For reference, in the US, we have appeal USA 118

Rule 41 Outside Help.
In front of the jury, he can says that he did not ask for...

The information was unsolicited. In most cases the race officer would be considered as a disinterested source. So, the boat has not broken RRS E4.2(e). If the hail was loud enough for all competitors to hear then it does not break E4.2(d).

However, the boat that was second in the race, a boat that loses out on being promoted, or the best ranked boat to be 'demoted', under HMS, could all have a case that their score has been made significantly worse by an improper action of the race committee.

HMS is Heat Management System, a commonly used system in radio sailing for managing large fleets.

@Gordon Davies, is this an improper action by the RC? 

It’s certainly a bad practice for the RC to give advice to competitors while racing. It gives an appearance of favoritism and potentially does affect the fairness of the race.  Plus what if the RO was wrong about how many laps the competitor had completed?

RYA Appeal 1969/12 also establishes that an RC’s action doesn’t have to break a rule to be considered improper.

The boat aas Gordon says breaks no rule. It can be an act or ommission of the race committee on which a redress claim can be founded..

The other factors in the redress rule have to be considered, and at the end of the day the fairest
 result may be to let the race results stand. 

SEEMS sensible, allows for great events. 

Jim Archer,

The action of the race committee is contrary to commonly accepted standards and affected the fairness of the competition. In my view this meets the dictionary of improper.

I'm always a bit intrigued by our over insistence that the RC can't assist. 

Is there another sport in the world that does this? If you are a runner or cyclist.. there are marshals that would direct you to the finish line.

So I would have said 41(c) could easily be applied - with a member of the RC pointing sailors to the finish line (needs to be applied equally) AND 41(d) applies as the help was not requested.  Even without the RC shouting/pointing to the finish for every sailor, is there in fact an argument that as "the information was freely available" in the sailing instructions it was already available to all competitors.

Is our aim as RC to be the pompous blazer wearing official or to help the competitors have a fair race

Calum re: “Is there another sport in the world that does this? If you are a runner or cyclist.. there are marshals that would direct you to the finish line. […] Is our aim as RC to be the pompous blazer wearing official or to help the competitors have a fair race“

If the bike/running race was a “regular” race where navigation and alternate routes was not a part of it … then the marshals and race officials have every need and desire to show every turn and keep people on the correct path.  This is important not only for fairness but for the safety of competitors.. as getting off the path might put them into dangerous terrain or automobile traffic. 

 On the other hand .. if this race is some sort of “rally” race ..  where alternate routes are expected and navigation decisions are a core part of the skills and competition… then a marshal pointing the way to an individual competitor would not be fair to others. 

Navigational and orientation skills are a core part of our sport … where taking alternate routes are expected. 

Which I think makes sense for the pins round the triangle.  Not 100% sure it makes sense for the finish. Which of course won't be drawn to scale on any SI, and which is invariably different event to event at the whim of the blazer wearers as far as the competitors can tell.

There is clearly no logic to sailing to port of the committee boat if the finish needs you to sail to starboard - even by my choice of bizzare navigation...

Perhaps the fact the race committee is all looking to starboard is too much of a clue?

Gordon Davies

Said Created: Fri 09:26

Those of us who remember that the World Sailing Judges Manual F22.8 used to say

An improper action is when the race committee, protest committee, organizing authority or technical committee does something that is not permitted by the rules of the event. An omission is when the race committee, protest committee, organizing authority or technical committee fail to do something, whether or not required by the rules, that causes the boat’s score to be significantly worsened.

should note that this has now been completely gutted in the July 2022 rewrite of the Judges Manual and now reads

WSJM - F

Redress might be awarded to a boat when it is established that an improper action or omission of the race committee, protest committee, technical committee or organizing authority has caused her score to be made significantly worse through no fault of her own. The exception is the effect of a protest committee’s decision on a boat when she was a party to the hearing.

Nevertheless, I would suggest that the old guidance provides a good starting point in determining whether an action of a race committee is improper.  Clearly if it is contrary to a rule it is an improper action.

I would suggest further that any action by a race committee that amounts to misconduct by a race official is clearly improper.  Misconduct by a race official can be determined by consulting a relevant Code of Conduct for Race Officials.

As an example, the WS Code of Conduct for Race Officials provides (relevant to the OP problem)

2.2 All decisions must be made in good faith, be based upon the rules, and in a fair and objective manner. Racing must not only be conducted in a fair manner, but be seen to be so.

I would prefer to apply these two tests before resorting to Gordon's formulation.

I note that Gordons's formulation refers to 'commonly accepted standards', which echoes the 'recognised principles' condition of RRS 2 and I would suggest that the same stringency, and the need for a breach to be 'clearly established' as in RRS 2 should be applied.

I also note that on Gordon's formulation affect on the fairness of the competition is an essential ingredient of the impropriety, not just another limb of the 'boat's score made worse by' requirement for redress.

Calum Polwart

Said Created: Sat 18:36

That's a very old fashioned and discredited view.

Of course the race committee is there to help competitors have a good day on the water, with fair competition.

Yes, the race committee should help competitors but it must not do something that gives an unfair advantage to any one boat.

In the OP scenario the action of the RO enables the boat to win the race when she would not otherwise have done so.

That's what makes the race committee action improper.

We've all seen the race where the lead boat makes a wrong turning and the next 9 boats follow like sheep.

If you are the 10th boat and realise - you get to win.  I'm sure you feel quite pleased by a sudden first place. But what happens when no-one realises. 

If no one realises the race committee will score the boats in their order of finishing in accordance with RRS A4.

If the race committee realises that all boats have missed a mark and thus have failed to Sail the Course they will either score all boats NSC or abandon the race in accordance with RRS 32.1(d).

Your point was?

If we assume N flag was never hoisted and assume the RC record the finishing places on the "fake" finish... what would the sailors want? Ignore the rule book. If you had just slogged your guts out for an hour   do you just want the race canned? If it gives no-one an advantage?

I'm convinced we deliver Olympic level expectations to local club racing.

Olympic sailors don't miss marks. They don't get confused how many laps they have done. They don't fail to understand that the finish is in a different place from the race at another club the week before.

We run a serious risk of missing the point! Facing is meant to be fun. It needs to be fair, but the definition of fair needs to take into account the expectations of the sailors.

Olympic Games - PRO pointing the lead boat to the finish. Dodgy

Junior sailors - competing in a series with relatively little experience - then the rules don't prevent the PRO from providing EQUITABLE assistance and we shouldn't be telling people that they can't.

Calum Polwart

Said Created: 23-Oct-02 22:11

Nobody in this thread has suggested that a race committee can't help boats in a fair and equal way.

The problem addressed in this thread is when advice to a single boat creates unfairness.

The sailors may or may not want it, but a race committee can't ignore the rules.

RRS 90.1 says

The race committee shall conduct races as directed by the organizing authority and as required by the rules.

Once a sailor gets out of the Green fleet, they should play by the rules.  All the rules.

It's not that hard.  8 year old kids in Opties can find their way around the race course, sail the right number or laps, and find the finishing line.

That's not to say that a Club and a race committee cannot devise Sailing Instructions that relax some rules.

As a race official I only wish I could.