1 Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee (revised February 2009) © 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved. Judges Training Judges Training Workshop Workshop 1 & 2 August 2009 DCYC Gail Bernstein & Rick Mallinson
Dec 17, 2015
1Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Judges Training Judges Training WorkshopWorkshop
1 & 2 August 2009
DCYC
Gail Bernstein & Rick Mallinson
2Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
IntroductionsIntroductions
Instructors• Gail Bernstein
– US SAILING Senior Judge– US SAILING Judges Committee
Chair, Judge Training & Testing Working Party
• Rick Mallinson– US SAILING Senior Judge– US SAILING Judges Committee
Area F Regional Administrative Judge
3Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
IntroductionsIntroductions
Participants
Around the room...• Home port
• Certifications and competitive interests
• Reason for attending
4Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Workshop OverviewWorkshop Overview
Workshop FormatWorkshop Format
• Focuses on the skills and practices of judging and protest committees
• Less lecture and more interactive exercises and mock protest hearings
• Questions and discussion encouraged – this is a workshop not a lecture
5Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Day One Workshop ContentsDay One Workshop Contents
• Study Question Review• Participant Questions• Event Preparation & Procedures
– Presentation– Event Preparation Checklist– Protest Administration Checklist
• Racing Rules of Sailing– Round Table Discussion (Participant Questions)
• Hearing Procedures– Presentation– Validity Protest– Facts Found Protest– Round Table Discussion (Participant Questions)
6Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Day Two Workshop Day Two Workshop ContentsContents
• Test– Instructions– Test– Review
• Protest Techniques– Round Table Discussion (Participant Questions)– Presentation– Mock Protest: Questioning Witnesses/Participant
Behavior
• Other Procedures– Redress– Arbitration– Misconduct Hearings– Round Table Discussion (Participant Questions)
7Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
I’ll take a break while
I’ll take a break while
you review the
you review the Study
Study
Questions
Questions and prepare
and prepare
youryour Participant Questions
Participant Questions
8Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Event PreparationEvent Preparation
9Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Event PreparationEvent Preparation
Accepting the Invitation• Avoid conflict of interest and the
appearance of conflict of interest
• If potential conflict, disclose and decline–Personal or pecuniary interest–Adversarial relationship–Campaign contributions–Oversight of campaign contributions
10Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Event PreparationEvent Preparation
Recommendations for PC Composition
• Certified judge as chair
• Rest of PC mix of certified/non-certified judges
• At least one familiar with racing class(es)
• At least one that knows local weather and geography
• If national event, chair not from host club
11Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Event PreparationEvent Preparation
Team Work• OA, RC & PC need to work as a team
• OA responsible for the NOR [RRS 89.2]– Appendix K, “Notice of Race Guide”
• RC responsible for the SIs [RRS 90.2(a)]– Appendix L, “Sailing Instructions Guide”
• PC checks for fairness and ensures rules enforced
12Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Event PreparationEvent Preparation
PC, OA & RC Meeting• Meet with OA representative and
PRO to establish working relationships
• Discuss, before racing starts:– Communications– Issues: PC protests; RC protests, etc.– Questions about SIs, etc.– RC action reports
13Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Event PreparationEvent Preparation
Venue Issues• Shore Side Facilities
– Notice Board– Hearing Room– Copy Machine– Internet Access
• On-the-Water Equipment
14Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Another break fo
r me,
Another break fo
r me,
but not f
or you!
but not f
or you! E
vent
Event
Preparation Checklis
t
Preparation Check
list, ,
Protest Administra
tion
Protest Administra
tion, ,
and and RRS Round Table
RRS Round Table
Discussion
Discussion
15Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Hearing ProceduresHearing Procedures
16Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
When should PC Initiate a Protest?Judges Committee recommendations
only:• Boat obviously breaks a rule, and no
other competitor could observe it• Boat likely breaks Rule 2• When there is contact with serious
damage or injury• When Appendix P or rule 67 apply, a
boat breaks rule 42
17Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
PC Member Interested Party• Introductions
– Ask the parties whether they object to any member of the PC as an interested party
• PC decides if objection is valid– Consider objection on grounds of interest– Apply the rulebook definitions of
interested party
• If valid, PC member– Can't take part in the hearing– Can be a witness
18Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Interested PartyNot an Interested Party
• Competitor • Race Committee
• Personal, business or family tie to a competitor
• Citizenship
• Significant adverse relationship with a competitor
• Membership in an OA or club
• Interest in a competing boat (including a syndicate)
• Giving testimony
• Contributions to a syndicate or campaign
19Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Approving Protest WithdrawalJudges Committee recommendations:• Protestor decides no rule broken• Either party has taken a penalty
(including retiring) for incident• When arbitration is used
successfully• When obviously invalid
20Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Disapproving Protest WithdrawalJudges Committee recommendations:
• Contact, other than incidental• Significant advantage may have
been gained • There is another protest for the
same incident• Pressure may have been applied to
protestor
21Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
The standardized protest form provides a template for procedure compliance.
ValidityValidity
Facts Facts FoundFound
ConclusionsConclusions DecisionDecision
22Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Validity of the Protest• Must be in writing• Must be identified in written
protest– Incident - including when and where– Protestor and protestee (may be
corrected before the hearing) – Rule(s) protestor believes broken (May
be corrected during the hearing)– Name of protestor’s representative
(May be corrected during the hearing)
23Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
•Protest form checklist– Hail [RRS 61.1(a)] – Flag [RRS 61.1(a)]– Other method of
informing– Incident identified
[RRS 61.2(b)]– Time limit [RRS 61.3]; extending the
time limit
Validity of the Protest
•May need additional evidence
24Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Validity Decisions• If in doubt, excuse parties
• Find facts regarding validity
• Decide validity, once and do it well– Valid, hearing will continue– Invalid, hearing is closed
25Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Taking Evidence• Listen to the evidence and develop
a clear picture of what each party thinks happened.
• During this part of the hearing a judge is starting to “see” the incident and determine which rules might apply.
26Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Questions by Judges• Should be limited to helping to
determine which rule applied as the situation developed
• Should be to determine how credible a person’s evidence is about what happened during the incident.
27Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Witnesses• The jury must hear all witnesses
called by the parties.• It can be helpful when one of the
crew gives a different story to the others.
• It can also be an unnecessary lengthening of the proceedings.
• Keep witnesses strictly to the point• Gather the necessary evidence
quickly without giving offence.
28Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Finding Facts• Start with facts not in dispute• Resolve differences• Take additional testimony if in doubt• Draft facts found• Test:
Do the facts found permit someone who did not hear the testimony to reconstruct the incident?
29Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Deliberations
Protest Committee should:• Weigh all testimony with equal care
• Recognize that honest testimony can vary, and even be in conflict, as a result of different observations and recollections
• Resolve such differences as best it can
30Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Deliberations
Protest Committee should: • Recognize that no boat or
competitor is guilty until a breach of a rule has been established to the satisfaction of the protest committee
• Keep an open mind until all of the evidence has been heard
31Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
The Decision• The decision will be to conclude:
– That no rule was broken and dismiss the protest.
– That a boat broke a rule and she is to be disqualified.
32Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
The Decision• A boat who broke a rule is
disqualified except when:– She was compelled to break a rule by the
actions of another boat breaking a rule;– Other penalties are provided for in the
SIs;– A right-of-way boat, or a boat with the
right to room, broke rule 14 but caused no damage;
– Rule 36, Races Restarted or Resailed, applies;
– The boat was not racing, except as allowed in Rule 64.1(d)
33Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Announcing the Decision• Recall the parties to the protest.
• Read the facts found, the decision, and the reason for the decision.
• All jury decisions should be brought to the scorers’ attention promptly.
34Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Time fo
r some
Time fo
r some
Mock Protests
Mock Protests and and
another
another Round
Round
Table Discussion
Table Discussion on
on
Protest Hearin
g
Protest Hearin
g
Procedures.
Procedures.
35Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Judges WorkshopJudges Workshop
End of Day 1End of Day 1Day 2 commences at 8:00 AM with coffee and 30 minutes of questions and discussions prior to the Test.
36Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Judges Training Judges Training WorkshopWorkshop
<<dates>>
<<host club>>
Final questions and discussion during morning coffee before test begins.
37Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
New Test FormatNew Test Format
38Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Test InstructionsTest Instructions
• Test Contains Two Parts:• Part A is a set of True/False questions. • Part B contains 10 scenarios. Each scenario has a
diagram, supporting text, and several questions about the scenarios.
• Scoring• Each question in Part A and Part B is worth 1 point,
there are 50 points in Part A and 50 points in Part B. • In Part B students will be awarded NO points in
cases where some, but not ALL, correct answers are circled. Partial points will not be granted.
• A passing score is 85 points or higher.
• Time Limit: 100 Minutes
39Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Test InstructionsTest Instructions
Printed Material Allowed during Test
• Test Booklet
• US SAILING or ISAF Rule Book
• US SAILING Prescriptions
• US SAILING Appeals and ISAF Case Book
• US SAILING Judges Manual (NOT the ISAF IJ manual)
40Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Test InstructionsTest Instructions
• Write your Name and US SAILING # on first page of both Part A and Part B Questions
• Read Test Instructions
• Any Test Format Related Questions?
• Good Luck
41Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
There are less than
minutes remaining
Test Timing InformationTest Timing Information
Test began at: <edit>
Test time limit: 100 Minutes
Press <space> to start timer10
0100 60100 60 45100 60 45
30100 60 45
30 20100 60 45 30
20 10100 60 45 30 20 10
5100 60 45 30 20 10
5 1Done
42Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest Hearing Protest Hearing TechniquesTechniques
43Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest Hearing TechniquesProtest Hearing Techniques
Manage the Personalities Involved
• Chair moderates the hearing• Discourage leading questions• Do not permit statements in place of
questions• Insist on politeness • Show and expect patience
– testimony should be given without interruption
44Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest Hearing TechniquesProtest Hearing Techniques
Principles of Questioning• PC questions as late as
possible• Avoid leading questions• Only questions that help find
the facts• Once a fact is determined do
not ask more questions about those facts.
45Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest Hearing TechniquesProtest Hearing Techniques
Questioning Technique• What rule might apply to this
incident??
• What are the boats obligations under those rules?
• What facts are needed to determine whether the boats met these obligations?
• What questions will help establish those facts?
46Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Leading QuestionsA question in the form of a statement inviting agreement
– Straightforward leading questions– Presuppositions– Multiple choice questions– Language that supports a position
Protest Hearing TechniquesProtest Hearing Techniques
47Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest Hearing TechinquesProtest Hearing Techinques
Hints for Taking Notes
Protestor Protestee1. Both boats on
starboard1. Agree
2. Bow 11 on inside
2. Agree
3. Bow 44 on outside
3. Agree
4. Bow 11 had overlap at zone.
4. Disagree
• Note facts stated by each party
• Match up agreeing facts
• Match up holes or disagreements
48Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest HearingsProtest Hearings
Another Approach For Taking Notes
Protestor Rules1.Both boats on
starboard downwind
11, 17? (how o/lap created?)
2.As approach mark, Bow 11 windward, inside
18 on, 11 off, 18.4? proper course?
3.Bow 44 leeward, outside
11, 16, 17
4.Bow 11 had overlap at zone.
18.2(b)? Last certainty?
• Note facts stated by a party
• Jot down applicable rules
• Note questions & facts needed to ascertain if a boat broke what rules
49Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Individuals Describe Events Differently
• This variability makes a difference in how well people express their recall of an event in a protest hearing.
• Not all parties will write a good description or draw a good diagram.
• Deficiencies in expressing evidence should not be automatically taken as poor recall or poor situational awareness. The deficit could reflect instead a limitation in a persons ability to express himself.
Protest Hearing TechniquesProtest Hearing Techniques
50Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Cautions in Evaluating Evidence• Juries can make judgments about
the credibility of evidence based on style and presentation of evidence.
• Witnesses who express their opinions confidently are often given more weight than someone who is less forceful and less believable.
Protest Hearing TechniquesProtest Hearing Techniques
51Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest Hearing TechniquesProtest Hearing Techniques
Facts verses Conclusions• Facts: simple declarative
statements
• Avoid complex sentences
• Prefer quantitative adjectives instead of qualitative adjectives
• Don’t mix: – Facts and conclusions– Facts with interpretations
52Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Finding Facts
One way to determine whether something is a fact or not is to use the “home video rule - if the action can be seen in a video, it is fact.”
– “Boat A altered her course when she was one boat length away” is a fact.
– “Boat B intended to luff” or “the boats were about five feet apart” are not facts.
– “Boat C was prevented from sailing a close hauled course by the presence of boat D” or “the boats were more than eight feet apart” are facts.
Protest Hearing TechniquesProtest Hearing Techniques
53Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Another break for
Another break for
me and another
me and another
Mock Protest
Mock Protest for for
you.you.
54Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Facts / Conclusions / Facts / Conclusions /
DecisionDecision
ExerciseExercise
55Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Exercise Fact vs ConclusionExercise Fact vs Conclusion
Facts vs Conclusions - Part 1 Circle “F” if the statement is a Fact, or “C” if the statement is a conclusion:
F C Jack and Jill were both sailing Lasers.
F C Jill testified that she hailed "protest" loudly within a reasonable period of time and displayed a red flag.
F C The protest is valid.
F C Jill said the wind was approximately 8 knots and Jack said it was 6 knots.
F C About one minute before the starting signal, both boats were on a beam reach on starboard tack four boat lengths below the middle of the starting line with Jack clear astern of Jill.
F C Jack was sailing faster than Jill and sailed into a leeward overlap position.
F C At the time the overlap was established, Jack gave Jill adequate room to keep clear.
F C Both boats sailed overlapped on parallel courses four feet apart for approximately 15 seconds.
F C At that point, Jack changed course sharply to windward, sailing from a beam reach to ten degrees above close-hauled.
F C Jill testified that she immediately pushed her tiller hard to leeward and trimmed her sail, but contact occurred less than two seconds after Jack's change of course.
F C Jack did not give Jill room to keep clear.
F C The collision caused serious damage to Jack’s boat.
F C There was a scratch approximately 30 centimeters long on the port rail of Jill's boat approximately one meter from the transom.
56Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Facts/Conclusions/DecisionFacts/Conclusions/Decision
Facts vs Conclusions - Part 2 • Incident involves three boats
rounding a leeward mark• Reorder into a proper written
decision containing sections on: Facts Found, Conclusions, Decision.
• May have to add a missing fact to support conclusions and decision. May want to split statements if they are a mix of fact and conclusion.
57Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Facts/Conclusions/DecisionFacts/Conclusions/Decision
1. Boat B rounded clear astern of Boat A
2. The current was slack and not a factor.
3. Boat A and Boat B were overlapped bow to bow
4. Boat A, who had not come from clear astern, was to leeward of Boat B
5. All the boats were J24s
6. Boat C, who was clear astern of A & B at the two boat length zone, sailed directly to the leeward mark and rounded the mark approximately three meters ahead of Boat A
7. Boat B was keeping clear of Boat A
8. Boat A continued sailing on starboard tack until well past her proper course to the next mark before gybing to round the mark.
9. Boats A, B, and C were all on a starboard tack broad reach approaching the leeward mark, which was to be left to port.
10. Boat A broke rule 18.4 and is disqualified.
11. There was no contact between any of the boats.
12. When Boat A entered the two boat length zone, she was the right of way boat.
13. The wind was SW at 10 knots.
14. Boat C was approximately one-half boat length clear astern of Boats A & B.
15. Boat C did not break a rule.
16. Boat B immediately hailed “protest” to both A and C and flew her red flag within an adequate amount of time.
58Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Facts/Conclusions/DecisionFacts/Conclusions/Decision
Suggested Protest Decision FACTS FOUND1) All the boats were J-24's [5]. The wind was SW at 10 knots
[13]. The current was slack [2].
2) Boats A, B, and C were all on a starboard tack broad reach approaching the leeward mark, which was to be left to port [9].
3) At the two boat length zone, Boat A was to leeward of Boat B and they were overlapped bow to bow [3*]. Boat C was approximately one-half boat length clear astern of Boats A & B [14].
4) A continued sailing on starboard tack until her stern was over 1 BL beyond the mark before gybing to round the mark [8*] .
5) C sailed directly to the leeward mark and rounded the mark approximately 3 meters ahead of A [6*].
6) B rounded clear astern of A [1].
7) There was no contact between any of the boats [11].
59Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Facts/Conclusions/DecisionFacts/Conclusions/Decision
Suggested Protest Decision CONCLUSIONS AND RULES THAT APPLY1) When A entered the 2 BL zone, she had right of way
over both B (rule 11) and C (rule 12) [12*].
2) B was required to keep clear of A by rule 11 and was required by rule 18.2(b) to give A room to round the mark, and she did so [7*].
3) C was required by rules 12 and 18.2(c) to keep clear of A and B, and she did so [15*].
4) While A was right of way and entitled to room, she was also obligated by rule 18.4 to sail no further than her proper course before she gybed. By sailing a full boat length past the mark, she sailed well past her proper course and in doing so broke rule 18.4 [12*].
60Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Facts/Conclusions/DecisionFacts/Conclusions/Decision
Suggested Protest Decision DECISION
1) A is disqualified for breaking rule 18.4 [10].
NOTE: Statement 16 was dropped. It is really part of the protest validity not part of the protest decision.
61Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
RedressRedress
62Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
RedressRedress
• Redress is a corrective mechanism
• Boats cannot protest the RC, PC or OA [RRS 60.1(a) “boat”]
• Boats can request redress [RRS 60.1(b)]
63Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
RedressRedress
Validity – [RRS 62.2]• Must be in writing, and meet a time
limit– The protest time limit or two hours
after the incident, whichever is later– Can be extended (“…shall be
extended ...If there is good reason to do so.”)
• No protest flag required
• No hail required
64Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
RedressRedress
Qualifying for Redress • Score made significantly worse in a
race or series, and
• Through no fault of her own, and
• For one of the reasons listed in rule 62.1
65Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
RedressRedress
Only Acceptable Reasons• Improper action or omission of the
RC, PC or OA
• Injury or physical damage by boat breaking a Part 2 rule
• Giving help under RRS 1.1
• A boat penalized under Rule 2 or disciplined under Rule 69.1(b)
66Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
RedressRedress
PC Requirements• Redress cannot be granted without
a hearing [RRS 63.1]• PC must make as fair an
arrangement as possible for all boats concerned [RRS 64.2]
• PC must consider all boats affected, whether or not they requested redress [RRS 64.2]
67Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
RedressRedress
Fair Arrangements• Scoring adjustments in Rule A10
– Position @ last mark– Time adjustment– Average points
• Fairest arrangement may be to do nothing
• Abandon race – last resort
68Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Another
Another Mock Mock
Protest
Protest! This ! This
one concerning
one concerning
redress.
redress.
69Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
70Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Arbitration• Process of resolving protests
without the formality of a full protest hearing.
• Arbitration is voluntary on the part of the sailors
• Short meeting between the sailors involved in a protest and an experienced judge serving as the arbitrator.
Protest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
71Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Purpose of Arbitration• Speed up the protest process
• Give sailors a chance to take a less severe penalty than DSQ when they realize they have broken a rule
Protest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
72Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Arbitration Penalty• Status is the same as an alternative penalty
taken on the water
• If the penalty is too high, the protestee will not accept it and if the penalty is too low the protestor is reluctant to agree to arbitration.
• Amount of penalty– Should be more than an alternative
penalty taken on the water– Should be less than DSQ– A penalty in the 30% to 40% range works
well
Protest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
73Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
Principles of Arbitration• Not in the RRS, requires
authorization in the NOR and SIs• Only used for protests where:
– The incident is limited to the rules of Part 2
– The incident involves two boats only– There was no contact that caused
injury or serious damage
74Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
Arbitration Occurs• After a protest is delivered and
before a protest hearing
• With only the parties and the arbitrator participating
• No witnesses
75Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
Arbitration Hearing
• Arbitrator explains the process
• Arbitrator investigates validity
• Brief statements from parties
• Questions from parties (optional)
• Questions from arbitrator
76Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
Arbitration ConclusionAfter hearing the evidence, the arbitrator recommends:
• Withdrawing the protest (if it is invalid or if no boat broke a rule), or
• Alternative penalties (if some boat broke a rule), or
• Referral to the PC (if the situation is unclear)
77Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
A Party to the Arbitration• May accept the arbitrator’s
recommendation, in which case the protest is withdrawn
• May proceed to the PC for a hearing
• A party that has accepted an alternative penalty cannot be penalized further
78Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Protest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
Arbitrators• Highly qualified and experienced
judge with a strong command of the rules
• Must think and make a decision quickly with limited analysis – An excellent deliberative judge
may not make the best arbitrator• Cannot participate as PC member in
a hearing on the same matter
79Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Arbitration ExerciseArbitration Exercise
80Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Arbitration ExerciseArbitration Exercise
Incident • Boats are Snipes
• Wind is about 6 knots
• Incident occurs half-way up second beat
• No other boats in the vicinity
• Green protests, alleging that red broke RRS 17.1
81Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Arbitration ExerciseArbitration Exercise
82Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Arbitration ExerciseArbitration Exercise
GREEN'S VERSION:• I had been on starboard for at
least 5 boat-lengths
• I saw RED approaching on port tack, and knew that I could cross in front of him, which I did (#2)
• I tacked onto port, to windward of RED (#3)
• After I was close hauled on port, RED luffed up (#4)
• RED clearly sailed above her proper course
• As soon as RED luffed I hailed "protest" (#4)
RED'S VERSION:
• I had been on port for at least 10 boat-lengths
• I saw GREEN approaching
• I didn't think he could cross in front of me, but he did
• He tacked right on my air, so I luffed up to try to force him to tack away (#4)
• I didn't want to hit him, so I bore away when my port bow was within one foot of the end of his boom (#5)
83Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Other ProceduresOther ProceduresProtest ArbitrationProtest Arbitration
Arbitration Exercise
What is your decision?•Penalty?•No Penalty?•Go to full hearing?
84Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Misconduct HearingsMisconduct Hearings
85Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Misconduct HearingsMisconduct Hearings
Why new emphasis?
• USOC/Ted Stevens requirements
• Hearings are rare enough, few maintain expertise by experience
• However, it’s VITAL that these hearings be done correctly when they are necessary
• New 2009 RRS changes to Rule 69
86Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
USOC/Ted Stevens Act USOC/Ted Stevens Act
• US law that aims to protect the rights of athletes and ensure the athlete’s voice is heard.
• Puts extra requirements on any hearing that can affect the right of an athlete to compete.
• US SAILING as governing body of Olympic sport – REQUIRED to obey
87Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
USOC/Ted Stevens ActUSOC/Ted Stevens Act
Athlete “Rights”• Athletes have right to file USOC grievance
when eligibility to compete is challenged.
• Resolved by binding arbitration – regardless of sailing’s existing appeals/review board process.
• Arbitration hearings not run under the RRS, have financial and legal risks to US SAILING.
• US SAILING can minimize risk by ensuring hearings involving eligibility done right.
88Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
USOC/Ted Stevens ActUSOC/Ted Stevens Act
How USOC/Ted StevensHow USOC/Ted Stevensaffects rule 69 hearings?affects rule 69 hearings?
• Parties have right to counsel
• Notification of hearing needs to include possible penalties
• Parties have right to get a record of the hearing
89Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Allegations of Gross Misconduct - RRS Allegations of Gross Misconduct - RRS 6969
• Rule 69 is a procedural rule, and is not “broken”
• Rule 69.1 addresses behavior of competitors, not boats• Only competitors can be penalized
by the PC in a rule 69 hearing
• Rule 69.2 (a) addresses other people, including coaches
90Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Let’s look at 69.1(a)Let’s look at 69.1(a)
““When a protest committee, from its When a protest committee, from its own observation or a report received own observation or a report received from from any sourceany source,,
believes that a believes that a competitorcompetitor may have may have committed committed
a a grossgross breach of a breach of a rulerule, , good good manners manners or or sportsmanshipsportsmanship, , or or
may have brought the may have brought the sport into sport into disrepute, disrepute,
it it maymay call a hearing.” call a hearing.”
91Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Informing the competitorInforming the competitor
from 69.1(a): “The protest committee shall promptly inform the competitor in writing of the alleged misconduct and of the time and place of the hearing.”
Also must include: possible penalties, see sample letter in 2009 Judges Manual
92Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Rule 69 Overall AdviceRule 69 Overall Advice
• Approach with care and deliberation• RE-READ rule 69, Appendix M, and
currentUS Judges Manuals carefully
• Tempers often flare, important for PC toset a moderate tone
• Consult other veteran judges • The Review Board’s Ombudsman is
available for advice (see ussailing.org/raceadmin)
93Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Confidentiality is Confidentiality is important!important!
• Athlete’s reputation is at stake.
• Consider proceedings confidential until full process is complete.
• Process can be long and frustrating.
• Incident is still “open” until Review Board and perhaps ISAF complete their follow-up activities.
94Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Sailor’s right to be presentSailor’s right to be present
CHANGED in 2009• 69.1(a): If sailor has good reason they cannot
attend, hearing must be re-scheduled.
• 69.1(e): If cannot schedule hearing such that sailor could reasonably attend, cannot hold hearing.
• 69.1(d): If sailor does not attend and does not provide a good reason, PC may still hold a hearing.
• 69.1(e) If PC does not hold a hearing, it can still investigate and make a report to MNA. Can ONLY penalize with valid hearing.
95Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
BOTTOM LINE: Missing BOTTOM LINE: Missing competitorcompetitor
• Try harder than in a normal hearing to schedule it so that sailor can attend.
• Conduct hearing without sailor present only if you are reasonably certain that sailor could have attended and chose not to do so.
• If sailor not present, and you do report to US SAILING (with or without 69 hearing), include information on steps taken to allow/encourage sailor to attend.
96Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Hearing processHearing process
• Most RRS hearing procedure rules apply:• 63.2 (time to prepare), • 63.3(a) (right to hear evidence,
witness limitations), • 63.4 (interested party) and • 63.6 (taking evidence and finding
facts)
• Be rigorous in following these!!!!!!
97Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Additional hearing Additional hearing requirementsrequirements
USOC/Ted Stevens
• Sailors have right to counsel
• Right to a record of hearing, consider• Dedicated veteran scribe to take notes• Audio recording of the hearing
• With audio – make it a good one• check batteries, do sound check, have
each person introduce themselves
98Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Gross MisconductGross Misconduct
Hearing Penalties • PC can issue a warning or penalize,
such as– Exclude a competitor, or– Disqualify a boat (DNE) from one or
more races
• Can penalize only within its jurisdiction
• Must send a report of any penalty to the national authority(s)
99Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Guidance on Penalites, 1Guidance on Penalites, 1
• Appropriate penalty will vary based on:• severity of the incident• attitude of the sailor• if the offence is repeated• other aggravating or mitigating
circumstances
• BUT consistency in penalties for similar breeches is also important.
• Consider the following levels…
100Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Guidance on PenaltiesGuidance on Penalties
Level 0Level 0Level 0Level 0
Level 1Level 1Level 1Level 1
Level 2Level 2Level 2Level 2
Level 3Level 3Level 3Level 3
Level 4Level 4Level 4Level 4
Level 5Level 5Level 5Level 5
Interview with competitor, no Interview with competitor, no hearinghearing
Interview with competitor, no Interview with competitor, no hearinghearing
Warning, but no penaltyWarning, but no penaltyWarning, but no penaltyWarning, but no penalty
Increase boat’s points score in a Increase boat’s points score in a race / seriesrace / series
Increase boat’s points score in a Increase boat’s points score in a race / seriesrace / series
Disqualify boat or exclude Disqualify boat or exclude competitor from race or racescompetitor from race or races
Disqualify boat or exclude Disqualify boat or exclude competitor from race or racescompetitor from race or races
Disqualify boat /exclude competitor Disqualify boat /exclude competitor from eventfrom event
Disqualify boat /exclude competitor Disqualify boat /exclude competitor from eventfrom event
Disqualify boat /exclude competitor Disqualify boat /exclude competitor from event and recommend further from event and recommend further
action by US SAILINGaction by US SAILING
Disqualify boat /exclude competitor Disqualify boat /exclude competitor from event and recommend further from event and recommend further
action by US SAILINGaction by US SAILING
101Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Guidance on penalties, Guidance on penalties, cont…cont…
Breaking a rule that is sufficiently serious, or behavior Breaking a rule that is sufficiently serious, or behavior such that normal penalty may be inadequate such that normal penalty may be inadequate
Breaking a rule that is sufficiently serious, or behavior Breaking a rule that is sufficiently serious, or behavior such that normal penalty may be inadequate such that normal penalty may be inadequate
Intentionally disobeying a reasonable request of the organizing Intentionally disobeying a reasonable request of the organizing authority or its officialsauthority or its officials
Intentionally disobeying a reasonable request of the organizing Intentionally disobeying a reasonable request of the organizing authority or its officialsauthority or its officials
Foul language: intended to offend, or inappropriate for occasion / Foul language: intended to offend, or inappropriate for occasion / locationlocation
Foul language: intended to offend, or inappropriate for occasion / Foul language: intended to offend, or inappropriate for occasion / locationlocation
Abuse of officialsAbuse of officialsAbuse of officialsAbuse of officials
Level 0Level 0Level 0Level 0 Level 1Level 1Level 1Level 1 Level 2Level 2Level 2Level 2 Level 3Level 3Level 3Level 3 Level 4Level 4Level 4Level 4 Level 5Level 5Level 5Level 5
102Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
More serious penalties…More serious penalties…
Level 0Level 0Level 0Level 0 Level 1Level 1Level 1Level 1 Level 2Level 2Level 2Level 2 Level 3Level 3Level 3Level 3 Level 4Level 4Level 4Level 4 Level 5Level 5Level 5Level 5
Repeating the same measurement Repeating the same measurement offence with intentoffence with intent
Repeating the same measurement Repeating the same measurement offence with intentoffence with intent
Bullying, intimidating or discriminatory Bullying, intimidating or discriminatory behavior against another competitorbehavior against another competitor
Bullying, intimidating or discriminatory Bullying, intimidating or discriminatory behavior against another competitorbehavior against another competitor
Lying in a protest committee hearingLying in a protest committee hearingLying in a protest committee hearingLying in a protest committee hearing
Fighting and physical assaultsFighting and physical assaultsFighting and physical assaultsFighting and physical assaults
Theft, damage or abuse of propertyTheft, damage or abuse of propertyTheft, damage or abuse of propertyTheft, damage or abuse of property
103Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Gross Misconduct – Follow-Gross Misconduct – Follow-upup
• All penalties must be reported to US SAILING• Prepare written report promptly and
carefully• Send report to US SAILING c/o Review Board
• US SAILING Review Board may • Investigate and recommend additional
penalties to US SAILING Board of Directors
• US SAILING gives additional penalties, they report to ISAF
• ISAF may suspend competitor’s eligibility under Regulation 19
104Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Appeals of Rule 69 hearingsAppeals of Rule 69 hearings
• Appeals requirements same for PC
• Appeals of rule 69 hearings handled directly by US Appeals (not Association Appeals)
• US SAILING considering prescription to always allow rule 69 hearings to be appealed
• Appeal is handled first, before US SAILING Review Board investigations/followon action
105Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
International Follow UpInternational Follow Up
• If party is not from US, report also goes to MNA of party.
• If international jury appointed, they also report to ISAF (in addition to relevant MNA)
106Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
USOC/Ted Stevens USOC/Ted Stevens ArbitrationArbitration
• While possible, very rare
• Applies when sailor’s right to compete is threatened:• rule 69 action in qualifiers• rule 69 action resulting in suspension of
right to compete
• Can run on VERY fast timeline
• Can happen regardless of appealability
107Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
LastLast Round Table Round Table Discussion Discussion to cover to cover anything we forgot.anything we forgot.
108Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Judges Training WorkshopJudges Training Workshop
Workshop EvaluationWorkshop Evaluation
Please complete the evaluation form in your student notebook. Your comments will help the Judge Training and Testing Working Party (JTTWP) continue to improve our programs.
109Presented by the US SAILING Judges Committee
(revised February 2009)
© 2009 US SAILING – All rights reserved.
Staying up-to-date
US SAILING Race Administration website:– http://www.ussailing.org/raceadmin– Links to several useful sub-sites: Judges, Racing
Rules (latest prescriptions), Appeals (new US appeals), Race Management
US SAILING Judges website:– http://www.ussailing.org/judges– Information and forms on Judges Program– See “Links and Documents”
International Sailing Federation:– http://www.sailing.org– Watch “Recent Postings” section on right– “Rules” menu on top menu bar– Latest Cases, Q&A, IJ seminars and workshops all
online