Forum: The Racing Rules of Sailing
At a regatta with multiple course areas boats having finished racing on one course cross another course.
Steve Pocock
Nationality: United Kingdom
Certifications:
- Regional Race Officer
0
Hi
The Regatta has several course areas in a bay, one of which (inner course) is close to the harbour mouth and likely to be crossed by competitors, having finished racing returning from the outer course.
One of the returning yachts from the other course area crosses the inner course finish line from the "finished side" to wards the leeward mark whilst boats on the inner course are still finishing.
Have they broken any rules?
The Regatta has several course areas in a bay, one of which (inner course) is close to the harbour mouth and likely to be crossed by competitors, having finished racing returning from the outer course.
One of the returning yachts from the other course area crosses the inner course finish line from the "finished side" to wards the leeward mark whilst boats on the inner course are still finishing.
Have they broken any rules?
Comments
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
As John said, if she did interfere, she broke that rule.
NB that boat keeps her ROW as per the rules. If she crosses the course on starboard, she has ROW, and crossing a racing boat on port tack, she's interfering.
Racing boat on port tack shall change course to respect the ROW, and the starboard boat can be penalized for 23.1
If the port tack boat did not respect the ROW, she also broke a rule = Both DSQ. Port for 10 and starboard for 23.1
Also good to remind competitors of the preface to Part 2 when in a hearing. The rules of Part 2 also apply to boats that “..have been racing”. This is news to some sailors!
Below is a typical Saturday in the height of the Annapolis sailing season (actually .. there are often even more racing circles than shown):
For a boat going home from Circle B or Circle A, are they "in or near the racing area", as they get to the smaller circles? (they could be 2 miles from their racing circle by the time they encounter the smaller fleets).
Do we interpret "in or near the racing area" as being satisfied as long as at least one of the boats "meeting" on the water are in or near their racing area?
Two boats, both not racing, and having a ROW conflict: no penalty, unless for 14, if there is a contact with injurie and/or SERIOUS damages (note the "serious")
The RRS operate perfectly well in this situation.
Unless there are some special risks you have identified in your risk assessment,
Emmet Dalton
Said Created: Yesterday 14:32
Again, why?
Apoendix LG, Preamble
4. SIs should not repeat or restate any racing rules
If you start reminding competitors about some rules of Part 2, where do you stop?
I'd have no difficulty saying that all the area between the margins of Course Area A and Course Area B and the Harbour Docks is "in or near the racing area".
If the Race Committee had any doubt, they could say in the SI
Boats travelling between the Harbour Docks and their Course Area shall be taken to be in or near the racing area.
Most of the incidents between boats not racing, anyway, happen very near, or inside the race course. Any incident before the - 4 minutes, or right after a AP, General recall, Abandon, or after clearing the finishing line, will be between boats not racing.
An incident between boats that have been racing but it happen reasonabily far from the race course, well, my opinion is that there would be needing a hearing to understand wether "Rules" or IRPCAS apply, wether it exist conflict between those rules, wether those boats were rasonablily understandable each other having been in the race... well, that's what Jury are for.
(conjugate al those verbs has been a big effort for my poor english grammar, that fried my brain. Hope i wrote them correctly, or, at least, understandable)
If the harbour is not nearby the racing course, and, in additon, it has lot of traffic, better if the NoR (and not just the SI) specify if and when IRPCAS or other rules will apply (preamble part 2).
I get your point.
Appropriate facts about where the racing area was and where and when the incident occurred and a conclusion that 'The incident occurred in or near the racing area and the RRS applied in accordance with the Preamble to Part 2' should do the trick.
I think a workable approach could be to consider the bounds of the racing area of the boats involved in the incident.
I do like your idea of spelling it out as you suggested to ‘put the bug in their ear’ and make it clear.
Whose racing area?
What if only one of the boats is near its racing area?
Is Racing area D near the racing area for a boat racing in Area C? I don't think so. They seem to be about 3 miles apart.
Is Racing area D near racing area for a boat racing in Area B? I don't think so. They seem to be about 2 miles apart.
Or is the whole bay the racing area of every boat racing in any of the areas? I don't think so, but as others have said the SI's for each racing area could make it so to take out differences in judgement and impose uniformity.
Does it make any difference if a boat has taken down its indicia of racing?
What about if they have been cruising around for half an hour after they finished their race? Or half an hour after all boats had finished or withdrawn? Or after their time for racing had expired?
The preamble of Part 2 examines 2 characteristics of a boat:
These 2 items are connected with an "and", therefore both of the above have to be satisfied for the rules of Part 2 to apply.
Para 1, Part 2 preamble: "The rules of Part 2 apply between boats that are sailing 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 14 when the incident resulted in injury or serious damage, or rule 23.1."
A boat that went back to the dock and came out the next morning for a picnic cruise, does not satisfy "intend to race, are racing, or have been racing.",
I don't think so but please make it plain for me if I'm being obtuse ..
Richard described she raced Saturday and then goes out on Sunday for a picnic cruise through the same area. I'm saying she does not qualify for "has been racing" on Sunday.
The Annapolis situation.
The rule does not apply to 'her racing area' it refers to 'the racing area'.
As far as I'm concerned the area from the southern and eastern sides of Area A, and the Northern and Eastern sides of Area B to the Harbour Docks are 'the racing area' or, at worst, 'in or near the racing area'.
We don't want to be creating a licence for keel boats to go barging through dinghy races willy-nilly.
I also note Aldo's comments. Likely boats from Area A will be under motor when returning to harbour docks, but some might choose to sail home, and boats from Area B, presumably Etchells, Dragons etc, will likely be sailing in.
Richard's post.
The boat raced yesterday, today she 'has been racing'.
OK, canon of construction: where there are two possible interpretations, prefer the interpretation that does not lead to an absurdity.
No, she is not subject to the Part 2 rules, so cannot break rule 23.2.
But she sure as shooting better not break any of the COLREGS, otherwise it's 'chat with the flag officers time'.
I can see both approaches as reasonable interpretations. I don’t think your average Circle A racer would consider the inner circle as “near” the race area, especially if those other areas are not part of the same event.
As you suggested, a rule in the SI refining the meaning of “race area” would make it clear.
PS: sort of reminds me of your “absurdity” analysis for “has been racing” when you examined the Saturday/Sunday question. If the inner harbor is generally used for racing on a consistent basis, is it part of “the race area” generally and always or only when other events are actually using that space?
Having read all your comments I think I am coming to the view that the answer is to define the "Racing area" in the SI's. This removes the need to restate 23.1 or the preamble to Section , although that could be mentioned in the briefing.
The reason for the original question is that this happened at an event where I was a CRO. The boat in question was under power at the time so no question of it being the stand on vessel under RRS or Collision Regs. Had I not "hailed it" it would have interfered with finishing boats.
Next question. Assuming the boat had broken 23.1 and we have a clear video of the event for the PC to see, what penalty should be applied? Also have they broken 69.1(b)?
The boat that raced yesterday, today she's not "have been racing". Not even same day, i would say, after the race is finished, RC boat gone, marks brought ashore, after a reasonable time.
The meaning of "near" (the racing area) should be intended in space and/or time. Well, that's my logic saying that, first because it makes sense, second because i checked the American Heriage dictionary :-)
https://www.ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=near
Are racing areas allocated by a maritime authority? If the areas circled are each allocated to different clubs it is harder to consider them as a single racing area. If the whole of the bay is licenced by the local maritime authority to a single or as a whole to multiple clubs then it is easier to consider all the circles as being in a single racing area.
The rules by themselves lack clarity in showing where rules are intended to apply between boats competing from different clubs across overlapping courses and moreso where the rules might be intended by the authors to apply across non-overlapping courses or areas covered by different licences from a maritime authority. This is where the SI's can be helpful.
Rules which restrict rights would normally only be applied where they are clearly intended to apply on their face as opposed to according to commentary and where there is a suitable nexus of the person being regulated to the rules. IE RRS cant regulate a sailor/boat which is both not a member of an affiliated club and not competing in a race under RRS.
If there is serious damage or injury the local maritime authority is likely to be involved and may well seek to impose Colregs irrespective of RRS. A person who would be responsible under the Colregs would then have to try to get a court to rule that the aggrieved party ought not be able to reply on the Colregs because of the application of the RRS.
Overtaking is a good example of a substantial difference between the RRS and Colregs.
No-one has mentioned this yet.
Rule J2.2(15) requires that the SI state the racing area.
Appendix KG 12.2 shows an example NOR where the racing area is described.
If there was any doubt about what the racing area was, a protest committee should make the SI and NOR the first port of call.
Around here, our NOR are quite broad typically saying the racing area is 'the waters of Port Jackson', or 'the waters of Sydney Harbour'.
So, Ang, what do your NOR/SI say?
Yup, see the previous post, Appendix J requires you to do this.
We seem to be moving towards agreement that adjacent course areas, should be considered to be 'the racing area' for boats on either course area, but the NOR/SI should tell you.
Don't start repeating rules to competitors. You'll never know when to stop, and by stating some rules but not others you may give the impression that some rules are more important than others.
Secondly, it's not a problem until it's a problem.
One boat behaving discourteously does not constitute a problem.
OK, that was probably a sensible thing to do as RO.
Had she actually interfered with a boat racing, leave the racing to the racers: if the boat racing doesn't like it, she can protest.
It is not the responsibility of the race committee to enforce the rules.
Why should the penalty be anything other than DSQ?
Yes, she probably has broken rule 69.1(b).
We haven't mentioned the word 'etiquette', but it is clearly a breach of etiquette to interfere with a boat that is racing, hence a breach of good manners.
Having once disqualified the boat, I would be very reluctant to proceed to a rule 69 hearing: you can't be killed twice, and unless there were aggravating circumstances, why would a protest committee impose a penalty greater than DSQ?
Nice shot John! I have (quickly) reviewed a smattering of SI's that I could still find. For the really large events that include both inner and outer circles (only a couple of those), the racing area is defined as the river and the Bay off its mouth.
Regattas that include only the outer circles in their regatta, describe the outer circles as the Bay outside the mouth of the Severn River or relative to Tolly Pt (1nm SE of Dingy E), Thomas Point (shown), and the Bridge (shown).
In the outer-only regattas, there are typically other separate regattas run by dingy classes or clubs in the harbor.
I would like to hear directly from the rules writers that they intended J2.2(10)'s
"the racing area" (such as a chart telling you where to go when you leave the harbor)
to be exactly the same as Part 2 preamble's "sailing in or near the racing area."
J2-2(11) offers a restriction on entering the starting area, which suggests that,
without it, no general restriction exists in the rules.
Nothing in the rules suggests that the sailing area for fleet A applies to a boat from fleet B.
But the SI could, and should, if the situation warrants it.