• Definition "Party" + RRS 76.3
  7 Comments
  Joan Noguera Yesterday 17:18
• Rule 17 upwind before and after the start.
  10 Comments
  Nick Taylor Yesterday 17:11
• Virtual Mark rounding
  32 Comments
  David Dalli Fri 15:29
• RYA Appeals
  3 Comments
  Jim Champ Fri 12:17
• Rules Situation Diagram Software
  8 Comments
  John Beavis Wed 21:17

• Definition "Party" + RRS 76.3
  At first: Congrats to Joan, who has detected a gap in the rule!
  
  Why do I think he's got a point?
  
  RRS 76 rules on the exclusion of either a boat (i.e. the sailboat and the crew on board, see introduction) or a competitor (be it the helm or any crew member of a boat entering the event).
  
  Now it becomes interesting:
   
  RRS 76.3 states that both may request redress "a" boat or competitor that considers that the rejection or exclusion is improper or that it broke rule 76.2.
  
  Nota bene: Literally, this would mean not only the excluded person or boat, but any boat or competitor of the entire event could request redress for the excluded boat or competitor.
  
  And here we find the first inconsistancy of RRS 76.3 with RRS 61.1, because "a competitor who considers that a rejection or exclusion might be improper" is missing in the list in RRS 61.1.
  
  Now, who's the party in the hearing? (Besides the body who made the exclusion decision, here we all agreed already.)
  
  The definition "party" is clear: It's only the boat, not a single competitor.
  
  My personal interpretation would be: Since any competitor is part of a boat, the request for redress by or for this competitor is affecting the boat, which I would interprete as "(a boat) for which redress is requested" according to the definition.
  
  Thus, the boat which either is excluded, or one of her crew is excluded, would be party to the hearing (besides certainly the body who excluded her or him).
  Additionally: If another boat or competitor than the excluded one makes the request for redress, this boat would also become a party to the hearing, see definition party. 
  
  Does that sound reasonable?
  Frank Brinkers Today 20:41
• Rule 17 upwind before and after the start.
  Thanks Guys
  Nick Taylor Today 19:38
• Virtual Mark rounding
   Hi Jim,

  No, I did not change the size of the zone or contemplate doing so. When using a waypoint it is very hard/impossible to judge how far one is from a waypoint using a chart plotter or handheld GPS. My view is that for practical purposes the size of the zone is really irrelevant. 

  
  

  In the end I decided to use the WS Appendix WP as is, rather than do something unusual. The thinking is that maybe the drafters thought through the issues better than I did.
  
  The NoR and SI can be found here: https://www.sssa.africa/racing/.

  
  Lance
  Lance Burger Today 04:51
• RYA Appeals
  RYA's Casebook is at https://www.rya.org.uk/racing/rules/rya-case-book/
  Peter Glick Fri 20:08
• Portsmouth Yardstick
  Thanks everyone for your contributions. There is a clarity in my mind now with all the inputs given here. Now I will close this thread here.
  Satish Kumar Kanwar Fri 19:17

Forums Leader Board

This Month