My take would be that the boat is only required to retire from the race in which the breach occurred, but the damaged boat may request redress for other races in the series or regatta which the damage caused her to miss.

Tim is correct, that's what the rules say.  The only exception is contained in E7 where a penalty can also be applied in the next race.

Thanks for your input  Tim  and John.   The reason this was raised is because the rules do not say that, it says only to retire.  The question remains, for how long.  Whilst most of our club members agree with yourself and Tim there is nothing in the rules to confirm that.   We shall adopt the one race only retirement.   Best wishes to all.

My interpretation is that at the time of the incident and that the damage occurs there is only one race you can retire from going forward.  You can't retire from a race that has not yet occurred and you have not started in.  If you don't race in the next race then you are DNS or maybe DNC, but not RET.

This is not the same as retiring from work which hopefully lasts longer than the day you retire! :-)

love your thinking !

If I recall correctly at various times the RRS has included a Retired After Finishing scoring designation but I don’t theink there’s ever been a Retired Before Starting - I agree with John that would be DNS or DNC (depending on whether the boat came to the starting area or not).

Also agree the boat could penalize herself by sitting out additional races but the rules don’t require any further penalty beyond retiring from the race where the damage was caused.

Didn’t we recently have a discussion very close to this? … where we examined whether or not a boat could “retire forward” when they caused serious damage between races?

The preamble to Part 2:

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.

I believe if, before the preparatory signal for race 1, a boat in the racing area and intending to race t-boned another boat resulting in injury or serious damage, her penalty is to retire from 
race 1.  RET because DNS is not a penalty.

Dick Rose has a saying that helps me to remember, "Rule 14 never sleeps".

I'll tackle this backwards.

A boat cannot retire from a race unless she 'came to the starting area', otherwise the DNC score would have no work to do, and a boat could avoid a DNC by retiring.

So she cannot retire in advance.  She can, if she wishes 'sit out' later races, but she is under no obligation to do so. 

A boat that breaks  a rule and causes serious damage is required by rule 44.1(b) to retire.  If she does not do so, on valid protest she may be disqualified from the race.  The only ways a protest committee can penalise a boat in more than one race are:

So why should a boat voluntarily take a penalty that is greater than can be given to her by a protest committee? 

And Jerry,  rule 63.1 refers to scores by the race committee under rule A5.1 for DNS, NSC, DNF, as 'penalties'

I agree with John Allan.

If a boat is responsible for damage that causes a competitor to have to miss more than one race, I can see where that boat might feel like the Corinthian thing to do would be to voluntarily penalize herself by sitting out those races also. But given that the damaged boat may request and get redress (such as average points) for the missed races I'm not sure there's a good reason to.

John, thanks for pointing out 63.1  How about RET because the competitor took the penalty as opposed to the penalty being given by the race committee?

Applied to a different scenario, when a competitor retires from a race (tired, broken equipment, out of sandwiches, etc.) they are also scored RET as the competitor took a penalty for not finishing.

Is it safe to say that RET and SCP are competitor initiated penalties with the others listed in A5.1 race committee initiated penalties?

John A has it wrong when he says that as a result of 63.1 that the scores of DNS, NSC, & DNF are penalties.  You can only be penalized for breaking a rule.  What rule is broken by not starting, not sailing the course, not finishing, or not coming to the racing area, or retiring?  Not meeting the criteria of starting, sailing the course, or finishing is not breaking a rule but are criteria for being scored in a specific way.  It is the RC that breaks rule 90.3 by not scoring them appropriately.

Appendix A is instructions to the RC on how to score boats and that they can take specific actions that worsen a boat's score without a hearing.

Also, a boat can be penalized in more than one race under E7.

I have been thinking about 63.1.  Consider the following:

DNS (Did Not Start after coming to the starting area) competitor breaks rule 28.1.
OCS (DNS) competitor breaks rule 28.1.
NSC (Not Sailed Course) competitor breaks rule 28.1.
DNF (Did Not Finish) competitor breaks rule 28.1.
RET (Retire) A competitor shall if she breaks a rule of part 2 or rule 31 if in breaking the rule she causes injury or serious damage.
RET (Retire)  A competitor shall if she breaks a rule of part 2 or rule 31 if in breaking the rule she gains a significant advantage.
RET (Retire) A competitor for their own reasons (tired, too breezy, not enough breeze, gin gave out, etc.) leaves the race and heads in.

The race committee gives the penalty for DNS, OCS, NSC, and DNF.
Competitors give themselves a penalty when they retire.

It seems to me, DNS, OCS, NSC, DNF and RET are all penalties.  

If a competitor hits a finish mark while finishing and does not take a penalty, she has finished.  Somebody (competitor, race committee, or if judges are on the water, a judge), must protest the competitor for breaking rule 31.

Anyone agree?

Thanks,

Jerry

Jerry, note that the wording of Basic Principles: Sportsmanship and the Rules was changed for 2021. The latest version says that "when a boat breaks a rule and is not  exonerated she will [note - not shall] promptly take an appropriate penalty or action, which may be to retire."

Since "or action" was added I believe we can read this that RET is not a penalty, it is an "action" which may be taken by a boat because she broke a rule. As you noted, RET is never imposed by a PC but is always voluntary. Breaking a rule is just one reason that a competitor may choose to retire.

On the other hand, 44.1(b) still says that a boat's "penalty shall be to retire." I wonder if maybe rule 44 wording just hasn't caught up with Sportsmanship & the Rules.

I agree with you that if a boat breaks a rule and doesn't take a penalty or retire she must be protested if she is to be penalized. 

Tim, thanks for pointing out the recent addition of the words "or action" to the Basic Principles.  I looked up the change, Submission 171-19.  I believe "or action" was to cover discretionary penalties which often include penalties less severe than retiring.  So I think RET is a penalty a competitor takes for: causing injury or serious damage, gaining a significant advantage, or leaving a race course without sailing the course.

A better understanding - When a boat breaks a discretionary penalty, they do not know what penalty to take.  With the new 64.6, the boat reports that she has broken a rule subject to a discretionary penalty to the protest committee - that is the action that newly appears in Sportsmanship and the Rules. The protest committee then decides the appropriate penalty after taking evidence, I'm not sure a full on hearing is required.  I think if a boat admits to breaking a DP, that is all the evidence required.

Jerry, re: “… I’m not sure a full hearing is required”

A hearing isn’t required at all. RRS 63.1 includes RRS 64.6.  It’s along-side starting penalties applied without a hearing by the RC. 

Nice, thanks Ang.