Video in Protest Hearings

[Bruce Andersen]

Although legal if not specifically excluded, use of video in protest hearings in troublesome to me.

We place Umpires in the control area and prohibit them from using binoculars so they observe the same scenario as the competitors.

We also require witnesses to be competitors in the same heat for the same reason - they see the same scenario that the protesting/protested skippers saw.

Does admitting video recording introduce information that the Umpires, witnesses, and competitors did not have at the time the protest was hailed and if so, is it fair?

This is my personal opinion and does not reflect the position of IRSA, of which I am an officer.

[Andrew Crocker]

Hi Bruce – I hope this is not too topical in the context of the IOM Worlds.

For all the reasons that you cite, and to cut a long story short, I would be very much in favour of adding to RRS E6.8 as follows:


E6.8

Add a new rule 63.4(g)

g) When a protest concerns an alleged breach of a rule of Part 2, 3 or 4, video or photographic evidence is not admissible.


A few comments on the above:

• The restriction of video/photographic evidence to breaches of Part 2,3 or 4 rules is deliberately intended to permit video evidence in Rule 69 cases, for example. To be clear: if there is video evidence of, say, a competitor abusing an official, this should not be ignored. This also maintains the validity of RS Call O2 in the Call Book for Radio Sailing (2021).

• RRS M8 already outlines significant "health warnings" about video/photographic evidence. In the case of small boats at distance, those caveats are only magnified for racing incidents.

• RRS E5.2 can already be regarded as ruling out the use of photographic and video aids for observers and umpires.

• Under RRS E6.2, if a committee learns that a boat has broken a rule by virtue of photographic or video evidence, the rule as currently worded does not prevent them protesting the boat. However, the proposed 63.4(g) would require, in the case of Part 2, 3 or 4 breaches, that the committee find a witness who conforms to the requirements of E6.1.

Regards,

Andrew Crocker

[Bruce Andersen]

A sensible approach.

Watching the video feed of the current WCR, there were numerous mark contacts that did not seem to have a corresponding penalty turn.

Although RRS E6.5 specifies that protests be delivered to the protest committee within 10 minutes after the last boat finishes, the only mention of time in RRS E6.3 (informing the Protestee) and RRS E6.4 (informing the Race Committee) is "as soon as reasonably possible".

Would reviewing the video in a pub at the end of the day and seeing inadvertent mark contact in the video feed (for the first time) then lodging a protest constitute "as soon as reasonably possible"?

Clearly, eliminating the use of video or photographic evidence eliminates this scenario.

I am commenting in my personal capacity, not as an officer of IRSA.

[Andrew Crocker]

Thanks Bruce.

In advance of any changes being made to the RRS, organisers of events who are concerned about the issues associated with video coverage should consider adding to the Sailing Instructions for their event the following:

• A protest, whether by a committee or another boat, request for redress or request for reopening shall be delivered to the race committee no later than ten minutes after the last boat in the heat finishes. This changes RRS E6.2, E6.4, and E6.5.

• When a protest concerns an alleged breach of a rule of Part 2, 3 or 4, video or photographic evidence is not admissible. This changes RRS 63.4(b).

The first para is intended to prevent the "morning after the night before in the pub" protests by clearly establishing a time limit for protests regardless of whether that protest is by another boat or a committee. RRS E6.2 is particularly broad and so requires limiting in this regard. RRS E6.4 (informing the Race Committee) is overridden by RRS E6.5.

The second para relates to the admissibility of photo/video evidence as previously discussed.

Regards

Andrew