Three keelboats, L, M and W are all on the same tack, with L to leeward, M in the middle, and W to windward. They are approaching a rock pile that L needs to substantially change course to avoid but M and W do not. L cannot tack without fouling M and M cannot tack without fouling W. The rock pile is not a mark. (See diagram below.)
At position 1, L hails M for room to tack. M hears the hail but W does not, or at least there’s no response from her. So at position 2, M hails W for room to tack, and W immediately tacks in response to the hail; but she also hails “Protest!” and puts up a red flag. M tacks immediately after W, and L tacks immediately after M.
W files her protest correctly, and there is a hearing. Assuming the facts found are as stated above, what is the correct decision for the protest committee?
I think most of us would say that Rule 20 worked here exactly as it was intended to do – L needed room to tack to avoid the rocks, and she hailed M correctly as described in the first paragraph of rule 20.1. M passed the hail on to W, and everybody responded as rule 20.1 requires. But actually, there’s nothing in the rule that allows M to pass on the hail to W. L’s hail is perfectly legal, because passing the obstruction requires a substantial change of course for her. But M’s hail is not legitimate because there is no obstruction that requires her to change course at all. M does not have to change course substantially to avoid the rocks, and although as a right-of-way boat L is an obstruction to M, at the time of her hail M does not need to change course to avoid her – and if L were to tack, she would no longer be an obstruction to M. So M’s hail does not conform to the requirements of rule 20, and she breaks the first sentence of rule 20.3, When Not to Hail. Disqualify M.
This answer seems wrong, to me and to lots of other people in the rules community including the entire US Racing Rules Committee. So this year, we are proposing to ISAF to change rule 20 by adding a sentence: " A boat that has been hailed for room to tack may always hail for room to tack and avoid a third boat.” If ISAF accepts our submission, the rule will change in 2013.
We’ve proposed some other changes, too, and I’ll cover them in future blogs. The entire list of rules submissions to the 2010 ISAF Conference in November will soon appear on the US SAILING website; when that happens, I’ll be interested in any comments about them.
3a48a62e-2e3f-4b80-9718-56f513ca69c7|0|.0