At a recent team race event, after racing had finished for the day, a competitor submitted a written protest ashore against another boat alleging a violation of RRS 13 during a race. My immediate reaction was that of course the protest committee must open a hearing to consider the protest, assuming it would be found to be invalid. However, an umpire much smarter than I pointed out that RRS D2.2 states that "[w]hen a boat protests under a rule of Part 2 or under rule 31 or 42 for an incident in the racing area, she is not entitled to a hearing...".

So my question is, should the protest be summarily rejected or should a hearing be opened?

I ask because in subsequently thinking about the issue, summarily dismissing a protest precludes the protest committee from hearing the facts in the matter and considering whether it may involve a rule not in Part 2. For example, if the competitor is protesting under a sportsmanship issue but only indicating that the boat broke RRS 13, wouldn't summarily dismissing the protest result in denying the protesting boat her opportunity to be heard concerning the RRS 2 claim?