Rule 69 in a club race

O

OliLaser

Guest
Was sailing last night on a keel boat another boat tacked in front of me and forced me to sail above closehauled within 3 boats and i was fetching. I told him protest and that i was above an f ing closehauled coure I also called him a big baby becasue he said rules 69 when i said the f word. to put things in perspective I am 18 and he is 45+ now I am protested under rule 69 for swearing ? any thoughts
 
Happened to me. You gotta be careful, some people take the game faaaaar to seriously. Just brush it off, its a club race.
 
You are probably guilty of a R. 69 breach, depending on the norms of the club in which you were racing. I would go to the hearing and be honest about what you said, explain your frustration with the other boat having fouled you, apologize and be as nice as you can be. It should either get dismissed, or at worst I think you would get a warning. I don't see many other choices. Good luck.
 
Nobody except a Protest Committee can initiate a protest under rule 69. However, you can be protested under rule 2, Fair Sailing, as swearing can, and often should, be considered verbal intimidation to gain an unfair advantage.

Obviously, you should have just said "Protest!" then zipped it. You can expect to be hauled into "The Room", apologize, and accept a score of DNE. Your sincere apology will probably prevent the PC from initiating a rule 69 hearing.
 
The Protest Committee can initiate a Rule 69 hearing also upon receiving a report of the alleged infraction; RRS 69.1(a).

And please, don't brush the incident off, OliLaser; rather, try to learn from your 'mistake'.
 
Whatever man.

You said it in the heat of the moment. My opinion is that unless that guy can honestly say he has never cursed at someone during a "heat of the moment" situation, he should just let it go.

Mind you, you should have just hailed protest and then said nothing else.

I wouldn't stress over it.

Actually, you didn't even really swear at him. I mean, you did, but not really, you know? If all you said was: "I was above a f****** close hauled course" and not something like: "You're a f****** idiot", then yeah, he is being a pretty big baby.

Just brush it off. He was probably looking for something to counter the fact that you were beating him and then hailed protest when he fouled you.

By calling him a baby, you were only telling the truth.
 
All sounds a bit OTT to me - I mean bringing in Rule 69 for a swear word.

However, "Seems a pity he did not hear you properly as you said Fracking (bit like on Battlestar Galactica 'cos they cannot use the F word on prime time TV so use something that is not the F word but ...). If he cannot hear you properly then it is hardly your fault"

In practice it sounds like the sort of threat somebody might make when they have done wrong and don't want to do a 720 and don't want to retire and so, by threatening you back with something more hope you will back down from your own protest. Basically trying to bully you out of pursuing it.

I have only once had a protest committee invoke a rule 69 hearing against me and it gets kind of formal. The problem started when, after a collision, at the protest hearing the other boat skipper just lied about what happened at the mark. I did not accuse him of lying, but the protest committee decided one or other of us was lying and they considered that Rule 69 worthy (against both of us !!). They immediately adjourned the hearing. As the other skipper said there was a boat rounding outside both of us, the hearing was adjourned until the following week when the other skipper wanted to get the other boat crew in. Following week Rule 69 hearing started, witness crew called in, told it the way it happened (as I had been telling the Protest Committee i.e. they agreed that I had rights and other boat could and should have taken avoiding action) at which point the Protest Committee backed down, dropped the Rule 69 issues and decided to penalise us both for the original incident (despite the witness bearing out my own story). The "political" problems they faced was that the boat we had been hit by was a military boat (Royal Navy - we were in larger boats not Lasers) which meant that crew had several days paperwork whatever (same bureaucracy as e.g. running an aircraft carrier onto rocks). When somebody invokes Rule 69 against you it does get kind of worrying as the consequences of it being upheld can be quite severe. However, so are the requirements on the protest committee.

If you've read my waffle and got this far, did:
1. For a Rule 69 hearing the incident must involve GROSS breaks of rules, sportmanship, etc.
2. The Protest Committee notfy you in writing of the Rule 69 action (they have to notify you promptly after they have received the report of an incident). Only a Protest Committee can call a hearing under Rule 69 - anybody can report an incident to the protest committee but they have to decide whether or not to call a hearing.

Then, they can do nothing or warn you (which is a slapped wrist and does not even penalise you in the race - no disqualification, no time penalty) or invoke a penalty. If they invoke a penalty (e.g. disqualify you, ban you from races, etc.) they get into more work as, for any penalty at all they have to start notifying the National Authority about the incident and you get the right to appeal, etc., etc. (and what are the chances of that happening !!). That is how I have always understood Rule 69 anyway.

Of course one should never swear at another competitor, or show any emotion that could be interpreted as being ..... but we live in the real world and it is a competitive sport and on occasions an inappropriate word might slip out. To the other helm I would say "If you can't stand the heat stay out of the fire". The other skipper in you have the incident with kind of annoys me as it is being so OTT. If the trend continues we will soon be getting protests "because he looked at me in a strange way" or "he shouted starboard in an aggressive manner" ...

If it was me I would protest him for the incident (assuming he was in the wrong and did not do 720's and I could be bothered - which means by the end of the leg I would have forgotten about it all) and call his bluff about the Rule 69. When you sail incidents happen. Don't get wound-up about is as we do it for fun and getting in a stew about is makes it no fun.

The aspect of getting people worried can also be a trick some competitive types may use to improve their results. On the water, if they start to get you thinking about a rule 69 protest, you will probably be going through what happened in your head, trying to remember the details of Rule 69, what the penalties might be, etc., etc. which means you are not thinking about the race which means you will quickly drop back through the fleet. On the water, when an incident happens (which it will), act if you must (e.g. 360/720) but then forget about it and get on with the race. Then after the race apologise, protest, fill in the insurance claim form whatever.

Ian

Oh, and if the Protest Committee do go through a rule 69 hearing I would change clubs. e.g. Boxing club and 45+ goes into the ring - objection; he tried to hit me, behaved in an aggressive manner, etc. There are bigger issues in the sport than even a club protest committee getting tangled up in rule 69 over a f word.
 
You should ahve jumped on his boat , shoved him in the water and turned it the right direction....then stood for a bit pounding your chest and screaming" I am the man!!!."

...then simply stepped onto your own boat and sailed off screaming and jumping up and down.

if sailors don't soon learn to do stuff like that, we will never be as popular as the WWF.

Oh yeah..get a spandex costume and a manager in a tastless suit before your go to that hearing
 
69 doesn't apply, IMHO. Rule 2 is a stretch, since the applicable Appeal is about a 30+ adult intimidating a 16 or so year old, not the opposite.

Did you say Protest, then file? If not, you really screwed up. Assuming he fouled you, not fileing tends to look bad. In addition, any trip to the ROOM is a 50-50 deal, no matter how it actually went on the water. Ask any experience sailor.

Procedures matter, such as the "P" word, flag if over 19', etc. Filing under the wrong rule, such as 69, doesn't exonerate anyone, as I recall. Any valid hearing opens the parties to whatever rule may eventually apply. But, 17+ "F" words, but no "P" words, and you don't have a valid protest!

"F" words to a 45 yr old American male? Well, not too bad. To a Brit? Probably less. To a boat full of kids, owned by a 45 yr. old? Hmmmm....

Did he do circles? Then protest? If so, then it's over, I'd say.

Otherwise, get used to close lee bows at the WM or whatever. The new 3 Boat rule just makes the whole game a bit more vague than it was.

BTW, the "F" word doesn't appear in the rule book, and is seriously discouraged in College racing, and above. So, lose it. I personally love throwing Rule numbers out. That always get's them thinking, usually enough to let me roll them and be gone.

Also, when you get a chance to do some beer can PHRF race on a keel boat, then I'd assume the other boat......
 
Whagt s this F word?
Freedom?
Foul?
Fantastic?
Flame?
Figure?
Fall?
Fling?

So may onptions!!!

I think anybody who uses the term F word has serious mental problem.

I believe the word you describe is a slang word for to botch or bungle and is often used with up.

it is also a great word extender, modifier, and etc.

Somebody needs to grow up and it isn;'t the young guy.

Certainly teh knucklehead on teh boat got cussed out. he fouled and ruined somebody else's race.

UH...foul language?? When else do you sue it but when somebody FOULS???

There is a reason they call it sailor language!!
 
I think anybody who uses the term F word has serious mental problem.

lol, well, the "F" word that I referred to was certainly not "Fred"!

My point was, and it may have been too subtle, that unless the "P" word is used, meaning "PROTEST", then no future protest is possible, due to limitations on the procedures of protesting under the rules. Specifically, the word PROTEST is required, independent of whatever other words may have been used.

It's interesting that you can point out my lack of using the word F***, without using the word F***. Well done, "F"red. :)

Al Russell
182797
 
There has been at least one competitor that has been given a 2 year ban for using the F word in the context of "get that F boat out of my way" to a judge boat which was preventing the competitor from tacking.

That said, only a protest committee can lodge a Rule 69 protest, but they can initiate that upon information provided to them. So the protest by the competitor is invalid, but that does not prevent the protest committee from initating their own protest. It also appears that you failed to lodge a valid protest for the sailing incident, which the protest committee can also initate a protest upon them being made aware of the situation.

On how all the above is described, if I was on a protest committee where this information was presented, I'd seriously consider initiating a protest against both competitors. Firstly, tacking inside the 3 boat lengths is dangerous when in the vicinity of other boats and needs to be stamped out, second your verbal behaviour and aggression following the incident is unacceptable and also needs to be stamped out, finally you also failed to lodge a valid protest as did the other competitor. Whilst someone said that the other skipper was trying to intimidate you, I'd say the reverse with you calling him a big baby, I have less of an issue over the use of the F word when in the context used.

I'd be more tempted to blow both of you from the race and for simplicity I'd do it over the tacking incident and lack of a valid protest, rather than the more messy (from the perspective of the official requirements involved) rule 69 incident.

If you lodge a protest you stand a 50/50 chance of surviving. If a protest is lodged against you, you chances of surviving drops to 33%. It's better to avoid getting into the situation in the first place or doing your turns (and then protesting if you feel you were in the right).
 
Since we are now in the "what would I do with the two ninnies..." mode..
I know exactly what I would do and I have done it.....

I would take both offenders aside and try to explain this is a game. it is supposed to be fun. There are rules. People get upset when they are competing. there is acceptable behavior and stupid dumbass behavior.

each person is well aware he played outside the rules or reacted like a ninny. ..or both...

Since both showed the ability to be unsportsmanlike..but both have already shown a big interest in sailing, , I would suggest they become best friends, play the sailing agme as the sportsmen they know how to be, and enjoy the rest of their lives.

If I were the judge in the protest room?? the hearing would not last long...

My first attempt would be to get both parties to blow of any official action and act like sportsmen and solve the issue between them...and never ever let it happen again.

If after continued attempts to get the two parties to act like adult sportsmen, I would recommend they get the hell out of the sport...then I would get up and walk out before I punched one or both of them.

People who insist on uing the "cops" when rational adults could easily solve the problem really irritate me.

Somebody else would have to preside over any hearing two nutcases like that would want to have held.

Which is exactly why I don't go to protest hearings anymore.

Protest hearings are generally caused by idiots. and always presided over by people who have better things to do with their lives.

The race aleady happened and no hearing will ever add to the fun I already had



I have plenty of pickle dishes and never will find enough time to hang out with my friends.

.
 
... Whilst someone said that the other skipper was trying to intimidate you, I'd say the reverse with you calling him a big baby, I have less of an issue over the use of the F word when in the context used.

Not having the rules to hand, I thought Rule 69 used the word Gross (i.e. your offence has to a major and significant). The use of F... or Big Baby is not really Gross (just work on a building site for 20 mins). How many parents have told their 4 year old children they are being "a big baby" and yet Social Services routinely fail to act on this and to my knowledge have never yet taken any children into care due to this "Gross Abuse" and if a 4 year old kid can take it I would hope a 45+ year old can survive without too much therapy.

I'd be more tempted to blow both of you from the race and for simplicity I'd do it over the tacking incident and lack of a valid protest, rather than the more messy (from the perspective of the official requirements involved) rule 69 incident.

Re: your own protest about the tacking "but I thought he did 720 on the next leg". After an incident you cannot be expected to watch every move of the offender. Thus, a Committee initiated protest over a failure to protest would be unproductive. In my experience protest committees like to avoid protests. I had to sit on a protest committee in Cork week one year and one major incident (several boats protesting the race committee) and we all wanted to throw it out even though the Race Committee was technically wrong. Decided desire to go along with the spitit of the sport rather that the technical detail (in the end I seem to remember we found against the Race Committee and awarded the protesting boats some trivial time compensation that changed none of the results).

It is a competitive sport, people get a bit wound-up and after the race is over, it is over. Maybe they shouldn't but it happens and a few exchanged words is an aspect of the sport.

Maybe there are cultural effects happening here. When I lived in France, about 6 months after moving there I was out to dinner on the night the French rejected the EU Constitution - and the arguments. People shouting at each other, arm waving, scary stuff. Then once the discussion was over, everybody best of friends and life goes on. No apologies, no "lets agree to differ", no kisses and make-up. It was just accepted that you can have an argument without needing to be enemies and without the need to resort to physical aggression. Maybe different cultures have different thresholds on these things.

Ian
(Sorry I'm going on on this thread, but it is something I feel strongly about. We can get over-sensitive sometimes.)
 
Not having the rules to hand, I thought Rule 69 used the word Gross (i.e. your offence has to a major and significant). The use of F... or Big Baby is not really Gross (just work on a building site for 20 mins). How many parents have told their 4 year old children they are being "a big baby" and yet Social Services routinely fail to act on this and to my knowledge have never yet taken any children into care due to this "Gross Abuse" and if a 4 year old kid can take it I would hope a 45+ year old can survive without too much therapy.

What's acceptable in one situation is not necessarily acceptable in another. Go tell a police officer or a judge to F' off or that they're a big baby might get a completely different response to what would occur on a building site. From my understanding from discussions with IJ's, ISAF is wanting to move to a zero tolerance on swearing and bad sportsmanship, while I doubt it will ever be policeable, I'm still strongly in favour of seeing the standards of behaviour on and off the water improve in our sport.
 
What's acceptable in one situation is not necessarily acceptable in another. Go tell a police officer or a judge to F' off or that they're a big baby might get a completely different response to what would occur on a building site. From my understanding from discussions with IJ's, ISAF is wanting to move to a zero tolerance on swearing and bad sportsmanship, while I doubt it will ever be policeable, I'm still strongly in favour of seeing the standards of behaviour on and off the water improve in our sport.

I think we are in broad agreement on the issue of sportsmanlike behaviour. I think we differ on where that line be drawn. I tend to think we live in the real world and sometimes people can get a bit frustrated and words slip out. Maybe they shouldn't but it happens, the race goes on and fun can be had by all. To introduce a rule that cannot be policed can only result in inconsistency which is a lot worse than drawing that line is a sensible place. People (most) curse; sometimes at themselves, sometimes at others and sometimes justifiable. Rules have to be practical and enforceable and allow people to have fun. Nobody is hurt or damaged by the occasional swear word. Swearing has little to do with bad sportsmanship (anybody might get irritated when somebody breaks the rules and messes-up their race and expressing that verbally is really not an issue).

With a zero tolerance of swearing I can see where our sport would go - have a club race followed by 3 weeks of protest hearings whilst each utterance is analysed and penalised. America's Cup might take decades in courts to sort things out :)

Ian
 
I'm in full agreeance. Zero tolerance is unpoliceable and should not be invoked. There is a balance, but where it is will always be difficult to determine, both for competitors but also juries. However, the level of sportsmanship has severely dropped in sailing, I suppose it's because of an atitude that there are cattle stations/ranches/farms up for grabs. Gone are the days that you do penalty turns because you thought you might have infringed someone or touched a mark, instead you wait for someone to call protest who you know might protest.

:)
 
There has been at least one competitor that has been given a 2 year ban for using the F word in the context of "get that F boat out of my way" to a judge boat which was preventing the competitor from tacking.

That said, only a protest committee can lodge a Rule 69 protest, but they can initiate that upon information provided to them. So the protest by the competitor is invalid, but that does not prevent the protest committee from initating their own protest. It also appears that you failed to lodge a valid protest for the sailing incident, which the protest committee can also initate a protest upon them being made aware of the situation.

On how all the above is described, if I was on a protest committee where this information was presented, I'd seriously consider initiating a protest against both competitors. Firstly, tacking inside the 3 boat lengths is dangerous when in the vicinity of other boats and needs to be stamped out, second your verbal behaviour and aggression following the incident is unacceptable and also needs to be stamped out, finally you also failed to lodge a valid protest as did the other competitor. Whilst someone said that the other skipper was trying to intimidate you, I'd say the reverse with you calling him a big baby, I have less of an issue over the use of the F word when in the context used.

I'd be more tempted to blow both of you from the race and for simplicity I'd do it over the tacking incident and lack of a valid protest, rather than the more messy (from the perspective of the official requirements involved) rule 69 incident.

If you lodge a protest you stand a 50/50 chance of surviving. If a protest is lodged against you, you chances of surviving drops to 33%. It's better to avoid getting into the situation in the first place or doing your turns (and then protesting if you feel you were in the right).

I am with Alan on this one. Many years ago I used to be a hothead and was always getting myself involved in incidents and occasionally involved in arguments on the water. I appreciate in the heat of a race it can be hard to keep a cool head. Just simply shout 'Protest' and let that be the end of it. Ignore anything they might say and concentrate on sailing the race as fast as you can. You lose more time and distance by arguing the toss on the water because you are distracted from what you should be doing.

I do always call protest if I am infringed and then have a quiet word after the race with the other person. If it cannot be resolved that way then I do follow it through. Purely for my peace of mind that I have got the rules correct.

In my opinion swearing on the water within earshot of other boats whilst racing is a cardinal sin and should be stamped out. There are far too many excuses made for bad and anti-social behaviour. I have called protest on another competitor who was delivering a tirade of expletives to another boat. he did apologise to myself and the other competitor sincerely after the race.

We all agree to be bound by the rules when we sign on to compete.

Just my 2p....
 
I hope you're not including a crew swearing amongst themselves...

I am...but if they are being quiet about it then it is no problem. The lake I sail on you can hear someone shout from the far side on a still day. We also have lots of family and youth members so I feel we should lead by example.

FWIW I do occasionally curse to myself when I have made a silly error (normally resulting in a swim).
 
I am...but if they are being quiet about it then it is no problem. The lake I sail on you can hear someone shout from the far side on a still day. We also have lots of family and youth members so I feel we should lead by example.

FWIW I do occasionally curse to myself when I have made a silly error (normally resulting in a swim).

I guess we'll agree to disagree then.

People have to stop thinking that kids don't know swear words, that it will somehow damage them and cause them to start saying it all the time.

I wonder if anyone scolded any of the Pittsburgh Penguins who swore when they were hoisting the Stanley Cup?

There a few "F*** yeah!" and one or two "F***in' right!"

That was on live TV and I'm sure there were a ton of families watching. I'm also sure no one cared.

End ramble.
 
In my opinion swearing on the water within earshot of other boats whilst racing is a cardinal sin and should be stamped out. There are far too many excuses made for bad and anti-social behaviour.

(Begin ramble - again 'cos I feel strongly about this)
I would disagree on the grounds that this is about sailing and not teaching people and enforcing good language. Maybe we should start getting protests for bad grammar. I go out to sail. I tend not to curse but on occasions I do and in the heat of the moment a bit of language does nobody any harm.

I would also argue that banning bad language in Europe contravenes people's human rights. It effectively discriminates against certain types of disability (e.g. Tourette syndrome). (Maybe you have to live in Europe to get the "Human Rights" thing).

And I know I'm getting stupid here, but so are people who start thinking others should be disqualified for something like uttering a F word. Try not to but keep life in balance and enjoy the sport, even if you do happen to overhear a little language. Get penalised for breaking the rules of sailing (and for Rule 69 is says GROSS). Don't start disqualifying people for their vocabulary - maybe try to discourage it but Rule 69 !! If somebody is OTT - well that applied to life, the person next to you on the train, etc. and has nothing to do with sailing.

I really think if protest hearings started because somebody uttered a swear word at somebody else in frustration - I would give up the sport and it would have become just silly. Loads of other fun things to do where people can be themselves, relax and have fun.

Ian
 
(Begin ramble - again 'cos I feel strongly about this)
I would disagree on the grounds that this is about sailing and not teaching people and enforcing good language. Maybe we should start getting protests for bad grammar. I go out to sail. I tend not to curse but on occasions I do and in the heat of the moment a bit of language does nobody any harm.

I would also argue that banning bad language in Europe contravenes people's human rights. It effectively discriminates against certain types of disability (e.g. Tourette syndrome). (Maybe you have to live in Europe to get the "Human Rights" thing).

And I know I'm getting stupid here, but so are people who start thinking others should be disqualified for something like uttering a F word. Try not to but keep life in balance and enjoy the sport, even if you do happen to overhear a little language. Get penalised for breaking the rules of sailing (and for Rule 69 is says GROSS). Don't start disqualifying people for their vocabulary - maybe try to discourage it but Rule 69 !! If somebody is OTT - well that applied to life, the person next to you on the train, etc. and has nothing to do with sailing.

I really think if protest hearings started because somebody uttered a swear word at somebody else in frustration - I would give up the sport and it would have become just silly. Loads of other fun things to do where people can be themselves, relax and have fun.

Ian

So, if you were a female and someone called you an
"effing stupid c**t"
during a regatta, that would be ok ?

How about if you're the 10 year old opti sailor who is called the:
"effing little pencil d**k"
by a 13 yr old opti sailor ?

What about verbal threatening with /or without swearing.
"If I find you in the boat park, after this race I'll beat the bloody snot of you"
Maybe funny if this is being said to you by some snot nosed pimply teenager and you are the 220 lb mixed martial arts champ, but what if it's the other way around ?
 
So, if you were a female and someone called you an
"effing stupid c**t"
during a regatta, that would be ok ?

How about if you're the 10 year old opti sailor who is called the:
"effing little pencil d**k"
by a 13 yr old opti sailor ?

What about verbal threatening with /or without swearing.
"If I find you in the boat park, after this race I'll beat the bloody snot of you"
Maybe funny if this is being said to you by some snot nosed pimply teenager and you are the 220 lb mixed martial arts champ, but what if it's the other way around ?

Those examples you gave are nowhere close to the context in which 'f***' was used in situation found in the opening post.

They are also the extreme of the scenario. Basically, you used examples not completely pertinent to the thread.

If I'm a MMA champ, what do I care what I say to someone, or someone says to me? If they want to get tough about it, I touch'em with the jab.

How did that even come up? Wehn would you encounter a MMArtist on the race course?
 
Did I end up in Sailing Anarchy somehow?
:confused:

So, because this thread deals with swearing, it somehow only belongs on SA?

I'm sick of people saying that shit on here.

"OMGZ, are I on Sailing Anarchy???"

Oh wait, no. I'll make the 49857389 thread on roll tacking, the 4523456457 on sailing by the lee, the 76855345 thread on hiking pants...You get the idea.

Stop with the Sailing Anarchy whining.
 
Those examples you gave are nowhere close to the context in which 'f***' was used in situation found in the opening post.

They are also the extreme of the scenario. Basically, you used examples not completely pertinent to the thread.

If I'm a MMA champ, what do I care what I say to someone, or someone says to me? If they want to get tough about it, I touch'em with the jab.

How did that even come up? Wehn would you encounter a MMArtist on the race course?

I used examples in line with the comments by Ian as I quoted. As usual the thread drifted off the original poster's issue long ago, but I think it's important for everyone to look at how swearing can be seen as a non-issue and also as grounds for a rule 69 hearing.

People also need to realize that not everyone shares the swearing or verbally intimidating person's viewpoint. What may seem like blowing off steam to them can be seen in a completely different context as my examples show.
 
So, if you were that girl, (or perhaps another competitor who heard her being called that) would you consider filing a protest ?

And why or why not ?
 
So, if you were that girl, (or perhaps another competitor who heard her being called that) would you consider filing a protest ?

And why or why not ?

If I was another competitor, I would do nothing.

If she wants to file a protest, I'm sure she will, but if she doesn't care enough to file a protest, why should I?

I wouldn't anyway. Not my business, so I'm not getting involved.
 
So, if you were a female and someone called you an
"effing stupid c**t"
during a regatta, that would be ok ?

How about if you're the 10 year old opti sailor who is called the:
"effing little pencil d**k"
by a 13 yr old opti sailor ?

What about verbal threatening with /or without swearing.
"If I find you in the boat park, after this race I'll beat the bloody snot of you"
Maybe funny if this is being said to you by some snot nosed pimply teenager and you are the 220 lb mixed martial arts champ, but what if it's the other way around ?

Virtually everything is life is a continuum. You can always come up with something slightly worse (or slightly better) and all such "but what ifs" do is to discuss the position of the line. One thing you can say is that one example is "trivial" (e.g. saying f***) and something else is unacceple (e.g. "If I find you in the boat park, after this race I'll beat the bloody snot of you")and thus that the line is somewhere between the two. Exactly where will be different for different people. Coming up with "what ifs" does not really add anything as we can come up with such forever and never make progress.

For example, "If I find you in the boat park, after this race I'll beat the bloody snot of you" is to my mind acceptable use of a swear word (bloody - hardly a desperately offensive word). It is not the language that is unacceptable but the direct threat.

Maybe one needs to distinguish between swearing (bad language through e.g frustration) and abuse/threats. I personally think the examples you gave represent abuse - which to my mind is something different from swearing.

As in many aspects in life we have to stand on our own two feet. It is a sad person who has to keep running to hide behind the rules every time somebody says something they don't like. You cannot legislate for every phrase in every situation and spoken tone that people might use. Common sense needs to prevail. Fortunately most sailors have plenty of common sense and just get on with life. We all say thing in the heat of the moment that on reflection we wish we hadn't - hence the going over to the person after the race, apologising and buying them a drink at the bar, etc.. What concerns me is when some rule makers sitting in an office (or some over zealous club officials) start to interpret rules in ways that go way beyond practicality, will at best be totally inconsistent and open to wild variations in implementation, etc.

Insults says more about he person doing the insulting so most can just ignore them with a smile. Might not be ideal but life is like that (not always ideal but more fun if we make the best of it)

Ian
 
Hi Folks,

Any debate of the rules should list the rule..

"When a protest committee, from its own observation or a report received from any source, believes that a competitor may have committed a gross breach of a
rule, good manners or sportsmanship, or may have brought the sport into disrepute, it may call a hearing. "

Sailing is a pure sport. It should be you working with or against the wind, water and waves to win races. It is not an on the water pissing contest. It is an inherently different environment than the pub where we meet after the races. There is no place on a race course for anything but proper seamanship. Before a race you sign that you understand and will abide by the rules. Don't lie. If you lie, god kills a kitten.

Cursing is not a good mannered course of action. It can bring the sport, your club, your sponsor, your boat or you into disrepute. It is clearly not allowed. Don't curse.

On a more formalized point, the only entity that can protest breach of rule 69 is the race committee. A competitor may only make a recommendation to the race committee that a protest is filed.
 
Hi Folks,

Any debate of the rules should list the rule..

"When a protest committee, from its own observation or a report received from any source, believes that a competitor may have committed a gross breach of a
rule, good manners or sportsmanship, or may have brought the sport into disrepute, it may call a hearing. "

Cursing is not a good mannered course of action. It can bring the sport, your club, your sponsor, your boat or you into disrepute. It is clearly not allowed. Don't curse.

You have to consider the word GROSS in the rule. Is a curse in frustration a GROSS breach of the rules ? Its a question of degree. We do the sport to have fun so over enforcement of the rules will just stop it being fun whilst achieving nothing. I've been sailing (mainly racing) all my life; dinghy regattas, national championships, overseas, offshore, etc. and you might get an occasional incident you ignore after 30 seconds, but the vast majority of sailing is good natured (or people would not do it). We do not need to solve a problem that really does not exist. OK there might be an occasional curse - so what. We cope. I agree the rule is needed s there have been stories about quite disgraceful behaviour (punches being thrown etc.) - so I don't disagree with the rule, I just believe the GROSS bit is important.

(On a technicality it is the Protest Committee who can invoke a Rule 69 hearing not the Race Committee - not a major point and not trying to be picky so please don't take my comment the wrong way. It is relevant because many club races don't have a protest committee until somebody protests - and thus the protest committee does not exist to observe or receive a report until a protest and nobody can protest under rule 69 ..... An interesting side effect of the rules ?).

Ian
 
I must admit that I am a real novice when it comes to racing rules, protests etc. In my limited experience it seems that one need only indicate a protest, make a mental picture of what happened and where everything was, and move on. This is mostly what I have seen and encountered. Now this is certainly easier said than done, and I have without doubt done my share of fist pounding either at someone else’s maneuvers and/or at my own foolish mistakes (mostly the latter).

However, it is my firm belief that the use of foul language in public is the surest sign of a weak mind; and I have instilled that in my children. I have also communicated this assertion to those who seem to think it a sign of maturity to use one word as an adjective, verb, interjection, noun, adverb, pronoun, imperative, or general metaphor for anything the least bit disagreeable. Therefore, if a person or committee wishes to invoke #69 or any other rule as a method of controlling this kind of boorishness, particularly at the club level, it is OK with me.

Just my 2¢
 
You have to consider the word GROSS in the rule. Is a curse in frustration a GROSS breach of the rules ? Its a question of degree.

Hi Deimos,

I thought about your comments and we have a great discussion going. Gross is a very subjective word. It's meaning is in the eye of the beholder. Imagine if other ISAF rules were as subjective. [i.e. rule 42]

On the water we are fully responsible for abiding by the rules, policing ourselves and ensuring the safety of our boat and the fellow boats. If it becomes a question of how questionable the breach was then as a sailor you should simply not do it. Cursing, albeit a small infringement, does not change the unalienable fact that it is not allowed.

ISAF takes an alleged infringement very seriously. Alleged cursing would more than likely not result in a disciplinary action. That does not make cursing less against the rule or less objectionable.

When someone is fouled they have a decision and a right to protest. They can make that decision quickly and be in the right. When someone is fouled they have no right to curse. That is also a decision to make. There are far more acceptable and well mannered alternatives to cursing.
 
I tend to take the attitude that it is more the intent than the words used that is important. Somebody using the F word in frustration is not a big deal. It is a question of bad language rather than anything else. Others might not like it but it is really unrelated to sailing. However, people can say all sorts of things using no swear words yet the intent might be ttally unacceptable.

e.g. "Thank you for f******g messing up my race" (bad language but not really Gross misconduct)
or e.g. "You can ruined my race you silly incompetent woman and I will in future make sure that ... - which is why we never trust female drivers" (more of a threat and intended insult as no bad language there - yet I would find this unacceptable).

Probably other examples closer to "the line" and there will always be the grey area. But I certainly think we need to keep Protest Committees focusing on sailing and not taking forever penalising people because "they don't speak polite like wot we want them to". Some people tend to swear a lot, others don't and I'm happy to sail against both.

Ian
 
I realize this is a hot issue. I went back and undeleted most of the posts just replacing the f word with f***. I think this is an important discussion as I find myself in the same "heat of the moment" situations- especially on the water (and maybe, every once in a while, in the car ;) )

So, what we need to do is determine where the line is. The hard part is the line is different for every person. However I think the word "Gross" in the rules means that a fleeting expletive in the heat of the moment would not be grounds for a protest.
 

Back
Top