The definition of finish has been changed. Previously, it had required that a boat after starting, crosses the finishing line. Now, it only provides that a boat after her starting signal, crosses the finishing line.
According to Reason Nr. 3 of Submission 002-22, this change was made to enable the OA or the RC, to, for safety reasons, give OCS boats a starting penality instead of having them turn back to the starting line (as e.g. common in CIM classic regattas and others). The submission points out that this would not be possible if finishing was contingent upon starting and both definitions were unchangeable by the NoR and SI.
This purpose is indeed achieved if a boat can finish without having started (according to the definition start). At first glance this change could make it unneccesary to further use test rule DR21-01 (Alternative Starting Penalty) to achieve that desired result.
However, the definition sail the course now includes the explicit new requirement that a boat starts. So, a boat that is OCS at her starting signal, can finish, but cannot sail the course.
But: The rule to sail the course (according to RRS 28) can be changed by NoR or SI. Also RRS 29 (recalls) can be changed. Also A5.1(a) which provides that a boat that did not sail the course shall be scored NSC can be changed. Obviously, if a boat did not sail the course because she e.g. missed a mark, she should still be scored NSC. A5.1(a) therefore cannot just be deleted, but needs to by amended. The change to A5.1(a) could state that an OCS boat, instead of being scored NSC, receives a starting penalty.
Do we therefore still need test rule DR21-01, or can we achieve the desired result by changing RRS 28, 29 and A5.1(a)?
Further, I think changing the definition of start as they have in DR21-01 covers you from issues where people could be over the line by an amount that exceeds the automatic penalty.
Suggested NOR/SI rule:
"A boat scored as OCS shall have xx minutes added to her corrected time and occupy the corresponding finishing place. For safety, OCS boats shall not restart and the time penalty shall stand. This changes RRS 28.1, 28.2 and 29.1."
Note: If you want to allow boats the ability to clear their OCS by restarting, then omit the second sentence and leave 28.2 & 29.1 unchanged.
The point of RRS A5.1 is to empower the RC to score a boat without a hearing, not to specify the penalty. The 'accorded' penalties - whatever they may be - are specified by other rules. Thus, I don't believe A5.1 is changed in this case.
I believe that's incorrect. For the previous quadrennium, the definition of Finish was rephrased in a way that required that a boat had first started, which created this (unintended) problem. The current definition Finish has been changed to remove this requirement; it now references the contextual, 'after her starting signal', instead of the imperitive, 'after starting'.
I am not aware of a version of DR21-01 that references the 2025-2028 RRS. If you know of one, can you post the link?
https://www.sailing.org/racingrules/
I still think you can work around it thusly...
"A boat scored as OCS instead of starting shall, in all other aspects and effect, sail the course, except that she shall (a) not restart to clear her penalty, and (b) have xx minutes added to her corrected time and occupy the corresponding finishing place. This changes RRS 28.1, 28.2, 29.1, 32.1, 35, A4 and A5.2."
RRS 60.2.b.2 also mentions sailing the course, but I don't think it's affected by this change.
Could they say something like:
A boat that did not sail the course because she was on the course side at her start and did not return to start will be penalized 1 place for each 5 seconds she is over without a hearing. This changes RRS 28.1, 28.2, 29.1, 32.1, 35, A5.1 & A5.2. Or just use the WS Test Rule?
FWIW, I was part of a small group of judges that worked on the issue, presented the problem (the inability to write SI's for many events that had alt-OCS conditions) and presented some draft DR's for WS consideration. I remember building a spreadsheet detailing all the 1st-level and 2nd level effects to the rules that would have to be changed. It was a pretty long list!
So .. the change to def:start is still the elegant solution I think. Fix it once .. and let the rest naturally permeate the rules.
Spreadsheet: Rules that use Start and the rules those rules touch
There are 2 sheets .. one was based upon the terms .. the next was sorted by the rule. Anyway .. it was just a WIP worksheet to get a scope of all the places we should look if an NOR/SI approach was used (as opposed to the WS DR). - Ang