Protest No. 79
Event: Star - Men
Race: 11
Protestor: SWE
Protestee: RC/OA
Protest details: Request for redress
Facts found:
Conclusion:
Rule(s) applicable:
Decision:
This request for redress is invalid according to rule Q5.3. However, under rule Q5.3, the International Jury has reviewed the following information about the finish position of SWE: - The finishing positions recorded by the race officers at both ends of the finishing line. - A video taken from a helicopter showing the finish. - A video taken across the finishing line. - The Omega GPS tracking system recording the positions of all boats. Based on this information, the International Jury is satisfied that the Race Committee did not make an error in scoring SWE 10th in the medal race. Therefore the International Jury will not consider to give redress under rule Q5.3.
Short decision:
Request invalid
Jury:
John Doerr, Marianne Middelthon, Jan Stage, David Tillett, Bernard Bonneau, Bill O'Hara
Protest No. 78
Event: Tornado - Open
Race: 9
Protestor: FRA
Protestee: OA
Protest details: RRS 62.10
Facts found:
FRA crossed the starting line on port tack close to the race committee signal boat. 3 Media boats were positioned on the layline less than 10 boat-lengths from the race committee signal boat. The 3 Media boats caused FRA to bear off slightly to avoid contact as she passed between them.
Conclusion:
There was an improper action by the Media boats that are under control of the OA. However, the jury is not satisfied that the finishing position of FRA was made significantly worse directly by this action.
Rule(s) applicable:
RRS 62.1(a)
Decision:
Request for redress is denied.
Short decision:
Request for redress is denied.
Jury:
John Doerr, Mats Bjorklund, Josje Hofland, Marianne Middelthon, Sofia Truchanowicz
Protest No. 77
Event: RS:X - Women
Race: 11
Protestor: ESP
Protestee: UMPIRES/GBR
Protest details: Non-action by umpires
Facts found:
Hearing conducted under Addendum Q 5.5. Part 2 incident occurred at Mark 1 between GBR and ESP. ESP protested on the water and claimed no umpire signaled a decision.
Conclusion:
Rule(s) applicable:
Rule application Q 5.1,5.5.
Decision:
protest is invalid under Q 5.1. A boat may not take proceedings in relation to any action or non-action by an umpire.
Short decision:
protest dismissed as invalid.
Jury:
David Tillett(AUS),Josje Hofland(NED),Rut Subniran(THA),ZofiaTruchanowicz(POL)
Protest No. 76
Event: Star - Men
Race:
Protestor: JURY
Protestee: IRL
Protest details: Measurement Reg. 9(d)
Facts found:
No racing on 19 August.
Conclusion:
Rule(s) applicable:
Decision:
Protest withdrawn.
Short decision:
Protest withdrawn.
Jury:
Protest No. 75
Event: 49er - Open
Race: 16
Protestor: ESP/ ITA
Protestee: JURY
Protest details:
Facts found:
The jury accepted a written request that ITA would be represented by Mr. Jordi Lamarca of Spain. The jury considered the request for redress by ESP and ITA. The request was submitted under RRS 62.1(a). Addendum Q 5.3 specifically excludes a request for redress by a boat under RRS 62.1(a).
Conclusion:
The jury concludes that the request for redress is invalid. As Addendum Q 5.3 would permit the jury to consider giving redress under that rule if it believes that an error may have been made, the jury considered the two rules quoted in the request that were not specifically mentioned in the decision of Cases 66/68. With regard to SI 7, this sailing instruction does not address replacement of equipment. The jury has reviewed Class Rule C2 and found nothing to cause the jury to believe it made an error. Further, the jury reviewed the entire decision and is satisfied that no error has been made.
Rule(s) applicable:
SI Addendum Q 5.3, SI 7, Class Rule C2
Decision:
Redress denied. The Jury will take no further action.
Short decision:
Redress denied. Jury will take no further action.
Jury:
John Doerr (chair), David Tillett, Josje Hofland, Marianne Middelthon, Takao Otani
Protest No. 74
Event: RS:X - Men
Race: 8
Protestor: UKR
Protestee: JPN
Protest details: N12
Facts found:
UKR on starboard and JPN on port approached the leeward mark with JPN on the layline. UKR gybed to port. Soon afterwards JPN established an overlap to windward and there was contact between the two boards. The two boards were approximately 5 seconds from the mark. The contact continued until UKR hit the mark. JPN luffed and slowed down. Neither boat did a penalty turn.
Conclusion:
JPN failed to keep clear as a windward boat. UKR did not make every attempt to give JPN room at the mark. JPN broke rule 11 and UKR broke rule 18.2(a)
Rule(s) applicable:
RRS 11 and 18.2(a)
Decision:
JPN and UKR are disqualified from race 8.
Short decision:
JPN and UKR are disqualified from race 8.
Jury:
Jack Lloyd, Mats Bjorklund, John Doerr, Kamen Fillyov, Oleg Ilyin
Protest No. 73
Event: RS:X - Men
Race: 8
Protestor: JPN
Protestee: UKR
Protest details: RRS 18.2(a)
Facts found:
JPN did not inform the race immediately after finishing that she was intending to protest UKR.
Conclusion:
JPN protest is invalid
Rule(s) applicable:
RRS B7.1(a)
Decision:
JPN protest is invalid.
Short decision:
JPN protest is invalid.
Jury:
Jack Lloyd, Mats Bjorklund, John Doerr, Kamen Fillyov, Oleg Ilyin
Protest No. 72
Event: Laser - Men
Race: 8
Protestor: SUI
Protestee: USA
Protest details: RRS 13, RRS 16.2
Facts found:
USA on starboard and SUI on port sailing on the first upwind of race 8. USA tacked to port in front of SUI. SUI bore away to avoid collision before USA completed his tack No contact occurred No boat took a penalty turns
Conclusion:
USA failed to keep clear as a tacking boat
Rule(s) applicable:
RRS 13
Decision:
SUI protest upheld. USA to be scored DSQ in race 8
Short decision:
USA to be scored DSQ in race 8
Jury:
Jan Stage, Ronnie McCracken, Miguel Allen, Nelson Horn Ilha, Sofia Truchanowicz
Protest No. 71
Event: Tornado - Open
Race: 7
Protestor: BEL
Protestee: RC
Protest details: RRS62.1
Facts found:
BEL(Tornado) approaching the 1st bottom gate in 5th place 6-8 Stars were rounding the gate with lesser speed in front of BEL BEL had to stop her boat to avoid contact with the Stars BEL rounded the next mark in 13th place Race committee used the same timing in between starts in race 7 as they had in previous races Width of the gate was 70 meters
Conclusion:
There was no improper action or omission of the race committee
Rule(s) applicable:
RRS 62.1(a
Decision:
Redress Denied.
Short decision:
Redress Denied.
Jury:
Pat Healy(Chairman), Bernard Bonneau, Quanhai Li, Takao Otani, Rut Subniran
Protest No. 70
Event: Star - Men
Race: 6
Protestor: SUI
Protestee: AUT
Protest details: RRS 18.2
Facts found:
AUT and SUI approach the starboard gate mark on starboard; When AUT enters the two boat lengths zone AUT is clear ahead of SUI; AUT sails to round the mark very close to it; SUI bears away and passes behind AUT, rounding the mark clear astern of her; No contact occurred; None of the boats made penalty turns.
Conclusion:
SUI, clear astern of AUT, fulfilled his obligation of keeping clear of AUT while she was rounding the mark, as required by RRS 18.2(c). None of the parties infringed a rule during this incident.
Rule(s) applicable:
RRS 18.2(c)
Decision:
SUI Protest is dismissed
Short decision:
SUI Protest is dismissed
Jury:
Bill O’Hara (Chairman), John MacCall, Bo Samuelsson, Ana Maria Sanchez, Eric Tulla.
Protest No. 69
Event: Laser Radial - Women
Race: 8
Protestor: ARG
Protestee: JURY
Protest details: P3
Facts found:
Before the starting signal ARG was penalized under P1. After the start the race committee signaled a general recall. After the general recall ARG approached the jury boat to ask about the penalty. ARG told the jury it was her second penalty under P1. ARG sailed away from the jury boat and did not race when race 8 was restarted.
Conclusion:
There was no improper action or omission of the members of the protest committee.
Rule(s) applicable:
RRS 62.1(a)
Decision:
Request for redress denied.
Short decision:
Request for redress denied.
Jury:
Jack Lloyd, Mats Bjorklund, Miguel Allen, Nelson Horn Ilha, Sofia Truchanowicz
Protest No. 68
Event: 49er - Open
Race: 16
Protestor: ESP
Protestee: DEN
Protest details:
Facts found:
Conclusion:
Rule(s) applicable:
Decision:
Refer to protest 66
Short decision:
Jury:
Protest No. 67
Event: 49er - Open
Race: 16
Protestor: USA
Protestee: RC
Protest details:
Facts found:
USA’s request for redress was based on an alleged improper action of the Race Committee. Addendum Q 5.3 states that a boat may not request redress under RRS 62.1(a).
Conclusion:
USA’s request for redress under RRS 62.1(a) was invalid. The International Jury heard no evidence that made it decide to consider giving redress under RRS 62.1(a).
Rule(s) applicable:
RRS 62.1(a), Q5.3.
Decision:
Request for redress was invalid.
Short decision:
Request for redress was invalid.
Jury:
John Doerr, David Tillett, Josje Hofland, Takao Otani, Marianne Middelthon
Protest No. 66
Event: 49er - Open
Race: 16
Protestor: RC
Protestee: DEN
Protest details:
Facts found:
Protest 66 RC v DEN and Protest 68 ESP v DEN were heard together and under Medal Race Sailing Instruction Addendum Q 5.5(b). Sailing to the start, DEN capsized and broke her mast. This resulted in significant damage including the mainsail, gennaker and mast step. DEN returned to shore. It was not possible for DEN to repair the damage in the time available and DEN arranged with CRO to use the CRO boat. DEN, through their coach, at the first reasonable opportunity notified the Race Committee of the replacement 15 minutes before the warning signal. DEN sailed to the start, started 3 minutes 57 seconds after the starting signal and completed the race. The race was conducted in winds close to the upper limits for 49er racing and in very difficult wave and tidal conditions. Every boat capsized at some stage during the race and two boats failed to finish inside the time limit. As soon as practical after coming ashore DEN submitted a written request to the Olympic Measurement Committee (OMC) for the replacement boat and presented the boat for inspection. The boat was thereafter subject to checks for compliance with the class rules and all other checks carried out on other boats during quarantine. The request for replacement was then approved by OMC in accordance with SI 21.2. The replacement boat sailed by the DEN competitors did not have the identifications required by the Notice of Race and Sailing Instructions on its sails. It did not carry a camera as required by the Organising Authority. It was not subjected to quarantine procedure as required by Measurement Regulation 13.
Conclusion:
DEN, as a boat assigned to compete in the medal race, was required by SI 19.7 to make a genuine effort to start, sail the course and finish. The OMC approved the replacement of the boat and found that it complied with class rules and all equipment inspections carried out in the Medal Race Quarantine Procedures. DEN complied with SI 21.2 and 21.3. The basis for the protest under MR 12.4 ceased to exist when the OMC approved the request. SI 2 (Additional Identification), SI 3 (Cameras) and MR 13 (Medal Race Quarantine Procedures) are subject to discretionary penalties (SI 18.7, MR 13.7). DEN did not gain a competitive advantage by failing to carry the camera (in the prevailing conditions), by failing to carry the correct identification, or by sailing a boat that had not been subjected to the Medal Race Quarantine Procedure at the required time. SI 2, 3 and 21, and MR 13 are not subject to protests by boats (SI 18.7 and MR 13.7).
Rule(s) applicable:
SI 19.7, MR 13, NoR 3, SI 2, 3, 18.7, 21.2 and 21.3.
Decision:
The protest by the RC is dismissed.The protest by ESP under SI 21.2 and SI 21.3 is invalid. No discretionary penalties imposed.
Short decision:
The protest by ESP under SI 21.2 and SI 21.3 is invalid. The protest by the RC is dismissed. No discretionary penalties imposed.
Jury:
John Doerr (chair), David Tillett, Marianne Middelthon, Takao Otani, Josje Hofland
Protest No. 65
Event: Star - Men
Race: 4
Protestor: USA
Protestee: RC
Protest details: RRS62.1(a)
Facts found:
Refer to protest 63
Conclusion:
Refer to protest 63
Rule(s) applicable:
Refer to protest 63
Decision:
Refer to protest 63
Short decision:
Refer to protest 63
Jury:
Refer to protest 63
Protest No. 64
Event: Star - Men
Race: 4
Protestor: GBR
Protestee:
Protest details: RRS62.1(a)
Facts found:
Refer to protest 63
Conclusion:
Refer to protest 63
Rule(s) applicable:
Refer to protest 63
Decision:
Refer to protest 63
Short decision:
Refer to protest 63
Jury:
Refer to protest 63
Protest No. 63
Event: Star - Men
Race: 4
Protestor: GBR
Protestee:
Protest details:
Facts found:
Protest heard together with 64 and 65. The gate marks were set to windward of the starting line. The left hand mark of the gate, looking upwind, drifted. The right hand side mark of the gate, looking upwind, did not drift. All of the boats rounded the right hand mark of the gate.
Conclusion:
The drifting of the left hand mark was an error by the RC. The relative positions of the boats were not significantly worsened by this error.
Rule(s) applicable:
RRS 62.1 (a)
Decision:
Redress denied
Short decision:
Redress denied
Jury:
Bill O’Hara, Miguel Allen, Nelson Horn Ilha, Quanhai Li, Jan Stage, Eric Tulla.
Protest No. 62
Event: Star - Men
Race: 4
Protestor: POR
Protestee: RC
Protest details:
Facts found:
POR was the closest boat to the RC at the moment of the start. POR was identified by the RC as OCS at the starting signal. RC signaled POR as OCS at the top mark. POR left the course.
Conclusion:
No error or omission was made by the Race Committee
Rule(s) applicable:
RRS 62.1 (a)
Decision:
Redress denied
Short decision:
Redress denied
Jury:
Bill O’Hara, Nelson Horn Ilha, Quanhai Li, Jan Stage, Eric Tulla.