Information from the Jury to Competitors

Website home Results Notices Hearings Protest Time Limits Rule 42 Scoring Enquiry Q & A

Type of Communication		Communication
Number:		4
Issued Date:		27 Jul 2011 09:00

This notice does not modify or replace the rules of the competition 1. Rule 42 and Appendix P The purpose of judging rule 42 on the water is to ensure a level of compliance that makes the competition fair for all boats. Judges will penalize on the water only when they are sure there has been a breach of these rules. Although there are usually two judges in each jury boat, a single judge will signal a yellow flag penalty when satisfied a boat has broken rule 42. The following points may help understand the application of rule 42 and Appendix P at this event · ISAF Rule 42 Interpretations. · When a boat's second or subsequent rule 42 penalty in the regatta is signalled in a race that is subsequently postponed, recalled or abandoned, the boat may NOT compete in the restarted race, and for each boat, every yellow flag penalty counts in the total number of such penalties. · Although judges will signal a rule 42 penalty as soon as possible, this might be after the boat has crossed the finishing line. In the case where this is a boat&rsquos first penalty, the boat will be given an 8 point penalty without a hearing. · When given a first penalty, a boat is required to get clear of other boats as soon as possible and then promptly make two turns, including two tacks and two gybes. · When given a second or subsequent penalty, a boat is required to promptly retire from the race. If a boat is penalized under Appendix P, the competitor may ask the judges for an explanation after the completion of the race. It can be done either on the water between races or by asking the jury office to arrange a meeting with the judges. 2. On the Water Sailing is essentially a self-policing sport. The jury expects that boats will take a penalty promptly when appropriate. The primary responsibility for protesting breaches of the rules is with the competitors, not the jury. However, in addition to taking action under Appendix P, the jury may lodge protests in under rule 60.3. The jury will protest breaches of a rule of Part 2 where the breach is difficult for other competitors to protest or they observe an apparent breach of good sportsmanship (rule 2). Examples of such breaches are · Deliberate breaches of the rules. · Failing to take a penalty after knowingly touching a mark. · Intimidating other boats &ndash often evidenced by unnecessary shouting or foul language · Team racing &ndash sailing to benefit another competitor to the detriment of your own position. · Reckless sailing &ndash sailing likely to result in damage or injury. The jury may blow a whistle when they see what they believe to be a breach of a rule, to encourage boats to take penalties afloat. They may also give evidence in protests however, jury evidence may not always be available. 3. Observers at hearings It is intended that hearings will be open to observers but this will be subject to the space available in the hearing rooms and at the discretion of the jury. Preference will be given to the parties to the hearing who may normally bring one person to observe. Observers sit further back from the parties and unless authorised by the panel chairman, observers are not permitted to speak, communicate with the parties, use cellular phones, or use photographic or recording equipment. A document entitled &ldquoInformation for Observers at Jury Hearings&rdquo will be available to observers prior to the hearing. Representatives of the media may be permitted to attend a hearing as an observer after reporting to the jury office. 4. Requests for redress for alleged race committee error in scoring a boat OCS, ZFP or BFD Boats sometimes want to challenge the race committee&rsquos decision to score them OCS, ZFP or BFD by requesting redress under rule 62.1(a). For a boat to be given redress, conclusive evidence must be presented to the jury that the race committee has made an error. Video evidence is rarely conclusive. In the absence of conclusive evidence to the contrary the Jury will uphold the race committee&rsquos decision. Evidence of the relative positions of two boats that are scored differently is not conclusive evidence that either boat started properly. 5. Doping control There may be doping control at the regatta. If selected for testing, you will be guided through the procedure. 6. Rule 69 Any form of cheating, including not telling the truth in a hearing, is considered a breach of sportsmanship which may result in a hearing under rule 69, and a heavy penalty. 7. Video Evidence If a party to a hearing wish to bring video evidence it is their responsibility to provide suitable equipment to view the video. 8. Failure to attend a hearing Competitors should be aware that the jury may proceed with a hearing [under rule 63.3(b)] in the absence of one of the parties. This will not be grounds for reopening unless the jury is satisfied that the competitor had made every reasonable effort to find out the time of the hearing and to attend. Competitors are reminded that on the last actual day of any qualifying series, it is the intention of the jury to hear all protests relating to the qualifying series on that day, including any request for redress based on decisions made that day or any requests for reopening of any case from the previous or same day. It is the responsibility of the competitors to monitor the official notice board until all hearings are concluded for the day. 9. International Jury The members of the International Jury are: Doug Elder (Chair) IJ NZL Eric Mehlbaum (Vice Chair) IJ NED Ron Barak IJ ISR Danielle Pascoe NJ AUS Robert Stewart IJ CAN Kurt Wessels NJ USA Paul Zupan NJ USA Competitors, team leaders and coaches may discuss procedure and policy with the Jury Chairman. The Jury Chairman may be contacted through the jury office and will be available each day before and after sailing.

Doug Elder (Chair) IJ NZL