Page 127 - Case Book 2017 - 2020 April 18

RS500 Phantom and she broke it, rule 11 would still have
applied to the RS500, with the result that both boats
should have been penalized. The fact that a leeward
Phantom boat is sailing above a proper course is not a reason in
itself for the exoneration of a windward boat that did
not keep clear, having been given room to do so.

Wind However, the protest committee was correct to decide
that rule 17 did not apply, even if the Phantom were
sailing above her proper course. Rule 17 placed a proper
course limitation on the RS500 when the overlap first
began. The boats never ceased to be overlapped as
defined even if they were momentarily on opposite tacks
while gybing, since they were both at that moment sailing
at more than ninety degrees from the true wind.
However, rule 17 applies only as long as the boats not
only remain overlapped but also remain on the same tack,
and so it will cease to apply when either boat gybes. No
new proper course limitation applied to the Phantom
Course to
next mark when, during the overlap, she became the leeward boat
RS500 within two hull lengths of the other. There was only ever
one overlap, the only proper course limitation applied to
the RS500, and it had already ended.
Phantom

Phantom 1151 v RS500 553, Delph SC
SUMMARY OF THE FACTS
An RS500 established an overlap to leeward of a RYA 2008/8
Phantom from astern outside the zone of a mark from Rule 32.2, Shortening or Abandoning after the Start
where the course to the next mark was a reach, and
where both boats needed to bear away and gybe in order Unless the sailing instructions validly change rule 32.2,
to round it. The Phantom gave the RS500 mark-room, flag S with two sounds must be used to shorten course,
and neither boat became clear ahead of the other during and a race cannot be shortened to the course’s
this time. After both boats had left the mark astern, the designated finishing line or any other line unless it
Phantom, sailing high, hailed ‘Windward boat keep complies with (a), (b) or (c) of rule 32.2.
clear’ to the RS, which was under gennaker. There was
contact within three lengths of the mark, and the
Phantom protested. The protest committee disqualified
the RS500 under rule 11, and referred its decision to the
RYA, noting that rule 18 was not relevant at the
moment of the incident, and that, although the Phantom
may have been sailing above her proper course, ‘rule 11
and not rule 17 applied’, and that, in any case, rule 17 Course to next mark
did not apply to the overlap.
DECISION Course
sailed by
The decision of the protest committee to disqualify the Course OLM most of the
RS500 is confirmed. sailed by fleet
Quixotic
The protest committee was correct to decide that, since Outfall buoy
the incident occurred after the RS500 had been given
mark-room as required by rule 18.2, her entitlement to Course from last mark
that room had ended. Rule 16.1 did not apply to the
situation after the boats had left the mark, since the SUMMARY OF THE FACTS
protest committee found that there was no change of The next mark of the course for a cruiser handicap race
course by the Phantom. The RS500 was a windward was the outer limit mark (OLM) of the starting and
boat that did not keep clear, and broke rule 11. If her finishing line, to be left to starboard. The OLM was
gennaker prevented her from sailing as high as the between the shore mark and a red outfall buoy, and both
0
0
Phantom, that was no excuse for breaking that rule. See of these lay approximately on 155 / 335 .
case RYA 1984/3, and also case RYA 2006/4 which The wind had dropped, and, as boats reached the
describes the responsibilities of both the right-of-way previous mark, the race committee radioed from the
and the keep clear boat. If rule 15 had applied to the shore that the race was to be shortened to the outfall
Phantom when she gybed, she initially gave the RS500 buoy which bore 318 from that mark. No member of
0
room to keep clear.
the race committee was afloat, and flag S was not used.
With reference to the protest committee’s comment that No sailing instruction either required the keeping of a
rule 11 and not rule 17 applied, those rules are not radio watch after the course had originally been
mutually exclusive. If rule 17 had applied to the announced by VHF, or changed rule 32.2.
127