration and therefore both boats should be disqualified. This clearly illustrates the point that just because rule 17 takes rights away from a leeward boat, at no time does it relieve the windward boat of it's obligations to keep clear under rule 11.
Had yellow changed course so suddenly that blue could not keep clear then yellow would have also broken rule 16.1. In those circumstance blue would be entitled to exoneration because her breach of rule 11 would have be compelled by yellow breaking a rule - 16.1
Case 5 Not so clear ahead
This case study has been inspired by a number of protests in which I have been involved (as a PC member) this year. The decisions I have been involved with have caused some surprise and in at least one case anger because the parties do not fully understand how the rules in this area have changed. I hope this case study goes some way to explaining the position.
The situation is two asymmetric dinghies approaching a port hand leeward mark on port tack. Blue enters the zone clear ahead of yellow and does not sail towards the mark but sails on her existing course to maintain best VMG. Blue gybes onto port to sail to the mark and encounters yellow on starboard. Blue bears away to avoid yellow. Yellow gybes on her proper course to sail to the mark. Blue hardens up towards the mark and follows yellow from clear astern.
This shows how the current rules have changed the decision from the 2005-8 rules. Under the old rules when yellow was clear astern of blue at position 1 then yellow had to "thereafter keep clear" under (old) 18.2(c). When the boats conflict at position 3 then blue's obligations under rule 10 conflict with yellow's obligations under rule 18 and under the (old) preamble to section C yellow's obligations took precedence and she had to keep clear. Things are very different under the 2009-12 rules as you will see from the following.
Position 1 - Blue has entered the zone clear ahead of yellow. Yellow has to keep clear of blue under rule 12 and give her mark room ( room to sail to the mark and her proper course while at the mark) under rule 18.2(b). This is clarified in ISAF Case 75 as "A direct corridor" from where blue entered the zone "to a position close to and alongside the mark on the required side". See also Rapid Response Match Racing Call 2010/001
Position 2 - Yellow has fulfilled her obligation to blue under rule 18.2(b) but blue has declined to take the mark room on offer by bearing away towards the mark and has instead sailed on to maintain her best VMG. Had blue born away and then encountered yellow on starboard then yellow would be breaking rule 18.2(b) by not giving blue the mark room to which she was entitled. Blue would have broken either rule 11 ( if she had remained on starboard) or rule 10 (if she gybed onto port) but been exonerated under rule 18.5 as she was taking mark room to which she was entitled.
Position 3 - Blue has gybed onto port and encountered yellow on starboard – blue is not yet at the mark but sailing towards it. Yellow's obligations under rule 18 have long since been met and blue's right to exoneration for breaking rule 10 has lapsed as she is no longer "taking mark room to which she is entitled". Blue must keep clear of yellow under rule 10 which she does by bearing away ( gybing if necessary) to allow yellow to sail her course without having to take avoiding action - see definition of "Keep Clear". Yellow is not obliged to initially give blue room to keep clear under rule 15 as she acquired the right of way as a result of blue's own actions.
There is no doubt that blue is sailing her proper course, however, mark room only allows a boat to sail her proper course while at the mark - not on her way to it (see definition of Mark Room). Yellow is now inside overlapped right of way boat that has to gybe at the mark to sail her proper course and is therefore subject to rule 18.4. To comply with that rule she must sail no further from the mark than her proper course before she gybes.
Position 4 - Yellow has met her obligations under rule 18.4 and gybed towards the mark. Blue has met her obligations under rule 10 and kept clear of yellow. Neither boat has broken a rule. Blue must keep clear of yellow under rule 12 which she does. When blue arrives at the mark she will once again be taking mark room to which she is entitled and the obligation on yellow will be to give it to her (rule 18.2(b) continuing to apply) but by that time yellow will be long gone.
Conclusion - no rules broken
Risks to yellow - This different position resulting from the change to the rules from the start of 2009 does not give yellow the free hand as might first appear. Up to position 3 she has obligations to keep clear and only briefly gains rights under rule 10 if blue gybes. If she sails further than her proper course she risks disqualification under rule 18.4.
If blue waits, gybes outside yellow and then emerges in position 4 as a leeward overlapped boat then the whole situation for yellow starts to unravel. At that stage she would be keep clear windward boat under rule 11 with no protection under rule 15 as blue has acquired the right of way as a result of yellow’s actions. Blue would have restrictions on changing course under rule 16.1 on the way to the mark but at the mark there would be no such restrictions as blue would be rounding the mark and entitled to exoneration under rule 18.5(b). Yellow although inside boat would not be entitled to mark room under rule 18.2(a) as the final clause of that rule disapplies itself when 18.2(b) applies. Although blue has not taken mark room under rule 18.2(b) nothing has happened as set out in 18.2(c) to disapply that rule so 18.2(a) cannot apply. Yellow would not be entitled to mark room and if she takes it and causes blue to bear away then she would have broken rule 11 as windward boat.
Case 6 Hold your course
Situation
Yellow and blue are approaching each other on opposite tacks on a beat, yellow on starboard blue on port. Yellow who is sailing a little free hails "starboard" and blue who estimates that yellow will pass astern of her hails "hold your course". Yellow hardens up and changes course so that after sailing for several boat lengths she comes into conflict with blue.
Question
In a valid protest would the decision be -
a) Disqualify blue
b) Disqualify yellow
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
a) Disqualify blue
Explanation
Throughout the incident the boats are on opposite tacks with blue on port. It follows that blue at all times is keep clear boat and has to therefore keep clear of yellow - to allow yellow to sail her course (any course of her choosing) so that yellow does not have take any avoiding action - see definition of Keep Clear.
In position 1 if the boats continue on there courses blue will keep clear of yellow by passing ahead. This can be seen by projecting forward yellow's position square by square which passes astern of blue.
In position 2 yellow changes course and is subject to rule 16.1 which requires her to give blue room ( time and space) to keep clear when she (yellow) changes course. The change of course happens at such a distance from blue that blue has plenty of time to change course in order to keep clear either by bearing away and passing astern of yellow or by tacking off onto starboard.
In position 3 yellow has made no further change of course and blue has failed to respond to yellow's earlier change of course instead choosing to argue the rights of the situation. Blue has been given room to keep clear but failed to do so and should be disqualified under rule 10.
Hailing - The hail " hold your course" has absolutely no effect on the rights or obligations of the situation, see RYA Case 1967/5. Blue may be indicating by her hail that she thinks that if yellow holds her course then she (blue) will keep clear or that if yellow fails to hold her course then she (yellow) will be breaking a rule - most probably rule 16.1. A Protest Committee considering the situation will make it's decision based entirely on whether or not when the right of way boat changes course she gave the keep clear boat room to keep clear, it will not take into account what a boat did or did not hail.
On a more general point hailing is only mentioned in rules twice, Rule 20 when it is require for a boat to be able to have room to tack at an obstruction and rule 61 when it is a requirement for a valid protest. Other than that whilst hailing may be helpful in indicating intentions or beliefs as to what a boat considers her rights, hailing has no standing within the rules and the absence or presence of a hail will not feature in the decision making process of a PC.
Case 7 Starboard boat as an obstruction
Situation
Yellow on close hauled starboard is approached by green and blue overlapped on port. Blue can pass astern of yellow without altering course but green, to windward of blue will either have to tack off or bear away to avoid yellow.
Question
Can green bear away and pass astern of yellow requiring blue to alter course to avoid her even though she is windward boat and had both the time and space to tack off onto starboard had she wanted ?
Answer
Yes green can require blue to bear away and give her room to pass astern of yellow.
Explanation
Yellow is a boat racing that both blue and green have to keep clear of and as such yellow is an obstruction to both boats - see definition of obstruction. Blue holds right of way in relation to green so under rule 19.2(a) she can chose which side of the obstruction to pass however rule 20.3 prevents her from hailing for room to tack as she does not have to make a substantial alteration of course to avoid yellow, the obstruction. It follows that blue has no choice but to sail astern of yellow.
Green has to keep clear of blue under rule 11 but as she approaches yellow rule 19.2(b) requires blue to give her room to pass between blue and the obstruction. If blue fails to do so she (blue) will have broken rule 19.2(b) and be disqualified in a valid protest. If as a result of not being given enough room green breaks a rule ( rule 10 if she hits yellow or rule 11 if she hits blue) she will be exonerated under rule 64.1(c) as she would have been compelled to break the rule by blue breaking a rule - 19.2(b).
If blue was not passing astern of yellow but was on a collision course the situation would be different. Blue would have the option under rule 20 to hail for room to tack and green would have to respond by tacking. If however blue decided to bear away to pass astern of yellow then the situation would remain as above and she would have to bear away sufficient to not only clear yellow but to also allow green to do so.
Case 8 - Tacking clear ahead at a windward mark
Situation
Blue enters the zone of a starboard hand windward mark on starboard tack clear ahead of yellow who is clear astern and a little to windward. Blue sails close hauled to the port lay line and then tacks hailing yellow that she (yellow) has "no water". Yellow conflicts with blue just after blue has passed head to wind.
Question
In a valid protest would the decision be -
a) Disqualify yellow
b) Disqualify blue
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
b) Disqualify blue
Explanation
When blue enters the zone in position 1 she is clear ahead of yellow and therefore entitled to mark room under rule 18.2(b). Mark room is room for blue to sail to the mark and her proper course while at the mark - see definition of mark room. The definition of mark room is further clarified in ISAF Case 75 as a direct corridor from the point that blue enters the zone to a position close to and along side the mark on the required side.
In positions 2 and 3 both boats sail there courses with yellow keeping clear of blue.
In position 4 blue tacks and hails yellow that because she (blue) is entitled to mark room then yellow is not entitled to room. Blue is wrong as rule 18.2(c) states that if a boat entitled to mark room passes head to wind then rule 18.2(b) ceases to apply. After blue passes head to wind 18.2(b) no longer applies and no other part of rule 18 is applicable.
The only rules applicable in position 4 and thereafter are the right of way rules. If the boats conflict before blue is on a close hauled course she is breaking rule 13 and if after she is close hauled she is breaking rule 10 and in either case would be disqualified in a valid protest.
If this were a mirror image at a port hand windward mark the situation would not be materially different. In position 4 blue would still break rule 13. Alternatively even if blue had established herself on close hauled starboard it would be so close to yellow that blue would have broken rule 15 and yellow would be exonerated from breaking rule 10 under rule 64.1(c) as she had been compelled to do so by blue breaking rule 15. The only way it could be different would be if blue managed to establish herself close hauled on starboard far enough away from yellow on port for yellow to be able to keep clear of her.
Case 9 - Overlapped or clear ahead at the zone
Situation
Yellow and blue are approaching a leeward mark in light winds with a strong tide running from lookers left to right. Because yellow has been carried wide by the tide blue enters the zone first clear astern of yellow. Yellow then turns towards the mark and enters the zone overlapped with blue. The boats sail to the mark with yellow accelerating on the closer point of sailing arriving first and then slowing as she turns to round the mark. Blue arrives at mark clear astern of yellow and whilst she could have born away and avoided yellow she hardens up and makes contact from clear astern with yellow with no damage or injury.
Question
In the subsequent protest yellow argues that she was clear ahead at the zone and entitled to mark room. Blue argues that she was inside and overlapped when yellow entered the zone and was therefore entitled to mark room. Should the protest committee -
a) accept yellow's argument and disqualify blue under rule 18.2(b)
b) accept blue's argument and disqualify yellow under rule 18.2(b)
c) come to some other conclusion
Answer
c) come to some other conclusion - in fact disqualify blue under rules 12 and 14.
Explanation
Neither yellow nor blue have carefully read the wording of rule 18.2(b). That rule states that an inside overlapped boat is only entitled to mark room if she is overlapped when the first boat reaches the zone. It goes on to say that the boat clear ahead is entitled to mark room only if she is clear ahead when she enters the zone - neither of these circumstances ever applied in this case.
In position 1 blue enters the zone an is not inside and overlapped so is not entitled to mark room under rule 18.2(b).
In position 2 yellow enters the zone but is not clear ahead when she does and so is not entitled to mark room under rule 18.2(b).
In position 3 it has been a established that no part of 18.2(b) applies. Blue is inside and overlapped so is entitled to mark room under rule 18.2(a).
In position 4 the boats are no longer overlapped so no part of rule 18 actually applies. Yellow has pulled clear ahead and become right of way boat under rule 12, she has also changed course and slowed almost to a stop in the tide. She has obligations under rule 15 ( acquiring a right of way) and rule 16.1 ( right of way boat changing course) but as blue has plenty of room (time and space) to keep clear of yellow by bearing away yellow has met her obligation to give room to keep clear under both rules.
Blue fails to keep clear while clear astern and fails to avoid contact when it was possible and therefore breaks both rules 12 and 14.
Had yellow not pulled clear ahead and the boats conflicted while blue was inside and overlapped the situation would be different in that rule 18.2(a) would still apply and yellow would have to give blue mark room under that rule. See ISAF Case 2 for further details and variations
10a - When the hailed boat refuses to respond
Situation
Yellow and Blue both on starboard tack are sailing towards a dockside where the water is known to be deep enough to float commercial shipping.The boats are overlapped with yellow approximately one boat length to windward of blue. At about 8 boat lengths from the dockside blue starts to hail for water to tack but yellow refuses and hails that there is plenty of room and water. They sail on for about 4 boat lengths arguing before yellow tacks off. Blue still well clear of the dock tacks immediately and protests yellow.
Question
In a valid protest would the decision be -
a) Disqualify blue
b) Disqualify yellow
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
c) Disqualify both
Explanation
When a boat is sailing close hauled or above and approaching an obstruction rule 20 states that she may hail a boat on the same tack for room to tack. The provisions of rule 20 do not apply until the hail is made.
When a boat is hailed under this rule she must respond in one of two ways, either to tack off or respond "you tack" and give the other boat room to avoid her - rule 20.1(b). If a boat responds in any other way she breaks this rule. Yellow did not respond in one of the approved ways but sailed on disputing the call. By not responding as required yellow broke rule 20.1(b). If yellow thought that blue's hail was not correct her only course of action within the rules was to respond ( most likely tack off) and then protest blue for her wrongful hail under rule 20.3 ( see below).
Rule 20.3 states that a boat shall not hail unless safety requires her to make a substantial course change to avoid an obstruction. In this case blue hailed long before safety required her to do so as was demonstrated by the fact that she sailed for some distance after her first hail with no problems in water she knew to be deep enough. In hailing too soon blue broke rule 20.3.
Both boats broke rules. Neither boat was compelled to break a rule (yellow could have tacked off when hailed and blue did not have to hail so soon) so neither boat is entitled to exoneration. Decision - disqualify both.
10b - When the hailing boat delays tacking
Situation
Yellow and Blue both on starboard tack are sailing towards a shoreline.The boats are overlapped with yellow approximately one boat length to windward of blue. Blue hails for room to tack and yellow responds immediately by tacking. In order to keep her wind clear blue sails on for a couple of boat lengths the tacks. Yellow protests.
Question
In a valid protest would the decision be -
a) Disqualify blue
b) Disqualify yellow
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
a) Disqualify blue
Explanation
When a boat is sailing close hauled or above and approaching an obstruction rule 20 states that she may hail a boat on the same tack for room to tack. The provisions of rule 20 do not apply until the hail is made.
When a boat is hailed under this rule she must respond in one of two ways, either to tack off or respond "you tack" and give the other boat room to avoid her - rule 20.1(b). In this case yellow responds by tacking off immediately and therefor fully complies with the rule.
Rule 20.1(c) states that when the hailed boat responds, the hailing boat shall tack as soon as possible. By sailing on for tactical advantage blue breaks this rule. It can also be argued that as blue sailed on she had hailed before safety required her to do so and also broke rule 20.3.
As soon as yellow has responded either by tacking or by hailing "you tack" blue must tack as soon as possible. In this case she did not. Disqualify blue
10c - When the hailed boat responds "you tack"
Situation
Yellow and Blue both on starboard tack are sailing towards a shoreline.The boats are approximately two boat lengths apart with yellow to windward and slightly astern of blue. Blue hails for room to tack and yellow responds "you tack". Blue tacks and finds herself heading straight for yellow. Blue continues to bear away onto abeam reach and manages to narrowly pass astern of yellow. Blue protests.
Question
In a valid protest would the decision be -
a) Disqualify blue
b) Disqualify yellow
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
d) Disqualify neither
Explanation
When a boat is sailing close hauled or above and approaching an obstruction rule 20 states that she may hail a boat on the same tack for room to tack. The provisions of rule 20 do not apply until the hail is made.
When a boat is hailed under this rule she must respond in one of two ways, either to tack off or respond "you tack" and give the other boat room to avoid her - rule 20.1(b). In this case yellow responded with the hail "you tack".
It is very important to understand that at no time do the rights conferred on the hailing boat by rule 20 in any way switch the basic right of way rule applying which after blue tacks is rule 10 port and starboard. Contrary to popular belief when yellow hails "you tack" she does not then have to keep clear of blue but only to give blue room to keep clear of her. In this context room is the time and space when a boat is handled in a seaman like manner.
As blue was able to keep clear in a seaman like manner ( albeit not with much to spare) then yellow met the requirements of rule 20. By keeping clear blue met her obligations under rule 10 - no rule broken.
Even if blue decided to tack onto port to avoid yellow the situation would be no different. Blue would have been given room to keep clear in a seaman like manner and would have done so - ISAF Case 101. If blue had been unable to avoid yellow having tacked then yellow would not have given blue room to keep clear and yellow would be disqualified under rule 20.1(b). Blue would have broken rule 10 but would be exonerated under rule 64.1(c) as she had been compelled to do so by yellow breaking a rule.
10d- At a finish line when one boat can fetch the Committee Boat
Situation
Yellow and blue are approaching a windward finish line both on close hauled port with blue overlapped to windward of yellow. Yellow hails for room to tack at the committee boat and blue refuses as she (blue) is able to fetch the committee boat. Yellow protests.
Question
In a valid protest would the decision be -
a) Disqualify blue
b) Disqualify yellow
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
c) Disqualify both
Explanation
When a boat is sailing close hauled or above and approaching an obstruction rule 20 states that she may hail a boat on the same tack for room to tack. The committee boat certainly ranks as an obstruction as the boats would have to make a substantial change of course if they were sailing towards it and only one of their hull lengths away - see definition of obstructionThe provisions of rule 20 do not apply until the hail is made.
When a boat is hailed under this rule she must respond in one of two ways, either to tack off or respond "you tack" and give the other boat room to avoid her - rule 20.1(b). If a boat responds in any other way she breaks this rule. Blue does not respond as required but declines on the grounds that she is fetching (able to pass to windward without tacking) the committee boat and under rule 20.3 blue is not allowed to hail. This is irrelevant - blue failed to respond as required and broke a rule.
Rule 20.3 states that a boat shall not hail for room if the obstruction is also a mark that the hailed boat is fetching. This was the case with blue and yellow should not have hailed. In doing so she broke rule 20.3
Both boats broke rules. Neither boat was compelled to break a rule (blue could have tacked off when hailed and yellow could have either born away and tacked behind blue or passed the wrong side of the committee boat) so neither boat is entitled to exoneration. Decision - disqualify both.
Case 11 - Fair sailing
Background
At the start of the last race of a series yellow and blue are tied on points for the lead well ahead of all other boats. Yellow has consistent top 3 positions and is discarding a 3rd. Blue also has consistent top 3 positions but had gear failure in one race and is discarding a DNF. It follows that if Yellow is able to cover blue and sail her down the fleet yellow will win the series.
Situation
At position 1 the starting signal is made. Blue makes a perfect start on close hauled starboard. Yellow is well over the line at the start. An individual recall is correctly signaled by the CB. The CB also hails yellow that she is over the line and receives an acknowledgement from her. Yellow makes no attempt to start correctly but uses her position to sail onto the wind of blue and cover her out to the left of the course, taking her way beyond the windward mark lay line before tacking off. The boats arrive at the windward mark last and second to last. Yellow retires and blue only gains a few places before the end of the race so yellow wins the series. Blue protests.
Question
In a valid protest should the decision be -
a) yellow has not broken any rule protest dismissed
b) yellow broke a rule but retired, no further penalty.
c) yellow broke a rule and is disqualified. Blue is not entitled to redress.
d) yellow broke a rule and is disqualified. Blue is entitled to redress.
Answer
d) yellow broke a rule and is disqualified. Blue is entitled to redress
Explanation
At the starting signal yellow is on the course side of the start line and knows it. She makes no attempt to start in accordance with rule 28.1 and is therefore attempting to win ( the series) by unfair means. This is a clear breach of rule 2 (Fair Sailing) which requires a boat to "compete in compliance with the recognized principles of sportsmanship and fair play." The penalty for breaking rule 2 is a disqualification that can not be excluded from the series - DNE. See ISAF Case 34
Yellow did retire which normally would mean that she could not be penalized further however rule 64.1(b) provides that if the appropriate penalty was DNE then this may be imposed even if the boat has retired.
Blue has suffered a worsening of her result (in the series) through no fault of her own as a direct result of yellow breaking rule 2. Under rule 62.1(d) she is entitled to redress.
The outcome would be that yellow would have to count her disqualification which would probably rule her out of any prizes. The PC may well want to consider calling a hearing under rule 69.1 ( gross misconduct) and could impose a further penalty such as disqualifying yellow from all races in the series - see rule 69.1(b)(2). The most equitable redress for blue would be to award average points of the races that blue actually completed being the best estimate if where blue might have finished had she not been infringed. This would be good enough for blue to win the series.
Had yellow started legitimately or returned from position 1 to correct her starting error things would have been very different. If yellow achieved the controlling position 4 without breaking a rule (28.1) then she is perfectly entitled to sail blue down the fleet. Although the actions would not benefit yellow in the race, they would benefit her in the series and are therefore in accordance with the principle of sportsman ship and fair play, although blue might not see it that way. The answer then would be a) no rules broken protest dismissed. See ISAF Case 78
Case 12 - Sailing the course - being forced the wrong side of a mark
Situation
Blue and yellow are approaching a leeward mark. When blue enters the zone yellow is overlapped inside and to windward. Blue does not think yellow has an overlap and refuses to give yellow mark room forcing her the wrong side of the mark. Yellow passes the mark the wrong side and races on protesting blue. The Protest Committee (PC) finds that yellow did have an overlap but disqualifies both boats, blue under rule 18.2(b) for not giving mark room and yellow under rule 28.1 for not sailing the course.
Question
Yellow seeks a reopening of the protest under rule 66 claiming that the PC made an error in disqualifying her as she was either entitled to redress under rule 62 or exoneration under rule 64.1(c) for blue's breach of the rule. Should the PC -
a) Reopen the hearing and give yellow redress under rule 62
b) Reopen the hearing and exonerate yellow under rule 64.1(c)
c) Refuse the request and let the original decision stand.
Answer
c) Refuse the request and let the original decision stand.
Explanation.
A PC may reopen a hearing if it decides that it has made a significant error but in this case there has been no such error.
Rule 62 states that a boat may be given redress if her result has been made significantly worse through no fault of her own as a direct result of one of four things. Those things are, an improper action by the race management, damage or injury caused by the action of a boat breaking a part 2 rule, giving help under rule 1.1 or by the action of a boat breaking rule 2. In this case none of those conditions have been met so there can be no redress. Furthermore in choosing to sailing the wrong side of the mark and not correcting this yellow fails the "through no fault of her own" test.
Turning to rule 64.1(c) yellow may only be exonerated if she was compelled to break a rule by blue breaking a rule. In sailing the wrong side of the mark yellow broke rule 28.1 - Sailing the Course. That rule states that a boat may correct an error under this rule, in this case by returning and passing the mark on the correct side. Whilst yellow was undoubtedly compelled to sail the wrong side of the mark nothing compelled her not to return and correct her error and thus she was not compelled to break rule 28.1.
The PC decision was correct, no error was made and the reopening of the hearing should be refused.
Case 13 - When a right of way boat is forced over the line on a Black Flag start.
Situation
At a windward start line which is subject to rule 30.3 (Black Flag) yellow is waiting to start with her sails eased. Blue accelerates from behind towards the start line intending to sail to windward of yellow but mis judges the situation and hits yellow from astern with no damage or injury. The force of the impact pushes yellow over the line a few seconds before the starting signal and yellow protests blue.
When the results are published yellow is disqualified and scored BFD for breaking rule 30.3. The Protest Committee (PC) disqualifies blue for breaking rules 12 and 14. Yellow requests the PC to either give her redress under rule 62 or exonerate her under rule 64.1(c).
Question
Should the PC -
a) Give yellow redress under rule 62
b) Exonerate yellow under rule 64.1(c)
c) Let yellow's disqualification under rule 30.3 stand.
Answer
c) Let yellow's disqualification under rule 30.3 stand.
Explanation
Rule 62 states that a boat may be given redress if her result has been made significantly worse through no fault of her own as a direct result of one of four things. Those things are, an improper action by the race management, damage or injury caused by the action of a boat breaking a part 2 rule, giving help under rule 1.1 or by the action of a boat breaking rule 2. In this case none of those conditions have been met, the RC acted properly in disqualifying yellow BFD ( it would have been improper not to have done so) as she did break rule 30.3; furthermore whilst the PC decided that blue broke rules 12 and 14, it did not find that she also broke rule 2 (Fair Sailing) so for that reason that aspect of rule 62 can not apply. There are no grounds for redress so none can be given.
Rule 64.1(c) initially looks a better bet but is not. That rule states that a boat may be exonerated if she is compelled to break a rule as a result of another boat breaking a rule - yellow is compelled to break rule 30.3 by blue breaking rules 12 and 14. The problem is that rule 64.1(c) only provided exoneration from a penalty imposed by a PC under rule 64.1(a) following a protest hearing. In this case the penalty was imposed by the Race Committee under rule 30.3 and not the Protest Committee under rule 64.1(a) so the exoneration under 64.1(c) is not applicable.
Had the start not been subject to rule 30.3 (Black Flag) the result would have been the same. In that case yellow would have broken rule 28.1 and been scored OCS and not BFD by the Race Committee. For the same reasons as described above yellow would not be able to get redress or exoneration. If yellow had returned to start correctly she would not be scored OCS but accorded a finishing position, however even if that position has been worsened she could not get redress as none of the four conditions for redress would have been met.
Harsh though it seems the correct decision is to let the BFD disqualification stand.
Case 14 - Leeward mark out of control
Situation
Yellow and blue are approaching a leeward port hand mark both flying their spinnakers on port tack. At the zone yellow is overlapped inside to windward and blue is overlapped outside to leeward. At the mark yellow is hit by a gust and has trouble dropping her spinnaker so she hails "out of control". Blue bears away and the boats sail some distance past the mark before yellow gets back under control, drops her spinnaker and immediately hardens up onto a close hauled course.
Question
In a valid protest should the Protest Committee -
a) Disqualify blue
b) Disqualify yellow
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
b) Disqualify yellow
Explanation
In all positions yellow as overlapped windward boat has to keep clear of blue under rule 11. In position 1 yellow is entitled to mark room (room to sail to the mark and her proper course while at the mark) and blue is obliged to give her that room. Between positions 1 and 2 both boats obey that rule.
In position 2 yellow is at the mark and entitled to room to sail her proper course (in this case to harden up onto a close hauled course) while at the mark and blue is giving her room to do so. Yellow's hail indicates that she is going to need more room.
In position 3 yellow is no longer at the mark nor is she sailing her proper course while at the mark so rule 18 no longer applies. The only rule that applies between the boats is rule 11 requiring yellow to keep clear of blue. Yellow is failing to keep clear of blue as blue is having to take avoiding action to allow yellow to regain control. Yellow is breaking rule 11. Rule 14 requires blue to avoid contact if possible and she is doing that.
In position 4 the boats are on the same tack close hauled and overlapped with yellow having to keep clear of blue which by that time she is doing.
Yellow's hail that she is out of control in no way affects her obligations under the rules - being out of control does not excuse a boat that as a result breaks a rule See ISAF Case 99. The hail does act as an early indication to blue that she is going to have to take some action to meet her obligation under rule 14 to avoid contact and blue responds by doing so. Disqualify yellow.
Case 15 - Sailing the Course
Situation
The Sailing Instructions (SIs) for a race describe the course as - Mark 1 S - Mark 2 P - Mark 3 P - Finish with no further reference to the course. Blue sails the course as shown in the diagram and is accorded a finishing place. The Race Committee protests blue for not having sailed the course as intended by the RC which was to loop mark 1 to starboard.
In a valid protest should the decision be -
a) Score blue DNF ( Did Not Finish)
b) Disqualify blue for sailing the wrong course.
c) Disqualify blue but give her redress because of the unclear SI
d) Allow blue's result to stand
Answer
d) Allow blue's result to stand
Explanation
Blue crossed the finish line from the direction of the last mark and therefore finished according to the definition of finishing. It follows that she may not be scored DNF.
For a boat to sail the course rule 28.1 requires a boat to start, leave each mark on the required side in the correct order and finish so that a string representing her track when drawn taught would pass each mark on the required side and touch each rounding mark. Blues course meets this requirement ( albeit passing mark 1 on the required side at some distance) and she has therefore sailed the course according to rule 28.1.
For a mark to be a rounding mark it must be designated as such or there should be a general designation that all marks are rounding marks in the SIs. The absence of such a designation a mark is a passing mark and there is no obligation for the string when drawn tight to touch it.
It does not matter what the intentions of the RC were, a competitor is entitled to look exclusively at the written sailing instructions and sail the course accordingly which blue does. If any boats sailed the course intended by the RC their results should also stand (presumably some distance behind blue) as their course would also comply with rule 28.1. Had the SIs designated mark 1 as a rounding mark then blue's course would not have complied with rule 28.1 and she could be disqualified after protest under that rule.
WARNING - It is tempting for a RC just to designate all marks as rounding marks to solve the problem. Whilst this usually works it does mean that if a mark is only intended as a passing mark it would have to be looped to comply with the SIs - see below.
Case 16 - Shortened Course
Situation
Blue and yellow are approaching a windward mark that is to be left to port. The Committee Boat takes up station to the port side of the mark and displays flag S with two sound signals (Shortened Course) as shown in the diagram. Blue sails through the finish line from the direction of the last mark. Yellow rounds the mark to port as stated in the SIs and crosses the line in the opposite direction to that of blue.
Question
Should the Race Committee (RC) -
a) Score yellow with her finishing position and score blue Did Not Finish (DNF)
b) Score blue with her finishing position and score yellow Did Not Finish (DNF)
c) Score both boats in their finishing positions as they cross the line from either direction
d) Do either a or b but give the other boat redress for the error by the RC.
Answer
b) Score blue with her finishing position and score yellow Did Not Finish (DNF)
Explanation
Rule 32 states that a RC may shorten a race by flying flag S with two sound signals at a rounding mark. If this is done the finish line is between the staff displaying flag S and the mark. If a course is shortened at a mark the mark ceases to become a mark of the course with a required side and becomes a finishing mark. It follows that it is quite in order for an RC to station the finishing boat on either side of the mark when shortening.
The definition of finishing states that a boat finishes when any part of her hull, or crew, or equipment in it's normal position crosses the line from the direction of the course from the last mark. As the race has been shortened the last mark becomes the mark previous to the one where the race has been shortened. Blue's finish meets this definition and she should be scored in position, yellows does not and she should be scored DNF.
Even if the RC admits that it made a mistake and intended to station the CB on the other side of the mark yellow cannot get redress. Rule 62 states that for a boat to get redress there must be an improper action by the RC. The positioning of the CB may well be an error but it was not improper as it provided a perfectly acceptable finish line in accordance with the rules. See ISAF Q&A 2009-016
If this were not a shortened course but a normal finish and the SIs provided for a hook round finish ( sailed by yellow) the situation would be different. Blue would still be correct in finishing according to the definition and yellow would be scored DNF. In that case as yellow's incorrect course would be as a result of the SI which because it specifies a finish that contravenes the rule would be an improper instruction by the RC. Yellow could seek redress under rule 62 and get it. Most likely redress would be to finish boats in the order in which they crossed the line from either direction. ISAF Case 45 refers
Case 17 - Individual Recall Error
Situation
Red is starting on a windward start line in a bunch of other boats. Red is slightly over the line at the starting signal. The Race Committee (RC) correctly fly the individual recall flag ( flag X ) but fails to make any sound signal. Red completes the race and is scored OCS and requests redress.
Question
Should the Protest Committee -
a) Refuse redress on the grounds that there was no need to make a sound signal so there was no improper action in not making it.
b) Refuse redress on the grounds that it was red's fault she was over the line and she therefore fails the "through no fault of her own test"
c) Give redress and let red's result stand
d) Give redress and adjust red's finishing position.
Answer
d) Give redress and adjust red's finishing position.
Explanation
It is a commonly held mis-belief that at a recall sound signals do not matter. Rule 26 which deals with starts states that sound signals shall be disregarded but rule 29.1 dealing with individual recalls makes it clear that the recall signal comprises both a visual signal (flag X) and one sound signal. Failure to make either is an improper action by the RC and therefore is grounds for redress.
Red's contention is that if the signal had been made correctly she would have been aware that a boat was OCS and had the possibility of deciding it was her and correcting it. Whilst it was certainly red's own fault that she was over the line it was not her fault that the recall was not signaled correctly when she could have corrected her starting error. It follows that her worsened result was caused by the improper action and was through no fault of her own.
Redress should be given but it is not appropriate to let red's result stand. The purpose of redress is to restore the situation as near as possible to what would have happened had the improper action not taken place. If the result stood red would actually gain an advantage from the improper action by being over the line at the start and not returning. The PC should take red's result and adjust it to reflect the number of places that they think red would have lost had she returned and started correctly i.e. if she had done what she would have done had the recall been signaled correctly. By definition this is a subjective judgement but none the less meets the requirement of rule 64.2 of "making as fair an arrangement as possible for all boats affected".
It should be noted that this decision depends on red's result being worsened by the lack of a sound signal. Red's claim would fail in this respect if any of the following applied -
1) Red was well over the line near a start mark and was aware that she was over with or without a sound signal.
2) Red was aware that a flag X had been flown from her own observation.
3) Conditions were such that had the sound signal been made red would not have heard it any way.
4) Red was aware by any other means that she was OCS but continued racing.
See ISAF Case 31 and RYA 1998/3
Case 18 - A boat not flying a spinnaker luffing one that is
Situation
Yellow flying a spinnaker approaches blue not flying a spinnaker from clear astern on the same tack and attempts to pass her to windward. Blue luffs quickly and continuously until she is head to wind to prevent yellow passing her. Yellow has to luff until she is nearly head to wind to keep clear of blue. Blue decides that she has slowed yellow enough and bears away onto her previous course. Yellow does likewise and protests.
Question
Should the protest committee's decision in a valid protest be -
a) Disqualify yellow
b) Disqualify blue
c) Disqualify both yellow and blue
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
b) Disqualify blue
Explanation
Yellow has to keep clear of blue throughout the incident, initially under rule 12 as same tack clear astern boat and after that under rule 11 same tack overlapped to windward. Yellow keeps clear according to the definition - blue is able to sail her course without taking avoiding action and when she changes course there is no immediate contact and the change of course was not caused by blue having to avoid yellow therefore yellow has broken no rule.
When blue changed course she was bound by rule 16.1 to give yellow room to keep clear. It is tempting to conclude that as yellow did keep clear she must have been given room and therefore blue did not break this rule but this fails to take account of the fact that "room" is a defined term with a specific meaning within the rules.
Room is defined as the space that a boat needs to promptly manoeuvre in a seamanlike manner. The only way that yellow was able to keep clear was by luffing head to wind and collapsing her spinnaker which could not be considered as seamanlike. It follows that she was not given room (as defined) to keep clear and blue therefore broke rule 16.1
Blue's correct action would have been to luff to the point where yellow could no longer hold her spinnaker then indicate by hail that she wanted luff higher. Yellow's seamanlike response to that would have been to drop her spinnaker and continue to respond to the luff. Under rule 16.1 blue would have had to have given yellow room to do this bearing away if necessary if that was what yellow needed to do to be able to drop the spinnaker.
This clearly indicate the error made by many competitors who think that a leeward boat may "luff as she pleases" and the problems all rest with the windward boat.
Case 19 - Dummy Tack
Situation
Blue and yellow are on the final beat of a race and blue is determined to cover yellow. Both boats are on port tack with yellow to leeward and clear astern of blue. Blue slows to tighten up the cover and yellow becomes overlapped from clear astern about 1 and a half boat lengths to leeward of blue. To break cover yellow puts in a dummy tack - luffing head to wind and then bearing back onto port. Blue falls for the dummy and tacks off onto starboard, at no time does either boat have to take avoiding action in respect of the other. Blue protests.
Question
In a valid protest would the decision be -
a) Disqualify blue
b) Disqualify yellow
c) Disqualify both blue and yellow
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
b) Disqualify yellow
Explanation.
When yellow becomes overlapped from clear astern on blue within two of her hull lengths she becomes subject to rule 17 which requires her not to sail above her proper course unless in doing so she promptly sails astern of blue. When yellow luffs head to wind she breaks this rule as she would not have done so to finish as quickly as possible in the absence of blue - see definition of Proper Course.
It does not matter that yellow became overlapped because of blue's action in slowing down. Whilst yellow does pass astern of blue this is because of blue's tack so the manoeuvre of luffing is not "in doing so promptly sailing astern" as required by the rules.
Nor does it matter that yellow at no time interferes with blue or causes her to take avoiding action. Rule 17 is quite clear in that yellow breaks the rule when she sails above her proper course and has nothing to do with the other boat.
Had yellow simply tacked there would have been no problem. In that case luffing as part of the tack is a perfectly normal manoeuvre and the tack itself would be a proper course for a boat on a beat.
Case 20 - Gybing at a leeward mark
Not a question but a case study of the different courses that an inside overlapped boat may be entitled to sail at a leeward mark where she has to gybe to round the mark.
Background
The two diagrams ( Fig 1 and Fig 2) show similar positions in that they involve boats that are inside, overlapped and have to gybe at a leeward mark coming into conflict with an outside boat on the opposite tack. Where they differ is that in Fig 1 green is keep clear boat whilst in Fig 2 yellow is right of way boat. This case study looks at the different courses that the boats are entitled to sail as a result.
Summary
Green has to sail a course that takes here close to the mark before rounding and gybing whilst yellow is able to sail the tactically desirable wide then close rounding - why is this ?
Explanation
Fig 1 - When green enters the zone she is inside overlapped boat and therefore entitled to mark room under rule 18.2.(b). Under the same rule grey has to give green mark room.
Mark room is defined as room to sail to the mark and the proper course while at the mark - see definition of mark room. It is clarified in ISAF Case 75 as being a direct corridor from the point that green enters the zone to a position close by and along side the mark on the required side. Significantly mark room does not allow green to sail her proper course on the way to the mark, her right to sail her proper course starts only when she is at the mark.
As long as the boats remain on opposite tacks green (on port) has to keep clear of grey ( on starboard) under rule 10.
The apparent conflict between rule 10 and rule 18.2(b) is resolved by rule 18.5 which states that as long as a boat is taking mark room to which she is entitled if she breaks a section A rule (rules 10,11,12 and 13) as a result of the other boat failing to give her mark room then she will be exonerated. The other boat would of course be disqualified for breaking rule 18.2(b).
It follows from this that if green is to be exonerated for breaking rule 10 ( which she does around position 3) she must be taking mark room to which she is entitled as is the case in the diagram. If green was attempting the wide and then close rounding at the time she encountered grey she would not be taking mark room to which she was entitled - she would be taking more. As a result green would not be entitled to exoneration under rule 18.5 but would be disqualified under rule 10.
For these reasons green must sail a straight course to the mark and then gybe.
Fig 2 - Here the difference is that yellow is not only entitled to mark room but is also right of way under rule 10 so in addition to giving yellow mark room, blue must also keep clear.
When yellow changes course in position 2 to make the wide and near rounding rule 16.1 required her to give blue room to keep clear which obviously she does. In position 3 yellow is taking much more than mark room and therefore is not entitled to exoneration under rule 18.5 however she does not need it as far from breaking a section A rule she is enforcing her rights as starboard boat under one ( rule 10).
The only rule that restricts yellow is rule 18.4 which states that if an inside overlapped right of way boat has to gybe to round a mark ( the exact condition of yellow) then she must sail no further from the mark than her proper course before gybing. Yellow complies with this rule, indeed in the absence of blue she may well have wanted to sail further before gybing.
In position 3 yellow is at the mark as her next action is a continuous change of course to round the mark - see Answer 2 (c) of Rapid Response Match Racing Call 2010/001. It follows that under the definition of mark room she is entitled to room to sail her proper course including room to gybe.
Conclusion
This case study shows the very different rights that an inside overlapped boat on an opposite tack might have depending on which way the leeward mark is to be passed.
Case 21 - Leeward gate Indecision
Situation
At a leeward gate the marks or off set so that the starboard hand (SH) mark is nearer to the windward mark than the port hand (PH) mark. Yellow and blue enter the PH mark zone on starboard tack with blue overlapped to windward and outside yellow. Yellow decides that because of the position of the marks she want to round the SH mark while blue wants to round the PH mark. Yellow forces blue away from the PH mark but when they enter the zone for the SH mark yellow realises that both green and grey have an inside overlap and she will have to give mark room to three boats. Yellow changes her mind and gybes back to the PH mark. Blue sails on a rounds outside on the SH mark and protests yellow for having forced her away from the PH mark that she (blue) wanted to round in the first place.
Question
Has yellow broken a rule -
a) yes
b) no
Answer
b) no
Explanation
When blue and yellow enter the PH zone blue must give mark room to yellow under rule 18.2(b) and to keep clear under rule 11. When yellow changes course towards the SH mark she has to give blue room to keep clear under rule 16.1 which she does. Whilst yellow at this stage is taking more than just mark room blue's obligation under rule 11 continues.
In position 3 whilst blue remains keep clear boat under rule 11 she gains rights as inside boat at the SH mark under rule 18.2(b) her obligations under that rule at the PH mark having lapsed when yellow left the PH zone - see rule 18.2(c). Yellow's obligation at this point is to give blue mark room ( to sail to the mark and her proper course while at the mark - see definition of mark room, including room that blue will have to give to green and grey) and by gybing away she does this.
If this were not a gate but just a leeward mark yellow would have broken rule 18.4 which would require her to sail no further from the PH mark than her proper course before gybing - between positions 3 and 4 yellow is certainly much further than her proper course from the mark. However the final sentence of 18.4 dis-applies that rule at gate marks. It follows that yellow can sail any course of her choosing before gybing as long as she complies with the Sect B General Limitation rules ( Rules 14-17) which she does.
Yellow breaks no rule, neither does blue so in a valid protest neither would be disqualified.
Case 22 - Keep clear of boats that are racing
Situation
At the start of a multi class regatta blue and yellow are approaching the start line on opposite tacks. Yellow is on starboard tack but her preparatory signal has not yet been made, she is just testing the start line, she hails starboard. Blue is on port, her preparatory signal has been made and she is approaching the line to make her start, she hails "keep clear of boats that are racing". Both boats have to luff head to wind to avoid each other and then head off on opposite tacks. Blue protests yellow.
Question
In a valid protest should the decision be -
a) Disqualify blue
b) Disqualify yellow
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
c) Disqualify both
Explanation
The preamble to Part 2 of the rules states that these rules apply to boats that are in or near the racing area and intend to race, are racing or have been racing. However a boat not racing shall not be penalized for breaking one of these rules except rule 23.1.
Rule 23.1 states that if reasonably possible a boat not racing shall not interfere with a boat that is racing.
Both boats were subject to the Part 2 rules. Blue broke rule 10 as a port tack boat failing to keep clear of a starboard tack boat. As blue's preparatory signal had been made she was racing (see definition of racing) and therefore according to the preamble should be penalized for breaking the rule.
Yellow was not racing but broke rule 23.1 by interfering with blue when it was quite possible for her to avoid doing so. The preamble states that even not racing she can be penalized for breaking that rule.
Nothing compelled either boat to break a rule as they both had ample opportunity to comply with their obligations. It follows that there are no grounds to exonerate either boat so both should be disqualified.
This is a clear illustration of the common misunderstanding that the rules require a boat not racing to "keep clear" of boats that are. Rule 23.1 is very clear in that it requires a boat not racing not to interfere with one that is which may involve much more than just keeping clear. However the rule never switches the keep clear obligations under the right of way rules or relieves the racing boat of it's obligation to keep clear.
Case 23 - Damage after a general recall
Situation
At the windward start of the race blue is attempting a port tack start at port end. Yellow is starting on starboard in a bunch of starboard tack boats in the middle of the line. Many boats are over the line at the start signal and the Race Committee signals a general recall. Because of the number of boats most of the competitors are unaware of the recall and race on. Shortly after the start the boat to leeward of yellow bears away sharply to reveal blue on port about to make contact with yellow who is unable to do anything. Blue hits yellow damaging her so badly that yellow returns to shore to repair the damage and is unable to start the recalled race. Yellow protests and seeks redress.
Question 1
In a valid protest would the decision be -
a) Disqualify blue
b) Disqualify yellow
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
d) Disqualify neither
Question 2 in the light of the answer to question 1 should the PC grant redress to yellow -
a) yes
b) no - as no boat has been disqualified there can be no redress
Answer
a) yes
Explanation
The preamble to Part 2 of the rules state that these rules apply to boats that are racing, intend to race or have been racing and are in the race area however a boat cannot be penalized under these rules ( except 23.1) unless she is racing.
A boat is racing from her preparatory signal until she finishes and clears the finish line or until the RC signals a general recall, postponement or abandonment - see definition of Racing.
It follows that even though blue clearly broke part 2 rules ( rule 10 port and starboard and rule 14 avoiding contact) she may not be penalized as neither boat was racing at the time. Even if the recall signal had been delayed until after the incident it would make no difference as rule 36 states that if a race is restarted then a boat will not be penalized for breaking a rule in the original race except rules 30.2, 30.3 and 69, none of which apply here.
Rule 62 states ( among other things) that a boat may be granted redress if her position has been significantly worsened through no fault of her own as a result of physical damage caused by the action of a boat breaking a part 2 rule. Yellows score of (DNS) is a worsened result, blue was breaking rules 10 and 14 and there was nothing yellow could have done. The conditions for redress are met and it should be granted even though blue could not be penalized for her breach of the rules.
It is vital that yellow goes through with the protest of blue even though blue cannot be penalized. It is only in a protest that the PC can find as facts that blue did break a part 2 rule and that yellow did not. Without these facts having been found by the PC it would be difficult for it to grant redress - RYA 1996/8. Furthermore in finding that yellow did not break a rule the PC in effect satisfies the "through no fault of her own" requirement of rule 62. If for example the PC found that yellow could have avoided blue but didn't then yellow broke rule 14 and the damage was not through no fault of her own.
It may seem odd that blue having damaged yellow to the point where yellow is unable to race escapes any punishment but those are the rules. The only exception would be if the PC found that blue had deliberately damaged yellow to gain an advantage in the series in which case the PC would find that blue had broken rule 2 (Fair Sailing) and could impose a non excludable disqualification (DNE) under that rule - Rule 2 is a Part 1 rule so not subject to the Part 2 preamble and so boats may be penalized under it whether they are racing or not. In such a circumstance the PC would almost certainly also call a rule 69 hearing (Gross Misconduct) and the very least penalty that blue could expect would be exclusion from the series and a report to the National Authority for consideration of further action.
Case 24 - An IDM at the start
A Sailing Instruction (SI) for a race states -
Start - If an inner distance mark is laid then it shall rank as a starting mark and boats must not sail between that mark and the committee boat (CB) at any time.
Situation
At the start blue is approaching the line on starboard close haul to make a start close to the IDM leaving it on the required side. Yellow is reaching towards the IDM from just behind the CB. Yellow is hailing for room and blue is hailing no room. Yellow hardens up round the IDM, blue mindful of the requirements of rule 14 (avoiding contact) bears away to let yellow in and hails "protest".
Question
In a valid protest should the decision be -
a) Disqualify yellow
b) Disqualify blue
c) Disqualify both
d) Disqualify neither
Answer
d) Disqualify neither
Explanation
The preamble to Sect C Part 2 (Marks and Obstructions) states that Sect C rules do not apply at a starting mark surrounded by navigable water when boats are approaching it to start. These rules include rule 18 (Mark Room) and rule 19 (Room to Pass and Obstruction). It follows that yellow may not hail for room on the IDM or the CB either as a mark or an obstruction.
A mark has to be an object ( see definition of mark) whilst an obstruction can, among other things, be either an object or an area so designated by the SIs ( see definition of obstruction). In this case because the SIs prohibit sailing between the CB and the IDM they set up an area which is an obstruction - roughly the area between the two red lines in the diagram.
Because the area that is an obstruction cannot be a mark ( it is not an object) it cannot be a starting mark. It follows that the disapplication of Sect C contained in the preamble cannot apply to the area of obstruction and therefore yellow is entitled to room at the obstruction under 19.2(b) and blue is required to give it under the same rule. Blue bears away and meets her obligations albeit under the incorrect impression that she is in the right and just avoiding contact. Both boats meet their obligations and no rule is broken.
WARNING
This SI is often included under the wrong belief that it helps to protect the CB, this is not the case. In the case in question if blue had not born away but pressed what she believed to be her rights the most likely outcome would have been contact with at least one, and possibly both boats falling off onto port tack and making contact with the CB - the very thing which is trying to be avoided.
Organisers should use the SI that reads -
If an inner distance mark is laid it shall rank as a starting mark and must be passed on the same side as the committee boat.
With no exclusion zone there is no obstruction and yellow cannot "barge" at the IDM. Blue may close the gap and force yellow the wrong side of the IDM. Yellow is quite entitled to pass between the IDM and the CB it's just that she hasn't started when she does and will have to restart according to the definition.
Case 25 - Propulsion Rules
Situation
Yellow is approaching a windward finish line in very light winds and an adverse tide. Her bow crosses the line and she receives a finishing gun as the wind dies. For the next 10 minutes she sits on the finish line, never quite clearing it. Finally deciding that she has finished the crew get out the paddles and head for the shore. The Race Committee protests yellow.
Question
In a valid protest should the decision be -
a) Disqualify yellow for illegal propulsion
b) Do not disqualify yellow as she had finished when she used the paddles
Answer
a) Disqualify yellow for illegal propulsion
Explanation
Yellow finished when the first part of her equipment in it's normal position crossed the finish line - see definition of Finish. However she is still racing until she finishes and clears the finish line and marks - see definition of Racing.
Rule 42 (Propulsions) forbids a number of actions, certainly among them is the use of paddles. Rule 42 is a Part 4 rule and the preamble to Part 4 states that those rules apply to boats that are racing. As yellow was still racing according to the definition when she used the paddles she broke rule 42 and should be disqualified.
It is ironic that yellow should be disqualified in this way as she could have easily avoided it. Rule 28.1 states that after finishing a boat need not cross the finish line completely. All yellow had to do was after finishing bear away and reach beyond the finish mark not having fully crossed the finish line. At that point she would have "cleared the finish line and marks" and would therefore no longer be racing according to the definition and could then use any means of propulsion she chose to get to the shore.
Case 26 - An IDM at the finish
The sailing instructions (SIs) for a race stated -
Finish - The finish line will be between a mast on the committee boat flying a blue flag and an outer distance mark also flying a blue flag. There will be an inner distance mark which may or may not be on the finish line and must be left to port when finishing.
Situation
On the down wind finish blue and yellow are on port tack overlapped with yellow to windward and ahead. As they approach the finish yellow hails for room to pass the IDM ( which is on the non course side of the line) on the required side. Blue responds by saying that you can't hail for room on a finish mark. Yellow crosses the finish line ahead of blue but is forced to sail the "wrong" side of the IDM by blue. Yellow rounds the committee boat and re-crosses the finish line passing between the IDM and the ODM shortly after position 5.
The Race Committee (RC) finishes blue in her position when she crosses the finish line for the first time and yellow in her position when she crosses it just after position 5. Yellow protests blue and seeks redress.
Question
Should the protest committee
a) Disqualify blue for failing to give mark room and give yellow redress
b) Disqualify blue for failing to give mark room and refuse redress to yellow as she was neither damaged nor injured.
c) Not disqualify blue but give yellow redress
d) Not disqualify blue and refuse redress to yellow
Answer
c) Not disqualify blue but give yellow redress
Explanation
This case illustrates a number of common misunderstandings regarding finishing marks.
Rule 18 applies equally to finishing marks as it does to any mark. If the IDM had been a finishing mark then yellow would have been entitled to mark room and blue would have broken rule 18.2(b) by not giving it however the IDM was not a finishing mark - see below.
Rule 28.1 requires a boat to start, leave each mark on the required side in the correct order and finish in order to have sailed the course. When yellow crossed the finish line for the first time she had met these requirements and should have been accorded a finishing position at that time. Rule 28.2 states that a boat may leave on either side a mark that does not begin, bound or end the leg she is on. The IDM did none of these things as the final leg of the course ended when yellow finished and after she finished she was not on a leg of the course. Notwithstanding the SIs the IDM would only have a required side if it was on the finish line or the course side of the line, as it was on the non course side it could be passed on either side. ISAF Case 58.
Blue did not have to give mark room to yellow at the IDM because the IDM was not a mark of the course - see above. The only relevant mark was the CB on which yellow was entitled to mark room. Although blue thought she was denying mark room to yellow on the IDM she did in fact give mark room on the CB albeit unwittingly and therefore broke no rule and should be finished in her recorded position.
Yellow is entitled to redress not because of anything that blue did but because of the improper action of the RC in failing to give her a finishing position when she crossed the line and finished according to the definition. The fact that she failed to pass the IDM on what the RC thought to be the required side is irrelevant as the events proved she could pass it on the side of her choosing having already finished. Redress would be to give yellow her position the first time she crossed the line.
Case 27 - Missing out the last mark
Situation
The sailing instructions require the last mark of the course to be left to port. Yellow leaves it to starboard in error and then crosses the finish line. Yellow is observed sailing the wrong course by the Race Committee on the Committee Boat.
Question
At the finish should the Race Committee -
a) Score yellow Did Not Finish as she had not completed the course
b) Disqualify yellow for sailing the wrong course
c) Score yellow in her finishing position and protest her.
Answer
c) Score yellow in her finishing position and protest her.
Explanation
Yellow has crossed the finish line from the direction of the course from the last mark ( even though she didn't round the last mark) and has therefore finished according to the definition. She therefore may not be scored DNF.
Rule 63.1 states that a boat may not be penalized without a protest hearing. It follows that yellow may only be scored DSQ as a result of a protest hearing.
The proper action for the RC is to score yellow in her finishing position as she did finish according to the definition and then protest her under rule 28.1 for failing to sail the course.
Whilst the other actions may in the short term seem attractive because of their simplicity they are fraught with dangers. Either action break the rules and therefore would be an improper action by the RC and yellow could claim redress under rule 62. A PC considering the redress would not consider whether or not yellow had sailed the course but only whether or not the RC had acted improperly. By failing to give a finish to a boat that had finished or by disqualifying a boat without a hearing the RC would have acted improperly and redress in the form of reinstatement would be given.
Yellow would satisfy the "through no fault of her own" test even though she had sailed the wrong course as it is not her fault that the RC acted improperly. Furthermore if the RC sought to correct it's error after yellow had been reinstated after redress by protesting her the protest would be invalid because it was out of time and would be rejected. Yellow would get a result even though she sailed the wrong course but see ISAF Q&A 2009-23 for possible action under rule 69 if the boat deliberately broke the rule.
Case 28 - Mark room at the finish, a change from the old rules
Background
Three boats are approaching the finish of the final race of a series. Yellow is covering blue and green is some way behind both of them. The probable finishing order is yellow, blue, green. Yellow has worked out that if the finishing order stands blue wins the series however if she (yellow) wins and blue finishes third or worse then yellow wins the series.
Situation
Blue and yellow are both able to fetch the port finish mark, blue only just and yellow by a couple of boat lengths. Green can lay the finish line near the starboard end. In position 1 yellow enters the zone for the port hand finish mark clear ahead of blue. Yellow then bears away creating a leeward overlap with blue and sails to a position close to the finish mark preventing blue from passing the mark on the correct side. Blue bears away and hails "protest" before gybing round and finishing behind green giving yellow first place in the series.
Question
In a valid protes by blue should the decision be -
a) Disqualify no boat and let the results stand
b) Disqualfy yellow and let the remaining results
c) Disqualify yellow and award redress to blue
Answer
a) Disqualify no boat and let the results stand
Explanation
No boat has broken a rule so no boat should be disqualified. Green has simply sailed her race and been the beneficiary of tactical manoeuvring by yellow.
When yellow entered the zone she was clear ahead of blue and was therefore entitled to Mark Room - room to sail to the mark and her proper course while at the mark (see definition). This is clarified in ISAF Case 75 as a direct corridor from the point she entres the zone to a position close to and along side the mark on the required side. Even though blue later established an inside overlap this did not change yellow's right to mark room or blue's obligation to give it ( see rules 18.2(b) & (c) ). Yellow did what she was allowed to under the rules and blue met her obligations so no rules were broken.
At first glance it may appear that yellow broke rule 11 as being windward boat and failing to keep clear but that isn't the case. Yellow would only be breaking rule 11 if blue had to take avoiding action. Blue did bear away but that was to meet her obligations under rule 18 to give yellow mark room. In doing so she did avoid yellow but that was not the reason she bore away so yellow did not break rule 11. If blue had refused to give yellow mark room and there had been contact then yellow would have broken rule 11 but been exonerated under rule 18.5(a).
ISAF Cases 34 & 78 set out the conditions that a boat seeking to slow another boat must satisfy in order not the break rule 2 (Fair Sailing) In summary these require the boat doing the slowing to be able to demonstrate that the manoeuvre will benefit her result either in a race or series and in manoeuvring she must not break a rule. Yellow met both these requirements.
This is an interesting game change in the 2009-12 rules from previous versions. Under previous rules blue's obligation to yellow was only to give her room to pass the mark on the required side. From position 2 onwards blue could sail up to a close hauled course in order to finish ( rule 17 would prevent her sailing higher unless she was shooting the mark) and she would meet her (old) obligation as yellow would pass the finish mark on the required side albeit at some distance. Whether or not this game change was intended doesn't matter, for the time being those are the rules.
