Celestial, Sam Haynes's yacht, had the IRC time to win the Sydney-Hobart, and was given as provisional winner, when it was protested by the boat that had the second-best time, Ichi Ban, Matt Allen's yacht (and later also by the RC), for not being able to be reached on VHF, for a 90 minute period, during the race.
I thought the protest would be dismissed, many boats suffered the same radio problems along a long stretch of shore that not always has good VHF coverage, and that situation had not given Celestial any advantage.
Sure, the contact with more than a dozen boats that had the same problem as Celestial, the accidental deployment of a Personal Locator Beacon, took less time but it was far from being immediate, as the rules optimistically demand (constant VHF watch), taking in average 15 minutes, but in some cases it took 25 minutes. In the case of Celestial the RC asked the nearest boat, Ichi Ban, for, without altering course to deploy flares to call the attention of Celestial, and that had a positive result being Ichi Ban contacted by Celestial by a handheld radio.
Being contacted by a portable VHF radio probably means that Celestial had some problem on the main radio or antenna that they were not aware, but regarding the safety problem, that the RC makes a big fuss around, if Celestial did not change course or speed, if it did not deploy flares (and they would know that, being Ichi Ban close), neither attempted to call the RC with his satellite phone (that the RC knew they had), it was obvious with 99% certainty that it was a false alarm. That does not dispense confirmation by radio contact but changes the degree of urgency, namely deploying an aircraft without that verification.
The race committee decided to consider the protest valid, give a big penalization to Celestial and a redress to Ichi Ban, transforming this one into the provisional leader. Later this decision was confirmed by the international jury.
The 3-minute redress to Ichi Ban, taking into consideration that it did not change course or speed, seems excessive to me, the 40 minutes penalization for "breaking race communication rules", namely a permanent VHF watch seem arbitrary because many other boats were contacted and almost none replied in a manner compatible with a permanent VHF watch, being the average response time 15 minutes, but with some taking 25 minutes to reply.
If a penalization was given to Celestial, other boats should have been penalized too, even if in a lesser extent, but Celestial was the only one penalized.
I would not have believed this was possible. How can Matt Allen feel any satisfaction with this "paper" victory? and not be ashamed by the way it was managed?
Quite cynically he said after arrival: "We'd always prefer to win on the water, there's no doubt about that. But obviously the race committee protested the same protest (after his protest). It is what it is. Sailing has many rules attached to it and they're important to abide by, especially the ones related to safety."
After what happened on the last Middle Sea Race, where a change of finish line dictated another winner, it is a case to wonder if the World Sailing Federation should not have a more pro-active role on the last word in what regards protests, nominating the appeal jury for the main events.
Dans des régates locales, en France, j'ai déjà observé des décisions aberrantes. Par exemple, un juge pourtant international affirmait qu'il avait pris le conseil d'un sémaphoriste (Flamanville) pour prendre sa décision. Détail ce sémaphore est un restaurant depuis 20 ans!
Ce même juge a aussi pris prétexte de la trace d'un tracking peu performant comme preuve qu'une bouée avait été laissée du mauvais coté. Que le même jour, le concurrent mis en cause apporte la preuve que la trace passe 4 autres marques du mauvais coté ou sur des cailloux n'a pas modifié sa décision...
That is a seriously disappointing lot of circumstances and result. It's enough for this owner to walk away from the sport, the club and never compete again. In a single word "SAD"
There was two protests against Celestial, a first one by Ichi Ban and a second by RC.
"Overnight, an international jury upheld two protests lodged against Celestial, adding 40 minutes to the yacht's time." https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-31/sydney-hobart-yacht-race-ichi-ban-handicap-win/100732452
Depending on the exact timing of the event in question, there were a series of solar-storms that struck Earth during the race. There's a very strong case to be made that there was a radio blackout as a result of solar weather.
Io come Udr mi rifiuto pensare ad una decisione del comitato diversa da quella che garantisce il corretto svolgimento della manifestazione!! Sarebbe meglio approfondire la decisione di accettare la protesta!
"Some boats took as long as 25 Minutes" Ichi Ban did not reply for over 90 minutes and failed to have their Sat Phone working as well. Most racing yachts without a deck mounted VHF handset have a backup handheld on deck and typically also on so there are REDUNDANT watch standers on the VHF. The fact that Celestial had and used one means nothing about their compliance. Lastly if the owner/PIC had done his job the PLBs are registered to the ships DCS radio and will set off a fairly annoying alarm and the MMSI number quickly identifies the guilty or overboard individual. FAIL, FAIL, and FAIL. Doesn't pass the smell test even...
It seems you did not understand the issue, that I believe any lawyer would not have any difficulty in understanding: Celestial was penalized for not maintaining a permanent radio watch, as by the rules. It was needed to 90 minutes for them to reply.
Several other boat took 25 minutes and the average response time was 15 minutes. 25 or even 15 minutes to reply to a direct VHF call is not compatible with a permanent radio watch, and constitute a breach in the rules.
The RC cannot protest a boat for breaching the rules and not protest others that breached the same rule, it is as simple as that. If the protest was only from Ichi Ban and the RC ignored that the rules were breached by other boats, it was ugly and revealing lack of sportsmanship, but the decision inevitable, and therefore, acceptable.
But not only the RC protested the Celestial, as they new that other boats had breached the same rule, and that is not acceptable.
If they protested celestial over not maintaining a permanent radio watch, then they had to protest all other boats they had knowledge where that had happened, and being it for 25 or 90 minutes, it is only a matter of degree, that should have consequences in the dimensions of the penalties, not in what regards breaching the rule and that should lead to a protest.
I took a walk down the CYCA A arm today to check out both boats. I have had suspicions about the standard of VHF antenna's on local ocean racers. I noticed that both Ichi Ban and Celestial appear to only have stern mounted 1/4 wavelength VHF antennas. There was no sign of a masthead antenna on either boat or if there was it was incredibly small. US offshore sailing regulations are stricter than Australian and call for masthead antenna at least a 1/4 wavelength but preferably a 1/2 wavelength (approx 1 meter) connected via low loss cable. Australian sailing regulations only specify a masthead mounted VHF antenna and if indeed neither boat had this then their range limit would have been 6 miles and that would explain the inability to communicate via VHF. And if indeed Ichi Ban did not have a masthead antenna it should have been penalised by 1/2 hour as well for having an inadequate and non compliant VHF.
Dans des régates locales, en France, j'ai déjà observé des décisions aberrantes. Par exemple, un juge pourtant international affirmait qu'il avait pris le conseil d'un sémaphoriste (Flamanville) pour prendre sa décision. Détail ce sémaphore est un restaurant depuis 20 ans!
ReplyDeleteCe même juge a aussi pris prétexte de la trace d'un tracking peu performant comme preuve qu'une bouée avait été laissée du mauvais coté. Que le même jour, le concurrent mis en cause apporte la preuve que la trace passe 4 autres marques du mauvais coté ou sur des cailloux n'a pas modifié sa décision...
ReplyDeleteThat is a seriously disappointing lot of circumstances and result. It's enough for this owner to walk away from the sport, the club and never compete again. In a single word "SAD"
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI can't believe that Ichi Ban considered a triumph to do this kind of dirty move. This protest says more about Ichi Ban than Celestial.
The race commitiee brought this protest not Ichi Ban, read the protest report for a unbaised view, fell sorry for him but he F**ked up
DeleteThere was two protests against Celestial, a first one by Ichi Ban and a second by RC.
Delete"Overnight, an international jury upheld two protests lodged against Celestial, adding 40 minutes to the yacht's time."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-31/sydney-hobart-yacht-race-ichi-ban-handicap-win/100732452
Depending on the exact timing of the event in question, there were a series of solar-storms that struck Earth during the race. There's a very strong case to be made that there was a radio blackout as a result of solar weather.
ReplyDeleteIo come Udr mi rifiuto pensare ad una decisione del comitato diversa da quella che garantisce il corretto svolgimento della manifestazione!! Sarebbe meglio approfondire la decisione di accettare la protesta!
ReplyDeleteA sad end to a race however after reading an unbiased version of events a fair outcome considering the safety implications.
ReplyDeleteThere are many that don't share your opinion and that is why I am not sure if this matter has ended:
Deletehttps://scontent.flis4-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/270999557_2187633281377223_5364525757463362061_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=K0RCHGJXhXQAX_1A_R6&_nc_ht=scontent.flis4-1.fna&oh=00_AT_3QB0YLGsxAo1wMw_jsiYpXZqndh5Z_28DTqwGq5vpaQ&oe=61D63963
"Some boats took as long as 25 Minutes" Ichi Ban did not reply for over 90 minutes and failed to have their Sat Phone working as well. Most racing yachts without a deck mounted VHF handset have a backup handheld on deck and typically also on so there are REDUNDANT watch standers on the VHF. The fact that Celestial had and used one means nothing about their compliance. Lastly if the owner/PIC had done his job the PLBs are registered to the ships DCS radio and will set off a fairly annoying alarm and the MMSI number quickly identifies the guilty or overboard individual. FAIL, FAIL, and FAIL. Doesn't pass the smell test even...
ReplyDeleteIt seems you did not understand the issue, that I believe any lawyer would not have any difficulty in understanding: Celestial was penalized for not maintaining a permanent radio watch, as by the rules. It was needed to 90 minutes for them to reply.
DeleteSeveral other boat took 25 minutes and the average response time was 15 minutes. 25 or even 15 minutes to reply to a direct VHF call is not compatible with a permanent radio watch, and constitute a breach in the rules.
The RC cannot protest a boat for breaching the rules and not protest others that breached the same rule, it is as simple as that. If the protest was only from Ichi Ban and the RC ignored that the rules were breached by other boats, it was ugly and revealing lack of sportsmanship, but the decision inevitable, and therefore, acceptable.
But not only the RC protested the Celestial, as they new that other boats had breached the same rule, and that is not acceptable.
If they protested celestial over not maintaining a permanent radio watch, then they had to protest all other boats they had knowledge where that had happened, and being it for 25 or 90 minutes, it is only a matter of degree, that should have consequences in the dimensions of the penalties, not in what regards breaching the rule and that should lead to a protest.
I took a walk down the CYCA A arm today to check out both boats. I have had suspicions about the standard of VHF antenna's on local ocean racers. I noticed that both Ichi Ban and Celestial appear to only have stern mounted 1/4 wavelength VHF antennas. There was no sign of a masthead antenna on either boat or if there was it was incredibly small. US offshore sailing regulations are stricter than Australian and call for masthead antenna at least a 1/4 wavelength but preferably a 1/2 wavelength (approx 1 meter) connected via low loss cable.
ReplyDeleteAustralian sailing regulations only specify a masthead mounted VHF antenna and if indeed neither boat had this then their range limit would have been 6 miles and that would explain the inability to communicate via VHF. And if indeed Ichi Ban did not have a masthead antenna it should have been penalised by 1/2 hour as well for having an inadequate and non compliant VHF.
The Ichi Ban at the CYCA marina is not the Hobart racer which is berthed elsewhere. Interesting point though
ReplyDelete