Forum: The Racing Rules of Sailing

accepting assistance

P
Anthony Pelletier
Nationality: United States
In a recent Lido 14 National Regatta, I was driving a chase boat. A competitor capsized near the windward mark. Under the existing conditions, they were not necessarily in any danger. I stayed close to see they required assistance. The team did call for assistance, which I provided. They decided to retire for the day and I towed them in.

My question involves my decision to wait. My assumption was that rendering help would require the team to retire from the race. I wanted to give them the opportunity to self rescue and stay in the race.
That's certainly how we operate in High-school sailing. After the regatta, the PRO stated that I could have provided assistance and the boat could have continued because they were "in danger." They could continue as long as they didn't gain any advantage from the assistance.
In the following weeks, I have read up on it a bit and cannot find anything that directly supports his assertion. Perhaps I've missed an obvious source.
Rule 41 says that assistance can be given in the case of injury, illness or danger. It makes not statement about whether the boat can then continue or any reference to gaining an advantage.
US Sailing prescription 2024-2 makes clear that the sailor need not "prove" that injury/illness or danger exists. If assistance is requested, it should provided. 
Importantly, it concludes with the phrase:
"However, a boat seeking and receiving help when not ill, injured or in danger breaks rule 41(a) and should retire from the race.”
Again, there is no mention of gaining advantage.

Let's assume the boat that capsized was near the front of the fleet. They call for and receive assistance. If there really was no danger, the US Sailing prescription says they should retire. But perhaps a danger did exist while they were in the water but is no longer present once they back in the boat (I don't know--sharks or crocodiles in the water). They sail on and finish mid fleet. 
It seems to me that a boat finishing behind them has a case for redress at least. Even if the danger criterion is met, one could argue that the actions of the RC gave an advantage to the boat that had capsized in that it recovered more quickly than it would have. 

I'd be happy if someone pointed out some obvious thing I've missed. But at this point, I think the way we handle it at HS regatta makes sense. If you can self rescue and continue, good on you. If you request help, you get it, but retire from the race. 
I've even had a team capsize near the finish and drift across the line in second place (sailors were still "in contact" with the boat and there is no requirement that the boat be upright when it finishes). 
So, do I have it wrong?

-Tony





Created: Yesterday 17:51

Comments

Format:
Calum Polwart
I've usually seen SI amendments that specifically permit assistance.

I usually expect this to be part of the safety boat briefing as to at what stage they *should* intervene, what the consequence for the sailor is etc. 

Our default stance is that sailors should be put back on boats if separated.  I guess they become endangered if separated.  I'm not sure I've seen that happen and benefit a near the front of the pack sailor. 

I've once seen a boat drift fast down wind with a tide. The safety boat were rushing to catch it. You might argue the sailor was advantaged by being rushed to it... They safety boat then spent a "fair" (pun entirely intended) amount of time getting the boat up, bailed and sorted out... Resulting in no real advantage.

But you can argue that a last place is better than a retirement/DNF. So any assistance is better than the guy who tried to fix it himself and times out. 
Created: Yesterday 18:58
Jim Champ
Here's my understanding. 
This is something that has changed fairly recently. A boat is (of course) only required to retire if she has broken a rule. Under the current rules outside help for a person considered in danger doesn't break a rule, so there is no need for RRS41 to state that the boat may continue. 
Redress is very strictly limited, and really only available if another party has broken a rule or RC acted improperly. It's quite often the case that one may be disadvantaged through no fault of one's own and be ineligible for redress. In this case helping a person in danger is the very opposite of an improper action! 
Created: Yesterday 19:06
Clark Chapin
US Sailing clarified this (within the USA) via Appeal 127 last year:
"Question 1: If a boat that is racing receives outside help for a crew member who is in danger, has the boat broken rule 41?
Answer 1: No. Rule 41(a) specifically permits a boat to receive outside help from any outside source for a crew member who is ill, injured or in danger. Furthermore, rule 1.1 requires a boat, competitor
or support person to give all possible help to any person or vessel in danger. If a boat that is racing receives outside help for a crew member who is in danger, she does not break rule 41 and she may continue racing.

Question 2: Is there a special meaning of the phrase “in danger” when used in rule 1.1, rule 41(a), and in other rules in The Racing Rules of Sailing (RRS)?
Answer 2: No. The phrase “in danger” is not defined in the RRS. The Terminology section of the Introduction to the RRS states that “other words and terms are used in the sense ordinarily understood in nautical or general use.” As understood in general use, the phrase “in danger” means: “the possibility of something happening that may injure, harm or kill somebody.”

Question 3: Does the fact that a person is in the water, by itself, mean that the person is “in danger?”
Answer 3: When people are in the water, the possibility of injury, harm or death exists. Therefore, it should be considered that they are “in danger” until it is obvious that they are not. There are many reasons a person in the water may be in danger, including injury, fatigue, hypothermia, preexisting health conditions, physical disabilities, being tangled in the rigging, being separated from the boat, being in water where there are sharks, and other reasons.
Case 20 states “A boat in a position to help another that may be in danger is required by rule 1.1 to do so.” A boat, competitor or support person will likely have no knowledge as to the circumstances that led to a person being in the water, or the condition of the person, until they are close by and have had the chance to assess the situation, which will, if practicable, usually include discussing the situation with the person.

Assumed Facts for Question 4: A boat in a race has capsized and at least one of the crew is in the water. A support boat lifts the mast of the capsized boat and holds the boat while the crew climbs back aboard. The boat continues in the race.
Question 4: Has the racing boat broken rule 41?
Answer 4: It depends. Rule 41(a) permits a boat to receive help from any source if a crew member is “in danger.” If any of the crew were “in danger” (see Answer 2), and if they would remain in danger until the boat is righted and the crew is back on board, then the boat has not broken rule 41(a). Furthermore, if the crew is unable to right the boat without outside help, then the crew is “in danger” and the boat has not broken rule 41(a)."
Created: Yesterday 19:46
John Christman
Nationality: United States
This question is addressed in US Appeal 127.  This changed what was my, and apparently your, understanding about giving assistance.  To some extent, I think it is overly broad and gives the competitor an expectation that they will get help instead of self-reliance. It is probably a good thing tor the RC to review with the competitors at the first meeting to set expectations of what help will be given.

Appeal 127.pdf 512 KB
Created: Yesterday 19:51
P
Michael Butterfield
I always consider a capsized boat is in danger and may receive assistance. 
As long as the boat and crew remain in the same area. I believe it used to have to be reported and a penalty considered but this is not in the rule now. 
This makes sense as we do not want our safety fleet waiting by one boat in case there is a problem.. We need the problem resolving to free the safety boat for the next incident. 
Created: Yesterday 20:48
Jim Champ
Looking through a 1989 rulebook, if I read it correctly outside assistance used to be limited to crew members sick or injured, but even then it seems that a third party could board a boat to give assistance, and the boat could even continue in the race if the sick/injured party was removed. Its a little less draconian than I recall.
Created: Yesterday 21:15
Mark Townsend
Nationality: United Kingdom
A person in the water should always be considered in danger. Nothing good is going to happen if you start considering water temperature, water depth, wave height, proximity to shipping channels or other factors to determine if a person in the water is in danger.


Created: Today 00:20
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Right up until 2009 the RRS always allowed a boat to receive help if she or her crew were in danger or peril (and, Jim, that included the 1989 RRS).

In the 2009 RRS this exception was deleted in accordance with Submission 07-202.  If anybody has a copy of that old submission, I'd love to see it.

In 2013, very rightly, that exception was put back into RRS 41. 

 USA Appeal US127 describes the process:

Explanation of rule  41(a).
  • Note: Rule  41 (Outside Help) has been significantly changed three times since the 2005–2008 edition of The Racing Rules of Sailing (RRS). Up through the 2005–2008 edition of the RRS, a boat was permitted to receive outside help for a crew member who was in danger. Under the rules in the 2009–2012 edition of the RRS, if a boat received help for a crew member who was in danger, she broke a rule. In the 2013–2016 and 2017–2020 editions of the RRS, a boat was permitted to receive help for a crew member who was in danger, but the last sentence in rule 41 said the boat could be protested and penalized if she gained a significant advantage by the help she received. In the 2021–2024 edition of the RRS, the last sentence in rule 41 was deleted, with the result that a boat cannot be penalized if she receives help for a crew member who was in danger. 

I think that, since 2009, there have been too many changes for too many different reasons to make historical analysis of the changes worth while.

USA Appeal US127 was published in January 2024 and said, among other things

  • When people are in the water, the possibility of injury, harm or death exists. Therefore, it should be considered that they are “in danger” until it is obvious that they are not.

 Q&A 2024-002 was published in May 2024 and said
 
Being separated from a boat is not inherently dangerous, but may be when combined with other factors like:
  • level of experience and age of the sailor,
  • weather conditions (water temperature, sea state, visibility, etc.)
  • speed of the other boats around,
  • distance from the boat,
  • presence of injuries,
  • dangerous wildlife,
  • etc.
 
I think it is fairly obvious that Q&A 2024-002 was issued in response to US Appeal 127 and the Q&A panel disagreed with the sweeping statement in USA Appeal 127.

Turning to Anthony's specific OP scenario.
  •  A competitor capsized near the windward mark. Under the existing conditions, they were not necessarily in any danger. 
That is to say, in terms of US Appeal 127, to Anthony, it was obvious that they were not in danger.

Another boat nearby would have had no obligation to give help under RRS 1.

Until requested to do so, Anthony was quite right not to give help to the boat unless asked.

Once they asked for help, Anthony, was, again, quite right in giving it.

If they had thought that while capsized they were in danger, and, once righted, with Anthony's help, they had continued to race, any other boat that thought that they had broken a rule could have protested them, and, in a protest hearing, the protest committee would have to conclude (hopefully considering all the criteria in Q&A 2024-002) whether they were in danger or not.

There is now absolutely no consideration about whether the boat gained any advantage or not.  That concept was very deliberately removed from RRS 41 in 2021.

If another boat had requested redress, no redress should be given.

The Q&A demonstrates that the action of the race committee in giving help that has been asked for is absolutely a proper action.

If the boat behind them is aggreived they can protest. If they don't protest they shouldn't expect race officials to do their dirty work for them.

The grounds of the protest is simply breach of RRS 41.
Created: Today 00:33
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Mark, you're entitled to your opinion, but the Q&A Panel has said exactly the opposite.
Created: Today 00:33
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
PS I think the writers of USA Appeal US127 have mixed up good advice to race management teams (and perhaps some risk averse quasi legal advice) with proper interpretation of the RRS for use by protest committees.
Created: Today 02:15
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more