Deliberately taking a foul

[Foolish Muse]

Rarely, but sometimes, it would be advantageous to deliberately take a foul and doing the penalty spins. Is there any particular problem with this? For example, it might be better to rub the pin at the start line, and do the penalty spin later, rather than duck under the pin and have to come back behind all the other boats. It might also be advantageous to interfere with another boat if it would knock them out of contention in a regatta. Is there any particular issue with deliberately causing a foul so long as the penalty spins are taken?
By "particular issue" I mean is there anything in the rules about this. I'm not questioning the "being a complete jerk" factor.

 

[awol]

44.1(b) if the boat caused injury or serious damage or despite taking a penalty, gained a significant advantage in the race or series by her breach her penalty shall be to retire.

 

[lpdsn]

You also run the risk of breaching Rule 2 or, in extreme cases, 69. Yacht racing simply wouldn't work if we all behaved like professional footballers.

Anyway, it's perfectly possible to interfere with another boat and take them out of contention in a regatta without breaking any rules - part of the game, but it's hard to pull it off without taking yourself out of contention.

 

[Foolish Muse]

Those are both good examples. The rule 2 of fair play seems to be most appropriate. And I can see the victim lodging a rule 69 protest if the penalty caused it to lose a regatta. It doesn't need to be a collision or injury situation. Here's a good example. At the start line in a regatta, a boat refuses to "head up", causing the leeward boat to miss the pin and putting it out of contention. Or at the windward mark the offending boat drives the innocent victim boat well past the mark. Both of these cases could be of advantage to the offending boat, just so long as the victim boat doesn't score a 1st place.

I would expect that similar rules of fail play exist in most sports. In basketball it is very normal for a losing team to take a deliberate foul in the dying seconds of the game in the hopes of getting the ball back. This foul is taken as a risk that the eventual outcome will favor the penalized team. Its clearly a risk. I've actually always felt that the victim team in this situation should be given the choice of a free throw (which has risk) or simply taking the ball back in from the side.

Has this ever been adjudicated on at the official level?

 

[lpdsn]

Has this ever been adjudicated on at the official level?

I just had a glance at a Paul Evestrom book on the rules where he references the ISAF cases book. Certainly support for interfering with a competitor where no other rule is broken not being a breach of RRS2.

In your start line example the windward boat would have to take a two-turns penalty to avoid the risk of being disqualified. Just after the start is the worst time to take a penalty - harder to find room to take the penalty with the disadvantage of then having to sail from the back of the fleet. If they took it half an hour later that would be hard to justify. Might get away with it once or twice in club racing with a good story.

 

[Foolish Muse]

Here's an example. A regatta with 6 races and one drop. Up until the 5th race:
Offending boat: 1,2,1,2,2,
Victim boat: 2,1,2,3,1,
The victim boat wants to drop the 3. The offending boat doesn't care what they score on the last race because they can drop that score. The victim boat needs to score 1 to win or 2 to tie. So the offending boat just needs to foul the victim boat to cause it to score 3 or higher. So he could go out of his way to foul the victim boat - he doesn't care what penalty he faces from the foul.

Interesting thoughts. I've never been in the situation but I just wondered about the legality of doing it. When you think about it, it is probably easier for the offending boat to guarantee his regatta win by fouling the victim boat at the starting line, rather than fighting it out to the finish and praying that the victim boat doesn't score a 1.

 

[lpdsn]

Here's an example. A regatta with 6 races and one drop. Up until the 5th race:
Offending boat: 1,2,1,2,2,
Victim boat: 2,1,2,3,1,
The victim boat wants to drop the 3. The offending boat doesn't care what they score on the last race because they can drop that score. The victim boat needs to score 1 to win or 2 to tie. So the offending boat just needs to foul the victim boat to cause it to score 3 or higher. So he could go out of his way to foul the victim boat - he doesn't care what penalty he faces from the foul.

Interesting thoughts. I've never been in the situation but I just wondered about the legality of doing it. When you think about it, it is probably easier for the offending boat to guarantee his regatta win by fouling the victim boat at the starting line, rather than fighting it out to the finish and praying that the victim boat doesn't score a 1.

But the same can be achieved within the rules. No need for a deliberate foul.

 

[awol]

Here's an example. A regatta with 6 races and one drop. Up until the 5th race:
Offending boat: 1,2,1,2,2,
Victim boat: 2,1,2,3,1,
The victim boat wants to drop the 3. The offending boat doesn't care what they score on the last race because they can drop that score. The victim boat needs to score 1 to win or 2 to tie. So the offending boat just needs to foul the victim boat to cause it to score 3 or higher. So he could go out of his way to foul the victim boat - he doesn't care what penalty he faces from the foul.

Interesting thoughts. I've never been in the situation but I just wondered about the legality of doing it. When you think about it, it is probably easier for the offending boat to guarantee his regatta win by fouling the victim boat at the starting line, rather than fighting it out to the finish and praying that the victim boat doesn't score a 1.

ISAF (or should it be WS now?) Case 34 deals with one example of this. Danger is offending boat is forced to count the result or dsq.

 

[Foolish Muse]

Yes, that case is spot on. The offending boat was disqualified under rule 2 in the exact situation discussed.

 

[drakes drum]

Rarely, but sometimes, it would be advantageous to deliberately take a foul and doing the penalty spins. Is there any particular problem with this? For example, it might be better to rub the pin at the start line, and do the penalty spin later, rather than duck under the pin and have to come back behind all the other boats. It might also be advantageous to interfere with another boat if it would knock them out of contention in a regatta. Is there any particular issue with deliberately causing a foul so long as the penalty spins are taken?
By "particular issue" I mean is there anything in the rules about this. I'm not questioning the "being a complete jerk" factor.

Rules apart, its hardly sporting behaviour and so may generate a protest. The result of that protest in a club series always has an element of "whose face fits". So leaving aside the vagaries of the wording of the rules, its a bit of a lottery anyway.

 

[michael_w]

Sailing someone down the fleet is the essence of team racing.

 

[flaming]

Sailing someone down the fleet is the essence of team racing.

And a perfectly well accepted practice in fleet racing where the series result depends on it.

However, to do so whilst not staying within the rules, obviously and deliberately, would leave you wide open to a rule 2 protest.

In football there is now the concept of a "good" yellow card. The Italians are masters of this, committing a cynical foul and taking the yellow card when the opposition are likely to break clear. There is no similar concept in sailing, and long may that be the case.

 

[Keen_Ed]

Sailing someone down the fleet is covered in case 78

 

[TallBuoy]

And a perfectly well accepted practice in fleet racing where the series result depends on it.

Scheidt v Ainslie, Sydney 2000 being a very famous example, IIRC.