Wednesday, 23 June 2010

Kiel 4; Day five

After an eleven hour day on the water umpiring yesterday and a 6 hour day today (cut-off time was 15:00 hours) we have a new Kieler Woche World Cup Match Race champion! Ekaterina Skudina and her crew managed to beat Claire Leroy and her crew in the finals 2-1. Congratulations to her, indeed. Coming up from the repacharge to win the tournament, shows some fighting spirit. Never giving up, never loosing hart. A well deserved win! And well done Katerina!

We are going in to the international part of Kiel Week, with many (more) competitors. I'll be going out on the water for rule 42 and do some hearings in the room. And perhaps some arbitration. Something for which they have a unique system here.

I've been scribbling in my notebooks and will no doubt find a few cases to share from the match race course, but for the next couple of post I will concentrate on the Jury-work
The first on I am telling you about is unique indeed:

A team sailing in Kiel-week in a different class handed in a request for redress two day's after the start of match racing, claiming that a wrong team was invited to come and that actually they should have been given the opportunity to sail according to the rules regarding invitations. With some preliminary reading of the NoR it was soon discovered, that indeed there might have been a mistake and that a wrong team was asked to come.
The reason why the team handed in the request was of course the missed oppertunity to earn ranking points.

But to stop the tournament for that? Impossible!
Was the request even valid? The party was not a competitor and time limit! Has anybody checked the time limit? If we hear it what can we do? This Internation Jury has no jurisdiction over ISAF's ranking list. Only over this particular World Cup Event.
Questions, obstacles, and hurdles......


  1. I believe any request would be out of time. It is also moot who should put in such a request. If the competitors were in another class there may have been 2 not the 3 of an elliot, so what of the other.
    The only series you could consider would be the agragate of events, so that is OK, loss of ISAF grading points is not relevant.
    the only rule of help is 76, this talks of refusing an entry, but the starus of a Match Race invatation is not specified.I know the rule has been extended but if a reason has been given then thia may be the end of the matter so no improper action.
    The competitors should have resolved this earlier, and now being out of time is paramount.

    Mike B

  2. I agree on the timing being late. I do believe that there is one issue other than ISAF Ranking points. This event is part of a circuit of World Cup events. ISAF is creating and posting overall results for the World Cup. This denial of entry would have an impact on those results. Those results are used to determine which countries are in next years events. Next years in turn I believe are being used as part of determining Olympic entries in Match Racing.

    This does raise the sometimes interesting question of which Jury has juristiction over issues of a series which crosses multiple events.

  3. The timming was all wrong. they were absolutely late

  4. Assuming the NOR made the invitation procedure protestable, then the timing of the request for redress is the next issue.

    It seems that the jury has great discretion in deciding whether there is sufficient cause to extend the deadline and in deciding what is fairest for all boats. And the jury's decision is nice and final.

    Now I have a question on Desert Sea about whether it might be possible to protest "grossly bad seamanship" committed by a racing boat colliding with a COLREGs/IRPCAS boat under Rule Preamble to Part 2 or RRS 69.

  5. IN the US we have a saying: You snooze, you lose. They should have brought it to the judges attention before the match started.

  6. Pat said... 4 Assuming the NOR made the invitation procedure protestable, then the timing of the request for redress is the next issue.

    I don't see how NOR can 'make the invitation procedure protestable' or even 'redressable'.

    If a boat's score is made significantly worse by an improper action of the OA she may request redress, as long as there is no fault of her own and she submits her request for redress within two hours after the incident.

    Let's assume that the boat is in a series accruing scores (World Cup circuit or whatever).

    The incident was the making of the selection decision by the OA, but the protest committee should extend the time limit to a reasonable time after the announcement of that decision, either in the form of a letter advising the competitor that they would not be invited, or the publication of the list of competitors. 24 hours after might be a reasonable time.

    Had the boat requesting redress done so promptly after the list of competitors was published, then the OA could have fixed things up.

    48 hours after the start of racing would not be a reasonable time. The request for redress is invalid.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...