OFF-COURSE

Peter Valentino delves into the racing rules and the importance of owning up and retiring out of your own will.

Coincidentally a few sailors recently asked me a few questions tied to sportsmanship and conduct, or rather misconduct, and I’ll start this article off by quoting a fundamental principle from the World Sailing Rules Book.

‘Competitors are governed by a body of rules that they are expected to follow and enforce. A fundamental principle of sportsmanship is that when competitors break a rule, they will promptly take a penalty, which may be to retire’.

The above sums up the character of the sport. Both while racing and indeed even ashore during an event. Intrinsically, ours is a selfpolicing sport where in most cases, when a competitor breaks a rule, it is expected that a penalty is taken or that the boat retires from the race. Luckily, our standard penalty is two turns taken in the same direction. It’s not much. At times the sailing instructions dictate a different penalty or indeed offer an option like, for instance, the offending boat would show the flag, and that would mean the acceptance of a time penalty; but this goes beyond the scope of this article.

So, in most clubs around the world, boats go out racing; and when boats get close and one or more of them break a rule, they will promptly take a two-turn penalty (R.44.2). During what I call high-level races like World, Continental Championships or International Regattas of sorts; it is typical for the Organising Authority to invite an International Jury. The main reason for this is to ensure that decisions taken are not subject to appeal; and that the results remain unchanged.

An International Jury is formed by at least five people; the majority must hold International Judge Status, and not more than two can be from the same nation. During the more important events, the jury members are generally afloat, and they follow the race. In the case of dinghy events, besides simple observation, the Jury is active in the direct judging of Rule 42, which is propulsion whereby a boat can illegally gain an advantage by body or sheet pumping. Boats compete by using the wind and the waves to increase, maintain or decrease their speed. Crew members are of course allowed to trim the sails and alter the direction and of course, always ensure good seamanship; but they can’t move their bodies to propel the boat. It takes a sailor to know if or not this rule is being broken, and I can tell you that whistling and giving a boat a penalty is not fun; at least it wasn’t for me. I did it, and I was strict with it to ensure a level playing field.

During some events, the Jury is out doing a bit more. Armed with a couple of flags, they can become active or proactive. The latter is much better. As a boat protests, another usually by hailing and by showing a red flag, the Jury quickly decides and they can either uphold the protest and give the offending boat a penalty, or they could dismiss the protest by showing a green flag. In a rare happening, the Jury may

Photo by Rolex / Kurt Arrigo

It’s so severe that a sailor is precluded from protesting under this rule, and it’s up to the Jury to decide whether to proceed or not

even revoke this by penalising the boat that initially protested. So primarily, our sport is self-policing.

At times the two turns, however, may not be enough. An example of this, for instance, is a contact that causes enough damage to either boat whereby any of the boats involved can’t race to the finishing line. Misconduct is another where two turns wouldn’t suffice. The game changed over the years and the first significant shift came along when sailors who raced Match Racing began to turn professional. A two-sided blade. Then, several judges that evolved into umpires formed something like, an unofficial closed group; and crowned or instead sold themselves as the best of the best. Rarely did they allow anyone else to join and the reason pivoted around money; around the payment.

Eventually, certain National Authorities began to pay their officials €79 per day; during certain events. I never got paid; I never wanted to; since to be a judge, you must be, and to be seen as being impartial. Accepting payment in any form from the Organising Authority may be seen as a conflict of interest; especially in complex cases when a sailor seeks redress for improper action or omission of the Organising Authority. Besides, I find payment degrading.

As time went by, more boats started taking upon sponsorship deals; some of which were tied to results. The better the result, the more generous the sponsorship. More crew ›

members became professional, and this was the next big game-changer. We found that the person representing the boat during a protest would be one of the professionals aboard, rather than the owner. These called for interesting hearings, but imagine the crew member who would have pushed the owner to sail into a spot and who then got protested and who then had to leave the protest room and face the boat owner only to convey the news that they had just got disqualified. Not fun.

Fast forward to the modern days where crew members switch boats all depending on who would pay best. The last thing these crew members wish for is to appear in a Jury Room to present a case against a boat that they would maybe like to race on during the next season for a better per diem. So here we are again, three decades later, where another group of judges took advantage of this scenario. They sold themselves to Class Associations, promising their time, availability and what they call consistency. Yet again they marketed themselves as the very best; zooming aboard their ribs observing racing in the proactive mode, and getting paid handsomely to do so!

Of course, this relieved so much pressure from the so-called professional sailors, because when the judge-turned-umpire flags the boat, the navigator can turn around to the owner and say….’Oh, that’s an umpire error’….and it’s never their mistake. Ipse Dixit!

The game changed so much over these years. Guidelines that include betting have appeared, and those who know the sport also know that sailing and betting don’t go together. A fivedegree change in wind direction or a sudden change of pressure on one side of the course may see boats sailing a game of snakes and ladders. I believe that our sport is still incredibly clean and that notwithstanding the changes inspired by money the character of our sport has remained true to the basic principle and that deep down a sailor will always take a penalty or retire, without the need of umpires on their tails.

This brings me to Rule 69; Misconduct. Many, here I also include several officials, have the wrong perspective about Rule 69. It has little to do with sailor vs sailor on a personal basis, but it’s a matter of what hurts the character of our sport. It’s a strict rule where a panel that finds that a sailor is guilty of breaking Rule69 can be banned from the sport from a period. It’s so severe that a sailor is precluded from protesting under this rule, and it’s up to the Jury to decide whether to proceed or not. Again, I state that this is a very stringent rule

Photo by Rolex / Kurt Arrigo

with possibly unforgiving penalties. Just like with every hearing, the competitor’s name will be listed on the Hearing Schedule that automatically gets displayed on the Official Notice Board. This information is free to all; so, the moment a sailor’s name goes up on that board with Rule 69 being cited alongside, that automatically elicits a bad light on that sailor. It’s a matter of character, which takes time to polish once it gets blemished.

Luckily, over the years this procedure has changed to the point where instead of moving straight into a Rule 69 hearing the Jury have first to investigate. If sufficient grounds are found to open a hearing, then the Jury must give the sailor time to prepare. If found guilty, the sailor will undoubtedly face disqualification from all races, direct expulsion from the event and the Jury will generally go further and suggest to the Member National Authority of the sailor that supplementary action, like expulsion from the sport for a specific time is imposed. This is not a rule to be taken lightly. Threatening to use this rule is indeed horrendous, and I know some bullies that have so done in the past, and I found it so very appalling.

The moment a Jury initiates the procedure, the character of that sailor is tarnished at times beyond repair; for life. It affects the sailor not only personally but also professionally, on lines like loss of place in a team, loss of sponsorship or prospective partnership. So please, and here I refer to officials; please read about this rule. Most times a sailor will apologise, unreservedly during the investigation. Accept that, be sure the sailor got the lesson and close it there. Being in the Jury Room and faced with such is a penalty within itself. Of course, if the sailor is uncooperative, then you’re left with no option. Keep in mind that it’s about what harms the character of the sport – and nothing else.

We’re back to “take a penalty or retire” …. If every citizen of this world played a sport that had that as a rule; as a fundamental principle, then I think we’d have a much cleaner society. If only sport and fairness had a more substantial impact on our daily life.