Responsibility and Duty of Care

[fireball]

Having done RO and had to postpone and abandon races I see their decision as sensible. The idea of sailing and racing is first and foremost for the ENJOYMENT ... no idiot puts to sea in survival conditions ... I wouldn't be surprised to see the 25hr delay extended depending how the forecast pans out.

 

[Danny Jo]

[ QUOTE ]
It is already rife in dinghy racing and causing mass hysteria every time a few youngsters capsize in a regatta and causing multiple race cancellations in almost any breezy conditions as race officers balance liability/potential blame with sending out the dinghies in windy conditions and giving them the experience to gain confidence in windy conditions.


[/ QUOTE ] Freestyle enjoyed the hospitality of the National Yacht Club "stormbound" in Dun Loaghaire for a couple of days in July. Thursday was the day of the Royal St George dinghy regatta, when a squall flattened 90 odd boats, and a copy-book operation by club launches, the RNLI, a sailing yacht and an Irish Naval vessel fished 120 children out of Dublin bay and brought them safely home. At least one child protested that he didn't want to be rescued. The rescue operation was possibly a little better resourced than was strictly necessary (I lost count of the number of ambulances on standy) but I was left with the impression that the episode was a first class training exercise for a more serious scenario. The media didn't see it like that, though. Questions were being asked about why the organizers had not acted on the forecast of strong winds. As a result, the National's regatta, scheduled for the following day was cancelled, and there were a lot of unhappy children milling about in weather that was ideal for sailing. I asked one of them about his experience the previous day - had he enjoyed it? Not really, was the answer, but his bearing suggested he wouldn't have missed it for anything.

Someone might say that the saving of one life justifies any amount of caution. But we should be aware of the costs (to those that would have survived the dangers) of swathing children in cotton wool, not to mention the undesirable social effects caused by compensatory risk-seeking.

I suppose I have an interest to declare - my most pleasurable memories of childhood are associated with danger: (long list of dodgy activities deleted). Er, on second thoughts, perhaps that doesn't prove anything, so I'll finish by saying that life is much sweeter for the knowledge that we never very far from death.

 

[BrendanS]

The media always react like that these days. I had many a happy long weekend in extreme danger of dying when a youth. Usually escorted by mountain rescue volunteers, from a great distance, and only brought in when one of us went and told them there was a problem, usually with great physical tolls on the messenger.

 

[pyrojames]

It's all rights versus responsibilities. It seems now that everyone has the right to be protected, and if something happens, someone must be to blame. I would like to see a greater emphasis on individual responsibility, so that people have to consider their own actions and their implications rather than just finding someone else on which to pin the blame.

This is why I feel that the Fastnet decision is a bad one. It is yet another step down the line, with organisers taking responsibility for sending people to sea rather than the individual skippers doing it.

 

[fireball]

[ QUOTE ]
It is yet another step down the line, with organisers taking responsibility for sending people to sea rather than the individual skippers doing it.

[/ QUOTE ] I disagree - they are not taking responsibility for sending ppl to sea ... they are delaying the start of the race so that when the boats hit the bad weather there should be more options open to the skippers based on the best forecast they have.

 

[pyrojames]

Hmmm. It seems to me that the skipper has all the options available to him in any case. He could decide to start 25 hours late. That the organisers have taken the decision to delay the start appear to be making that decision for them. It is removing options, rather than increasing them.

 

[fireball]

but is it not increasing the opportunity for a fair race rather than just allowing the kamikaze skippers who are lucky enough not to suffer gear failure to do well? The organisers will be well aware of the pressure on skippers to continue to race even in the worst of conditions ... you may say that that is what the race is about, but is it really?

 

[mel80]

Worth pointing out that in neither case have the race organisers prevented anyone going to sea. All they have said is that the race that they are organising will not go ahead as planned.

It seems to me that many people have assumed that they did this to avoid being blamed in the event of an accident, but it is by no means clear that this is the case. It may be that they don't wish the race to become associated with a particular tradgedy for some reason (sponsorship etc), it may be that they don't consider it would be fair to some of the participents under the rules of the race (e.g. if there many small boats that would be disproportionately affected by heavy weather), or simply that they, as people, don't want to be associated with an undertaking that they see as unnacceptably risky (regardless of how indiviual skippers feel).

In any case, just as the decision of whether or not to put to sea rests with the skipper, the decision of whether or not to start a race rests with the organisers; that seems fair enough to me.

 

[fireball]

Nicely put!

 

[bilbobaggins]

Re: Rights and Responsibilities ( Duty of Care? )

We frequently hear people demanding their rights; more rarely, demanding their responsibilities.....

I imagine that the RORC Committee *are* working hard at their responsibilities - which are several.

It's going to be more interesting than the last one or two.....


/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

[temptress]

It is also worth pointing out that, whilst this is the first time the RORC have delayed the FASTNET start, it is by no means the first time the RORC have delayed the start of a race due to bad weather forecasts.

I can think of at least 2 examples where I have been involved and I’m sure these were not the first. 2003 Falmouth - Cascais and 2004 Round Ireland – both these races had severe gales forecast and both had their starts delayed.

 

[BlueSkyNick]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry for the long ramble, but it is something I am really peed off about as I see what is happening to the racing in my old clubs, the LTSC and RLYC these days, through no fault of their own, but through needing to protect the officers and clubs from this extreme blame culture in all activities.

[/ QUOTE ]As a member of LTSC, cruiser not racer, I would like to understand this a little more. PM me if you prefer.

 

[pyrojames]

I don't see that it makes any difference to its "fairness". Everyone gets to start together, they get the same conditions, at least until the fleet begins to separate.

I should add, that I don't race, because it is the very manner of racing that people tend to push boats harder, and go out into forecasts which would have the more prudent sailor staying in harbour. So, as a non-racer, I see a race as an attempt to be first (or as high as possible) along a set course after some set start. The weather should be immaterial to the race plan, but critical in the skipper's race plan. I followed the Sydney Hobart Fleet down the coast once, but left 24 hours late, thanks to the forecast, they got thumped on the first night out, with a lot of retirements, I had a nice 200 mile run down the coast before holing up for the next blow. They got to Hobart long before I did, but I think we had more fun along the way (96 not 98).

I can see quite reasonably why the organisers took the decision they did, I just don't agree with it! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[ean_p]

exactly...........well said !

 

[Danny Jo]

Fair enough.

This thread encapsulates many of the best attributes of Scuttlebutt discussion, and some of the less good.

Starting with the latter, isn't it annoying when a contributor lumps together all the separate points with which he disagrees and falsely presents them as a single and obviously incoherent case which he can then dismiss as rubbish? This may provoke otherwise calm and rational forumites to respond in a similar vein and lead to an unpleasant slanging match. It hasn't happened here, of course, or on Scuttlebut for some time, thank goodness.

The positive side is the breadth and depth of the points made. There is quite of bit of conjecture, but as Popper pointed out in "Conjecture and Refutation", proposing something that is then proved wrong is no bad thing. Just as science progresses by observations that refute established theories, so can forumites' knowledge and understanding grow on the back of informed refutation of posters' conjectures.

How's that for a justification of my vacuous earlier contribution ?

 

[Salty]

Re: I\'m not sure where to post this ..... BUT ....

[ QUOTE ]

Well, there hasn't been a Sydney - Hobart delayed yet, and that's a race on par with the Fastnet, or more probably, visa-versa!

[/ QUOTE ] I'm sure the RORC committee are rather well aware of the six-year court case against the CYC for their 'negligence' in allowing the '98 Sydney-Hobart to go ahead rather than cancelling or postponing given the available weather information. Don't blame the RORC for this one, blame the legal system that allows (even encourages) their prosecution when something goes wrong.

 

[starboard]

[ QUOTE ]


Incidently, after the SIPR was cancelled , we sailed the boat back to the Clyde round the M of K about 24 hours later than our original schedule with no difficulty or drama.

[/ QUOTE ]

I note you have a Contessa 32...one of the most stable sea boats around, I would be happy in most weathers in that boat....however I fear most of the smaller racing boats taking part in the SIPR would have faired not as well!!

Paul.

 

[awol]

That day they would have been fine, F3 southerly, sunshine and not too cold with the tidal flow changes showing nicely.
I must admit to being brassed off when club races are cancelled 'cos of wind - that's when we are at our best!

 

[tangomoon]

[ QUOTE ]
when you are beginning to suffer from hypothermia, and your crew mate has been washed away because he doesn't like to be told to wear a harness

[/ QUOTE ]

What did you say about nanny? /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[Stemar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
your crew mate has been washed away because he doesn't like to be told to wear a harness

[/ QUOTE ]

What did you say about nanny? /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]Nanny or not, I'll put up with any amount of hissy fits (tho it'd only be one per person - no second chances!) about being made to wear a harness rather than having to explain to the Coroner & crew's missus why I didn't insist...

(I use the word missus 'cos in my experience only a bloke would be that stupid. If that's sexist, then I'm sexist and unrepentant)