Tiziano, great question.  I was actually on the PC for the protest that resulted in the published US Appeal 124

We wrestled with that question as a PC in the hearing and during the appeal process. 

We looked at the available Cases/Appeals specifically as cited in the Appeal, US Sailing appeals US46, US67 and US82.  The result of that appeals process produced US 124.  When taken together, these 4 US Appeals (including US124)  start to paint a picture.   

Now, with these in mind I ask the questions;

Then you ask is all that the first reasonable opportunity?

In the UK, RYA Case RYA1999-01 that says the flag must be "close at hand" to fly, but the US doesn't have that.  

I'd recommend reading the 4 US Appeals and see if they help you bound the problem in your mind. 

Ask “how long does it take to pick up a winch handle”?   A Protest Flag is a similar piece of equipment which should be kept close at hand . 

Our protest committee requires immediate notification. I always hail "protest" immediately after the issue - I can always reconsider afterwards. When I raced a bigger boat, we kept the red flag rolled up on the shroud so it was available immediately. 

Mike, RYA 1999-01 is very interesting as it highlights the diff approaches in the US and UK. 

First the onus on the flag being "at hand".  We don't have that really based on the US Appeals. 

Then, another divergence is in the hearing, where it states that exploration the promptness of the flag is not necessary if the protestee makes no objection. 

That would imply a process in the hearing like:

PC to Protestor: Did you fly a flag?
Protestor: Yes
PC to Protestee: Do you have any objection regarding the flying of the flag or its timeliness?
Protestee: No

... end of flag inquiry. 

That's not common process in the US that I've experienced. 

I've had situations in high school dinghy races where the incident caused a capsize. What is the first reasonable opportunity then? As the boat is going over? When the boat is in the water? After you've ascertained that your crew is okay? Once you have righted the boat? Flying a flag is not an issue here, but safety certainly is, and the likelihood of the other boat still being in the vicinity to hear a hail is not high. Although I know that actually hearing the hail is not required, if the other boat is not in the area, what's the point?

Protest flag timing again?
My approach over the last 32 years as an IJ (and before that as a National Judge) has been:  Safety of the Crew; Safety of the Boat; Flag!  In most cases, check one and two are done in a glance.  I used to say (way back when even dinghies had to fly a protest flag), if single handed boats could do it within seconds, surely a multi-person boat could mange the same thing. 
The comment above, "How long does it take to find a winch handle?" is a good example.

In sailing races, the term "Reasonable Opportunity” refers to the expectation that a competitor must take action—such as protesting or displaying a required signal—at the first practical moment after an incident occurs. This concept is particularly relevant, where a boat must hail "Protest" and, if required, display a red flag “as soon as reasonably possible”

Factors that influence what is considered a "reasonable opportunity" include:

Weather conditions** (e.g., strong winds or rough seas may delay actions).

Crew availability (whether sailors are occupied with critical boat operations).

Location of required equipment (such as the red protest flag).

Tactical situations (e.g., approaching a finish line or navigating a congested mark rounding).

Protest panels assess whether a boat complied with this requirement based on these circumstances. If a boat fails to act within a reasonable timeframe, its protest may be deemed invalid 

I don't think you can have a hard and fast time for "reasonable", and that's deliberate. It's a term of art from the common law, and it's always contextual about what is reasonably to be expected from a reasonable person in all the circumstances. Using a term like that in the RRS isn't accidental in my view, and is intended to give room to assess the individual circumstances.

The RYA position only follows good sense and general sailing practice.
A flag chan be furled on the backstay or shroud, and secured with tape. This by just leaning over it can be unfurled in seconds.
The teas then is relative to this. So for instance if you have to go belw toa locket to get the fag and this takes 30 seconds, relative to the above it is slower so not at the first reasonable opportunity.

The rest is relative to a prompt response not quick because of the relative location of the flag on a particular boat.

Yes on Validity, if all is in order on the protest form little need be asked unless it is raised by the other boat. Asking if there is any complaint identifies to issue so you cam move on.

On appeal generally if a boat has not challenged the validity of the flag or hail initially at the hearing, then there is no act or omission or is partly that boats fault for not raising it. No redress, and the reasons just follow the rules.

If not it starts to appear in all complaints, Reopenings and appeals.

One of the worst rule interpretations in the book to my mind. Failure to follow what is basically an administrative procedure by the injured party ought not to be a get out of gaol free for the rule breaker. Its especially pernicious at club level where there are no regular protests because it reinforces the common perception at that level that there's no point in protesting because a PC will do everything they can to avoid hearing them. Further still it encourages poor sportsmanship, since the boat that acknowledges their fault and takes a penalty is disadvantaged against the boat that doesn't take a penalty because they believe the protest will be thrown out.

If a protest is not notified properly, and especially in the case of so called "ambush" protests, often given as the rationale for the rule interpretation, then it would be legitimate to reduce the penalty from disqualification, but it ought not be the case that a guilty party escapes because the innocent party was too slow in waving a piece of cloth.

I have very seldom ever commented twice on the same subject but I would like the folks thinking that a protest committee is too harsh because the conditions of RRS 60.2(a)(1)  have not been met, think about this.

The protestor is claiming that another boat broke a rule on the race course. Those that would argue "first reasonable opportunity" should be very liberally interpreted and accept an extended time, are arguing that denying a boat to fulfil her obligation under RRS 44.1 because of the delayed display of a protest flag is OK. By that logic, the argument is that one rule, example RRS 10 , more important than another rule, RRS 60.2(a)(1) which the protestor has not met: or RRS 44.1 which would have allowed the protested boat to take her penalty.

Remember there is no requirement for the protested boat to hear the hail "Protest". The flag is the visual signal of the intention to protest.

I am certain this in not the intention of the rules of our sport.

BTW - RRS 60.2(b)(1) & 60.2(c) covers the capsize, MOB, damage situations etc. and are the exceptions to RRS 620.2(a)(1).

Jim .. there is a simple solution for clubs and organizations ... they can write the flag requirement out in an SI.  Just leave the hail "protest". 

Just to clarify, I am not advocating a change in the language of RRS60. I am advocating that if those conditions have not been met then a PC should have the power to continue the hearing, but impose a lesser penalty on a boat that was denied the opportunity to take an alternate penalty because of a failure to notify. 
We need to remember that under the Basic Principle a boat should be aware that she broke a rule, and should take a penalty without being prompted by a hail or flag signal. 

I would prefer, promptly,  still quick, but with more lattitude.
We have the silly situation now where if you shout "do your turns"  then protest, it invalid as you could have shouted protest first. 

And I would agree with Michael; that is absurd.

The reason it is absurd is related to the point Leo made: it doesn’t deprive someone who is uncertain as to whether they may have breached a rule of the chance to take a penalty. If anything, the opposite. 

If we then have two identical offences with a hail in one of “Protest, do your turns” and in the other of “Do your turns, protest”, where the first offence is penalised and the second escapes, it does nothing for sportsmanship or good sailing, and I would agree with Jim there. It is absurd, and readings of the rules that lead to absurdity are bad readings to be avoided if open under the rules. 

I would therefore suggest as a possible guideline; a protest flag is displayed in a reasonable time if doing so does not take so long as to deprive the offending boat of a reasonable chance to take a penalty as required. And I would note as an observation on that requirement that referees in rugby are taught to count a five-second “immediately” in their heads; im-me-di-ate-ly. We might work from there. 

I am responding to Leo. My club insists you must say protest, even if someone has hit you and it's self-evident that they fouled you. Even saying do your turns is not good enough. I have had too many protests thrown out because I didn't say "protest" (I'm in a small boat so no flag necessary). 

Mike re: "We have the silly situation now where if you shout "do your turns"  then "protest", it invalid as you could have shouted protest first. "

Are you referring to a WS Case or RYA Case that came to that conclusion?  

Angelo, I have had a case in the U.S., where saying "That's a foul" after a start-line incident, near-contact, then (an admittedly late) raise of the flag, led a start line foul to be overturned on appeal.

There is no way of squaring the Basic Principle with throwing out an actual foul based on the these issues.

It is too bad that more attention isn't given to the differences between competitive racing and weekend fun. 

We eventually decided that rules issues meant that we weren't having fun. We stopped racing. Sadly, our one-design fleet lost its start not long after.

This issue was the first domino in our decision. It was probably only 10-20 percent of the decision. (It was 80 percent personalities, of course.)

But these trade-offs, while abstract in the rule writing room, have real consequences for the sport.

Dan .. I just looked up at my previous post and noticed I didn't put quotes around "protest" after "do your turns" and that turned protest into a verb instead of spoken words as I intended.  

We don't have a specific WS Case that I am aware of that is as Draconian as to not allow 2-3 words be spoken before the word "protest" .. as long as the entire phrase only takes 2-3 sec's, I'm OK with it. 

If someone hails ...

However ...

PS Dan ...

I want to repeat to underline this. If the OA/RC of a "weekend fun" race wants to, they can remove the flag requirement all together or change the protest requirements to suit what the competitors want. 

In the end, we are trying to serve-up the racing experience that people want. If the racers communicate to the OA that they want the standards for protest validity to be lower .. they can write that in. Nearly the entirety of Part 5 is changeable by NOR/SI under RRS 86. 

However, after making such changes they may find an entire new slew of complaints that people had no idea they were being protested on the water. 

PS2: Along with that, they could extend the time that a boat can take a penalty, as RRS 44 is changeable.  For instance, you could state that turns have to be done within 30 secs of an incident or before finishing for instance. 

All these areas of complaint can be experimented with to see what works best for the event and competitors. 

How does that square with if there is contact, someone is at fault and must take a penalty or have a protest hearing? 

Nancy ... contact itself does not relieve the party who believes they were fouled to hail "protest".  However there are circumstances when a close-contact rules breach occurs that the hail and flag are not necessary. 

For instance RRS 60.2(c) states ...

But yes... RRS 2 sportsmanship states that when a boat KNOWS that it broke a rule it shall take a penalty. But contact can happen and a boat might not be sure who broke a rule. 

In the end though... it's a simple word. "Protest". Just say it and have a red flag in your pocket or rolled on the backstay. 

PS: Here is how I keep my flags ... I have both a red and a yellow flag on my backstay in small diameter pvc pipes.  I ran the string from one corner of the flag through a hole in the top cap (do that before glueing cap to body!).  This allows you to roll the flag and pull it into the body using the cap-string. The toggle is cable-tied to the backstay with the toggle exposed to use as a handle.

For hailing "protest", I keep my tongue furled in my mouth ready for deployment :-P

We use scoring penalties for Wed Night Races .. so one needs the yellow flag just as handy as the red.

When I was a teen racing on 27 foot boats in the 80s, all kinds of#$%#@ was said when boats came together. If you knew you were wrong, you'd get clear and do turns. If the other boat deployed their flag a minute later, you knew you had a choice to go to the room or do turns just to be sure. If you didn't see a flag in a minute or two, well then, it was water under the bridge, regardless of what was said during the shouting. This system was one of reasonableness and sportmanship. It didn't work for 100-boat Olympics fleets, I'm sure. But it worked fine for a lot of situations. I never heard of a dispute that was hard to resolve.

Angelo, I have seen you muse about how many people got away with fouls during the transition to the strict hail format rule. We were on the receiving end of one of those. 

I can see the benefit of clarity of the strict format approach. But, by enforcing it this strictly, it nudged to sport away from reasonableness/sportsmanship/self-enforcement more toward "letter of the law" over "spirit of the law".