Forum: The Racing Rules of Sailing
Properly stating where and when on a Protest Form.
P
Paul ZupanCertifications:
- International Judge
- National Judge
0
Be careful in determining validity as the 2017 version of RRS is a little more liberal than the previous version (). RRS (c) requires that the protest shall identify where and when the incident occurred. However, the last sentence in the rule allows for identifying the where and when before or during the hearing. Submission 199-15 explains the change:
Submission 199-15
Rule and the Protest Form. A submission from the Chairman of the Racing Rules Committee To change rule so that fewer protests are found to be invalid bease the protestor failed to state correctly where and when the incident occurred.. Also, to modify the Protest Form in light of the changes to rule .
Reasons
Protests are often found to be invalid because the protestor fails to state correctly where and when the incident occurred. This is most likely to occur at events where several races are held each day over several days. The changes proposed in rule will require protestors to identify the incident, but give them the opportunity to correct an error in identifying where and when the incident occurred. When the protestor corrects an error in identifying where and when the incident occurred, the hearing may have to be temporarily adjourned to permit the protestee reasonable time to prepare for the hearing. The benefit of reducing the number of protests found invalid on what most competitors and judges view as a technicality outweighs the small cost of occassionally having to adjourn a hearing to permit a protestee to prepare.
Submission 199-15
Rule and the Protest Form. A submission from the Chairman of the Racing Rules Committee To change rule so that fewer protests are found to be invalid bease the protestor failed to state correctly where and when the incident occurred.. Also, to modify the Protest Form in light of the changes to rule .
Reasons
Protests are often found to be invalid because the protestor fails to state correctly where and when the incident occurred. This is most likely to occur at events where several races are held each day over several days. The changes proposed in rule will require protestors to identify the incident, but give them the opportunity to correct an error in identifying where and when the incident occurred. When the protestor corrects an error in identifying where and when the incident occurred, the hearing may have to be temporarily adjourned to permit the protestee reasonable time to prepare for the hearing. The benefit of reducing the number of protests found invalid on what most competitors and judges view as a technicality outweighs the small cost of occassionally having to adjourn a hearing to permit a protestee to prepare.
Comments
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
Clearly the direction of movement (quite rightly in my view) is for protests not to be declared invalid on technicalities and wherever possible the PC should resolve issues in a hearing.
1) Have a section up the top that has "Mandatory information" with the mandatory items clearly identified.
2) Have a box that says "Protest Cutoff time" and have the Jury secretary fill this in when they hand out the form so the protestee has it in their face their time limit.
I realise that people can write their protest on any old piece of paper, but in reality most people come in to the Jury Secretary to pick up a form and this would be a very simple change.
My 2 cents worth.
Requiring the competitors to file electronically initially feels like it's a complex solution to a simple problem, but the transition to filing electronically results in both a more accurate and a more efficient process for the competitors, and a lot less busy work for the protest committee. So while improving the paper form may help, my suggestion is to quit using paper altogether.
Maybe even "Minimum Mandatory Information"?
"Exactly" on both Paul's post.. many competitors don't realize how little info has to be filed .. and what information can be amended at a later date. Making that clear (min info) and electronic would remove a mental hurdle for many IMO.
Paul P., maybe you could mock-up a form and post here and we can try it on for size?
Ang
1) The SI's allow for email delivery of a protest (they supply an email address in the SI's)
2) The SI's don't specifically state the protest must be filed using a specific form (but they may make reference to form availability).
So .. going through Rule ...
a) the protestor and protestee; (before hearing)
b) the incident;
c) where and when the incident occurred; (before or during hearing)
d) any rule the protestor believes was broken; and (before or during hearing)
e) the name of the protestor's representative.(before or during hearing)
So .. an email to the provided protest-address ..
Subject: Protest in ABC regatta
Email Body:
Incident - Going to windward, port boat did not keep clear of me, the starboard boat.
That could be a proper protest filing? .. not even listing the your (protestor's boat's) name? Seems odd.
Ang