The morning after the big vote in Qingdao, Athletes’ Commission representative Laura Baldwin reflects on what happened, and what she would like to see happen in the future.

“It was frustrating not being able to speak out directly in the Council Meeting as I left feeling there was more to say in the debate but a lot of the sailors’ views were voiced through certain Council Members. Some Council Members gave very good reasoning behind supporting a reopening of the vote. Others explained how policies tied their hands or expressed fears of greater upset being caused by re-voting. There where some real heroes in the room who stood up against their committees’ wishes (of self interest) to do the best for the sport as a director of ISAF.

All is not lost for Olympic Multihull sailing as there is support to get the Event back in to the Olympic program for 2016. I advise all Multihull sailors to focus their energy and efforts towards lobbying to get the Multihull Event secured for the 2016 Olympic Games.

Encourage your MNA (Member National Authority) and Class Associations to put in submissions for the November 2008 ISAF Annual Meeting, requesting this be decided already in 2009. Efforts should also go towards continuing the Multihull’s participation in the Volvo Youth Sailing ISAF World Championships. The same is true for the Women’s High-Performance Dinghy Event.

The sailor’s voice is being heard within ISAF. We have a direct channel of communication to the Executive Board in the form of quarterly reports and the Chairmen of each of the Committees are working with us in all the different fields of the sport. We have had input and in fact we were the ones who got the World Cup back on the table at last November’s ISAF Meeting, and we will continue to have a role within the working group for this project. We have also expressed our views regarding the ISAF World Rankings, Race Management, Officials, Equipment and Events so we are definitely moving forward positively. All that remains is to be able to sit at least one representative at the tables in the Committee Meetings and ultimately gain seats on Council.

The Athletes Commission is still relatively new, now eight months and we have had to learn how ISAF operates and how we should best work as a group. It has been important to learn from the sidelines how the Committees and especially how Council works before being thrown straight in at the deep end. The structure and procedures are complicated and it is important to understand how things work first. I think we have a good understanding now and I hope that we will be invited to join the Council soon.

If you would like to voice your opinion you may write to the ISAF Athletes Commission by emailing: isaf.sailors@gmail.com

Ben Ainslie has just won his fourth Finn European Championship after an extraordinary week of drama. Those words ‘drama’ and ‘Ben Ainslie’ just shouldn’t appear in the same sentence. This guy is so good, he should be winning these regattas at a stroll. Such is his superiority in the Finn class, it always makes me wonder if he’s really trying when he’s not winning with at least a race to spare.

A bit like his last gasp victory at the Olympic Test Regatta in Qingdao last year, Ainslie had it all to do, going into the Medal Race today. He was 8 points adrift of Guillaume Florent, the Frenchman who has been the surprise leader of this regatta for much of the week. Eight points, or four places (in the double-scoring Medal Race), in a 10-boat fleet is a lot to make up, but not the way Ainslie goes about things.

Ainslie said: “I had a game plan that I had discussed with my coach, Jez Fanstone, to have a bit of a match race with Florent in the pre-start and to try to put him off his game plan. I managed to force him into making a mistake and by halfway down the first beat I could see he wasn’t going so well so I decided to pull the throttle to try to get as big a lead as possible and hope he didn’t pull through.

“This does rank amongst one of my more satisfying victories; it is always nice to win when you have been behind going into the last race,” said Ainslie. I imagine one of the other satisfying aspects of this victory was in knocking Florent off the top of the podium. It was the Frenchman who controversially protested Ainslie in a port/starboard incident at the last Olympics in Athens. The Briton was disqualified, even though TV footage of the port/starboard cross showed more than a little daylight between Ainslie’s transom and Florent’s bow.

Don’t make Ben angry, you won’t like him when he’s angry. Suitably fired up, Ainslie went on to dominate the Olympic Regatta and took Gold in Athens.

So, almost four years later, Ainslie took his revenge in Italy today, while Croatia’s Ivan Gaspic took silver ahead of Florent who was forced to settle for bronze.

Five Gold Cups, four European Championships, three Olympic Medals, two of them Gold. One undeniable truth. Ben Ainslie is the clear, clear favourite for Gold in Qingdao this August.

Except that in each of the three Olympic Games he’s competed in, Ben has always had a terrible start to the regatta. He’s always left his chances of a medal hanging in the balance. Which means that today is unlikely to be the last time that we see those words ‘drama’ and ‘Ben Ainslie’ appear in the same sentence together this summer.

Photo courtesy of James Taylor

The vote in Qingdao brings to a close a fraught six months for members of ISAF Executive and Council. ISAF president Goran Petersson was outraged at the levels of abuse that had been levelled at him and some of his colleagues, following the controversial vote in Estoril.

As far as Petersson was concerned, justice and democracy were served last November, and that unfortunate choice of wording, the move to ‘reaffirm’, showed just how strongly he and ISAF Executive wanted the Estoril decision to stand. They must be mighty relieved at the way the vote worked out today.

Petersson said that because of the personal abuse that some members had been subjected to, the voting procedure earlier today would take place under a secret ballot. This is an unfortunate, but understandable, move. It makes individuals a good deal less accountable for their actions, and this is regrettable bearing in mind the accusations of conflict of interest that have swirled around some people these past months. But it’s understandable that Petersson should have made this move if the abuse has been as bad as he suggests.

To give the President his due, he also prefaced the meeting by reminding Council members of their duties and obligations to the wider interests of the sport (as opposed to national interests and Olympic medal tallies). Whether or not this reminder had any effect, we will never know. One can only hope that Council members voted for the right reasons.

This was not the meeting at which to raise the whole legitimacy of Council’s make-up, that will have to wait another day. But what is clearer than ever is that of the 38 members of Council, there should be at least one representative of the Athletes’ Commission at the table.

British Laser Radial sailor Laura Baldwin attended the meeting representing the Athletes Commission but wasn’t allowed to stand up and speak on behalf of the competing athletes in the Council Meeting. “It was disappointing not being able to make the case for competeing athletes” said Baldwin. So why wasn’t she allowed to speak? “ISAF is very shaken by the level of personal attacks that individuals have come under over the past few months, and they didn’t want to put me in a similar situation.”

Personal attack or not, Baldwin still would have liked her chance to speak. “I spoke to many Committee Members and really felt I was getting the athletes’ point across. What I think is being missed here is how these decisions have such a massive impact on sailors’ lives. The problem with the multihull being thrown out of the Games is that the skills to multihull sailing are so unique, it’s not going to be that easy for people to step cross into other Events and continue their careers. My fear is we’re going to lose a lot of these sailors from Olympic sailing.”

At the moment the athletes are just pawns in the game. ISAF did the right thing by creating an Athletes’ Commission. However at the moment it is a toothless organisation. To have Baldwin there at the meeting, and not allow her to speak when clearly she wanted to (threats of personal abuse or no), is patronising in the extreme.

If Goran Petersson is a true advocate of democracy, then in future he will allow the athletes a seat at the top table.

QUESTION: Should the Olympic sailors have a seat on ISAF Council, or would that confuse matters?

Multihull sailors will be disappointed that after a tense meeting of ISAF Council in Qingdao today, there is no change from the decision made in Estoril last November. There was a glimmer of hope after the first vote, when a majority of the 38 Council voting members opted to reject the initial proposal by the Executive Committee. To remind you, the proposal was:

“That Council reaffirm their decision on the 2012 Olympic Events made in November
2007 by a simple majority vote.”

Of the 38 votes, 17 voted in favour, 1 abstained, and 20 voted to reject this decision to reaffirm the Estoril decision. So, on to the next stage.

2012 Olympic Events

Amendment to the Constitution

A submission from the Executive Committee

Proposal:

“Should Council vote not to reaffirm the decision, two separate votes will then follow:

1. Should the selected events for the Men be changed – A majority of two thirds
will be required to effect any change as per Regulation 16.1.3 (a).

2. Should the selected events for the Women be changed – A majority of two
thirds will be required to effect any change as per Regulation 16.1.3 (a).”

On the Men’s Events, a majority of 21 voted in favour of change compared with 17 against change. However, the mandate for change required another 5 votes in favour to achieve the two thirds majority. That didn’t happen, so the multihull is gone from 2012.

On the Women’s Events, just 16 voted in favour compared with 21 against and 1 abstention. So not even a majority in favour of change. Not much demand for a women’s skiff according to this vote, while women’s match racing looks set for inclusion in Weymouth.

Not what SailJuice wanted to see, but what’s done is done. There is no coming back from this decision. The multihull community must now focus on reinstatement for 2016.

Thick fog in Qingdao. OK, this picture was from last week, so we can’t blame it entirely on the ISAF mid-year meeting. One of my Qingdao spies has filed this report at the end of a tense meeting of the Events Committee. ‘SailJuice Mole’ says Events made the following recommendations:

1. To re-open the Olympic equipment debate (this was a close vote).

2. To open up the Equipment options in November if so required.

3. To proceed with the World Cup Series, starting with Melbourne in December 08, then Miami OCR early next year. Just the Grade 1 events essentially, with Palma included – exactly as the Scott McLeod proposal – details to be confirmed by the Executive.

4. Multihulls are NOT dinghies.

5. To only have the ISAF Sailing World Championship every 4 years, in light of the World Cup Series developments.

6. To support an increase in coach boats at the Games.

Other points of note in relation to the Olympic debate: “Interest” is being looked at by Constitution Committee, who are divided on this thorny topic. If someone declares an interest (and the President rules them ineligible to vote), is their vote one less, or considered an abstention?

Friend of SailJuice, US Sailing’s Charlie Cook, reckons “he” has 21 votes – in which case the discussion won’t be reopened. Australia’s Phil Jones reckons there are 26 wanting to reopen… so unless there are 47 votes (which there aren’t), several people/groups are playing both sides of the argument. Couple of key abstentions last November are reconsidering, as they were unhappy about the change to voting procedure in Estoril.

Should be an interesting debate tomorrow.

This weekend is crunch time in Qingdao. All multihull fanatics wait to see what ISAF Council decides this weekend in China, if indeed the Olympic Events for Weymouth 2012 will come up for reconsideration.

ISAF’s decision not to publish the 15 submissions on this topic from national authorities and class associations was disappointing, another sign that the Federation would prefer this whole nasty business to go away without further debate.

Anyway, hopefully the 40-odd members of ISAF Council have informed themselves of the many issues that swirl around this complex debate. And hopefully the individual members will bear in mind their statutory duty laid down in ISAF’s own regulations. That is, to act in the best interests of the sport as a whole, rather than putting nationalistic medal hopes before any other consideration, as we saw in Estoril last November.

Below is a letter sent to head of the Olympic movement, Jacques Rogge, by Nick Dewhirst of the UK Catamaran Racing Association.

Cc: Members of the International Olympic Committee
ISAF Council Members

7th May 2008

A PETITION CONCERNING THE 2012 SAILING REGATTA

Dear Mr. Rogge

We ask that IOC intervene to ensure that the 2012 Olympic Sailing Regatta include a Multihull Event so that it genuinely presents “the wide range and diversity of sailing” as claimed by ISAF’s President, Goran Petersson.

Multihulls represent a large branch of the sport, accounting for between a tenth and a third of global participation depending on the basis of calculation and have been part of the Regatta continuously since 1976.

However the Commission now requires that the Regatta be reduced from 11 to 10 Events. Last November ISAF chose to do this by eliminating the only Multihull Event, rather than any of the two Keelboat, two Windsurf or six Dinghy Events.

As explained in our Report, it appears that ISAF did so because multihulls are politically weakest, not least representative, least telegenic or least suitable for the Olympics. In the view of your former colleague and previous ISAF President, Paul Henderson, “The most interesting observation is to see how many MNA’s are now saying that their delegates were instructed to vote in the best interest of their specific country winning medals - not in the best interest of our beloved sport. Surprise! Surprise! Holier than thou pontifications are quite hollow methinks.”

In doing so, we believe that Councillors did not vote in the “interests of the sport of yachting throughout the world” as required by Article 41 of the ISAF Constitution, because your 2002 Review of the Olympic Programme provided recommendations on how to interpret this (See Appendix 3).

In general, you recommended that “weight category events should not be allowed, except for the combat sports and for weightlifting”, yet ISAF proposes an Event for 1 Person Dinghy (Heavyweight) and against “similar events” yet ISAF proposes four Dinghy Events for Men.

Specifically you criticised sailing for “low broadcast and spectator appeal”. Your subsequent 2005 Report noted that ISAF had taken steps to increase the appeal of the sport by “introducing faster and more spectacular boats”, yet now it has taken a step backwards by completely excluding the fastest boats of all, namely Multihulls (See Appendix 3).

In addition you also provided guidance on encouraging participation by Women, yet ISAF is increasing its preponderance of Events for Men, by eliminating the only remaining Open Event, which is Multihulls.

You then also noted that “the Keelboat class are very expensive boats …. for general practice and development compared to other classes” and wrote that “if the Executive Board recommends the reduction in the number of athletes and events, the Commission believes these reductions could be made through the exclusion of keelboat sailing events”. Yet ISAF disputed this unambiguous advice.

The leadership of ISAF continues to dispute your recommendations, despite: -

• An appeal from the Royal Yachting Association on behalf of the host nation
• The recommendation of ISAF’s own expert Events Committee
• The independent opinion of the previous ISAF President
• Formal submissions from fifteen of its Member National Authorities
• Unanimous public opinion polls by different yachting journals and websites

Now it proposes a guillotine motion to its Council, which meets on 10-11th May, in order to stop further discussion and “reaffirm” its decision to oppose your guidelines, even though members have the right to place submissions on the agenda for its Annual Meeting in November.

According to a letter of 11th December 2007 to Council members by the outgoing Secretary-General, Arve Sundheim “At the Council meeting on 9 November and prior to making the decision on the ten events for the 2012 Olympic Programme, the ISAF President was explicitly asked by a Council member if there was any IOC guidance which may affect the choice of events. The ISAF President responded that the IOC guidance was to achieve universality, nation participation, medal spread and media appeal. Be assured that if there had been any specific IOC guidance which was new to the table, you would all have been advised in advance”.

We therefore ask that

• As its President did not do so, you remind ISAF Councillors of your specific long-standing guidance, published in August 2002 and May 2005.

• Should Council still exclude any Multihull Event, you postpone the reduction of Events one more time, on the basis that Multihulls would deserve to be included in the Games based on these criteria of “universality, nation participation, medal spread and media appeal”. (Appendix 2 shows what the multihull community achieves independently without ISAF support.)

You have significant influence over ISAF because it has a “very high reliance on Olympic revenues (65%) and a low percentage of its income comes from marketing and broadcasting (10%)” according to your 2005 Report. In the interests of the Olympic Spirit, please use it.

On behalf of 6000+ petitioners from more than 60 countries, including numerous ISAF sailors of the Year, Olympic medallists and other sailing champions, key organisers of our sport, influential media figures and leaders in the yachting industry (See Appendix 1).

Yours sincerely,

Nick Dewhirst
Chairman

To see the original petition and find links to the full report plus other documents, click here:

QUESTION: Can ISAF Council members be trusted to put personal and national interests aside at the mid-year meeting in Qingdao?

Ken Read sounds mighty proud of the boys he has lined up as the team to sail Puma Racing, the only American entry in the Volvo Ocean Race. “It’s been a long time coming,” said Read in a conference call from Newport, Rhode Island, this afternoon. “It’s been an overwhelming process to choose this team. The human element is crucial to the final outcome. We didn’t take it lightly.

“With the America’s Cup in flux right now, there is a lot of really good sailors looking for work. What I thought was going to be a difficult process became overwhelming, we had resumés from 400 sailors crazy enough to want to do this race. With that group of resumés, you could have put 10 world class crews together and not miss much.”

Read has been using George David’s 90-footer Rambler for crew training and elimination of the list of 400.

The Puma skipper describes his final line-up as “very international, six different nationalities on board. Experience played a part [in their selection]. If there were two individuals who were close in terms of their resumés, then I leaned towards experience, particularly Volvo Ocean Race experience.”

The Team

Read roll-called his team mates in alphabetical order:

Andrew Cape, navigator: Capey, I think he’s lost track the number of times he’s sailed around the world. Navigator of movistar in the last race and then Ericsson. Great guy, great navigator, great choice.

Rick Deppe: for this race we’re a crew of 10 plus one, the extra person is a media specialist who will send photos and video off the boat every day. A few years ago Rick eased his way out of the professional sailing world and into the video world, he’s worked for Disney Channel and Discovery Channel. An obvious choice for this job.

Justin Ferris, trimmer/driver: the best sailor I’ve sailed with that the world hasn’t heard about yet. Justin did the last race on the Disney entry. Big, strong, tough, a great all-rounder that you need on a Volvo programme.

Sidney Gavignet: he was on board ABN 1, which won the last Volvo Race, started the Barcelona Race, the boat he was on lost its mast, but great attitude. When Sidney sailed with us this summer, we knew he had this innate sense of ‘fast’. He’s a good guy and he can make a boat go fast.

Jerry Kirby, bowman: he’s been doing this a long time, he’s won America’s Cups as a bowman, he’s as experienced in offshore sailing as anyone I know. Jerry was a clear candidate because he’s the toughest guy I know. In a tough spot, Jerry’s the guy you want standing next to you. He’s got a major building business in Newport, and I had to convince him to take a year out to do this.

Jonathan McKee is a guy who back in the day was clearly the fastest sailor I’d ever sailed against in the university ranks. He’s won an Olympic gold medal in the Flying Dutchman, bronze in the 49er, done America’s Cups, and done distance racing. He’s another one of these fast guys just born with the talent.

Michael Mueller, bowman and trimmer. Mickey Mueller is a great reason why the new rule – having two under-30s on board – is a great rule to be brought in by Volvo. In ABN 2 in the last race, that boat brought a ton of energy into the last race. Mickey probably wouldn’t have had a shot at this race without this rule, because of his lack of experience, but he came highly recommended from the German America’s Cup team. He’s a big strong young guy who’s going to be of real value.

Chris Nicholson, watch captain. Chris Nicholson was the first guy we hired. To call him a watch captain is a huge understatement. One of the big links we had to make was between the sailing team and the design team. He’s an electrician by trade, he’s won 49er world championships, he’s been round the world. He’s been very influential in all the systems in how this boat works. I keep on saying our designers Botin & Carkeek should now be called Botin & Carkeek & Nicholson.

Rob Salthouse, trimmer/driver. Salty comes to us straight from Team New Zealand. He’s been round the world on Tyco. He’s one of these tough, solid Kiwis who can do anything on the boat. He’s in charge of our food and nutrition programme. He’s first in the gym in the morning, he has that proactive attitude to get us through 37,000 miles.

Casey Smith, bowman. He’s an Australian who I sailed with on the Pegasus TP52 programme. He was a clear choice for the under-30 option. He’ll be the boat captain, and brings that under-30 energy that this race wanted - and will get - because of this rule.

Read summed up his crew selection thus:

“Sailing skill was the first element. Chemistry was the second thing. I didn’t want to go sailing around the world with someone I didn’t like. Sounds silly, but it’s important. Then the experience factor. When we had two choices to make, we went with experience. You’ll find in this list a lot of people who are successful sailing around the world.”

Read didn’t rule out possible replacements to the team, but only due to some unforeseen circumstance such as injury to main crew. “These boats are clearly people breakers. Reference back to our Rambler experience. We have a bunch of guys who are saying, ‘Let me in coach!’ These guys are literally a phone call away. They know who they are and they understand that if a particular skill-set goes down on board, then we will be calling them. There is a certain amount you are allowed to rotate crew from leg to leg.”

However, Read sounds like he’ll be sticking as much as possible to the original gang of 10 (or 11 if you count media man Rick Deppe). “We’ve talked about chemistry and winning is the best way to promote chemistry. Winning cures a lot of ailments.”

QUESTION: Who do you think will win the Volvo Ocean Race? And why?

If you want a job done well, do it yourself. Isn’t that what they say? Larry Ellison clearly took this advice to heart when he beat some of the world’s best match racers to win the RC44 Cagliari Cup yesterday, including some of his own handsomely-paid full-time employees. Yes, he had Russell Coutts on board calling tactics and a bunch of other pros from his own BMW Oracle Racing team, but there’s only so much help a helmsman can get. In match racing you have to make decisions in the blink of an eye, so all credit to Larry, age 63 ½.

“I am very lucky because it is an owner’s class with pro sailors steering the match and Russell let me steer his boat,” said the sexagenarian billionaire. “I think that this is an amazing accomplishment, and I am very proud of what we have done.” Cor blimey, Larry, not half! Take a look at the people who he beat: the boy wonder James Spithill, Ben Ainslie, etc. Down at the bottom of the pile there’s Jes-Gram Hansen, along with Spithill the stand-out match racing helmsman of the 32nd America’s Cup, and last week’s Star World Champion, Mateusz Kusnierewicz.

Spithill was disappointed with his performance, but gave much praise to Larry. Well he would, wouldn’t he! He’s on the BOR pay roll! “We are very happy to finish the event in second. It was absolutely superb. I am very impressed by Larry Ellison’s performance. He sailed extremely well. It’s his first time on this boat, with this team, and the level of the fleet is just huge. What he’s done is amazing.”

Some people laugh at Larry for wanting to steer his own boat in the America’s Cup whenever BMW Oracle is clear ahead, but on the strength of this performance he can’t be that much of a hand brake on the team. Expect to see Larry at the helm of an Extreme 40 catamaran any time soon! A bit of practice for that other match race event coming up sometime in the next year…

(Mark rounding photo: Francesco Nonnoi; on-board photo: Gilles Martin-Raget)

Results from the RC44 Cagliari Cup

(Name of team, helmsman, No of victories / defeats, points)

1) BMW ORACLE Racing, Larry Ellison, 8/1 - 8 points
2) Team Ceeref, James Spithill, 7/2 - 7 points
3) Team Banco Espirito Santo, Ben Ainslie, 6/3 - 6 points
4) Team Aqua, Cameron Appleton 6/3 - 6 points
5) Cro-A-Sail, Morten Henrikson / Miroslav Reljanovic, 5/4 - 5 points
6) Team Hiroshi - Città di Milano, Sébastien Col 5/4 - 4 points (1 penalty)
7) Sea Dubai, Markus Wieser 4/5 – 4 points
8 Team Beecom, Jesper Radich 3/6 – 3 points
9) Mascalzone Latino, Jes Gram Hansen 0/9 – 0 point
9) Team Organika, Mateusz Kusznierewicz 0/9 – 0 point

Question: Should Larry put his employees on half-wages until they’ve proven they can beat him in a match race?

I went racing with Alinghi today aboard one of their Extreme 40 catamarans in Valencia. Ed Baird was steering on my boat (and before you ask, no, he didn’t capsize), with Rodney Ardern, Lorenzo Mazza and Pieter van Nieuwenhuizen doing the hard work up front.

On the black boat, Murray Jones was steering with Brad Butterworth on mainsheet. Ed and crew blitzed the starts and won today’s informal series 5-0.

This was all part of a media day run by Alinghi, branded ‘Back to Sailing’. Although the dark cloud of legal uncertainty continues to hang over the 33rd America’s Cup, the sailing and design teams at Alinghi are full bore into learning and researching the weird and wonderful possibilities of a multi race in boats measuring 90ft by 90ft.

Now, I had thought those dimensions were maximum limits, but apparently not, according to Alinghi’s legal counsel Lucien Masmejean. 90ft by 90ft is what it says on BMW Oracle Racing’s challenge certificate, so you couldn’t build something smaller even if you wanted to!

The sailors and designers are genuinely excited by the challenge ahead of them. The predicted loads are mind boggling, quite terrifying in fact. Upwind speeds are likely to be in the region of 20 knots, downwind they could exceed 40 knots. The dynamic duo in the offshore multi world, Nigel Irens and Benoit Cabaret, have been wheeled in to make sure Grant Simmer, Rolf Vrolijk, Dirk Kramers and all the established monohull experts at Alinghi don’t get completely carried away. Irens and Cabaret are the monumentally successful double act behind Ellen MacArthur’s B&Q Castorama, and more recently Francis Joyon’s IDEC 2 and Thomas Coville’s Sodeb’O. Note that all these boats are trimarans, by the way.

Although Alinghi - and BMW Oracle for that matter - remain tight lipped as to whether their beast will float on two hulls or three, most seem to be expecting a trimaran of some form.

With both teams now so far down the multihull road, I’ve finally managed to get excited about the prospect of a showdown in giant multis. Building of the American boat is said to be well advanced, the Swiss are just about to start building theirs, but even then there are no certainties that these boats will actually contest the 33rd Cup. Crazy times, but for now the Cup is still a legal dogfight and it is not inconceivable that these giant multis could be consigned to the America’s Cup dustbin before they have even been sailed.

That would be a terrible shame, but on the other hand, it was a terrible shame to return to Valencia today, nine months after the epic conclusion of the 32nd Cup, and see the tumbleweed blowing through all those empty challenger bases around a much quieter Port America’s Cup than I remember from last summer.

QUESTION: What would you rather see? The duel to go ahead in giant multihulls, or to scrap them and return to a more traditional Cup in keelboats, with a challenger series?

What an awesome result for the Polish team Mateusz Kusnierewicz and Dominik Zycki winning the Star Worlds. But how relevant is beating a 104-boat fleet compared with the Olympic challenge of short course racing against a fleet of just 16? Iain Percy is hoping that the answer is “not very”. He and crew Bart Simpson (pictured mid-gybe by Fried Elliot) had a shocking week in Miami, albeit in a borrowed boat. They won one race, but the rest of the week was a catalogue of disaster – broken shroud, OCS, you name it.

“It’s just been one of those weeks where it’s all been decided with a throw of the dice – and we’ve thrown a lot of ones and not many sixes!” said Percy afterwards.
So where’s the silver lining for the Brits? Well, back in 2000 a certain Mateusz Kusnierewicz won the Finn Gold Cup just months before the Sydney Games. And the young Pole was the reigning Olympic Champion from Savannah four years previously. He was the man to beat. Meanwhile, still quite new to the fleet, Iain Percy had moments of brilliance at that Weymouth event, but ruined it with a clutch of OCSs and other unwanted letters on his score sheet. I can’t remember where he finished, but nor probably does he.

A few months later, who won the gold medal on the fluky waters of Sydney Harbour? Iain Percy, with Mateusz out of the medals. The Brit will take some comfort from that history lesson, and he drew a comparison with last week’s failed mission against the one that really matters in Qingdao. “I know it is easy to come up with excuses, but it has been one of those weeks where if it is going to happen it is going to happen to us, and with such big fleets at the Star Worlds, any mistake costs you dear. In that sense the racing here is really kind of irrelevant to the racing we’re going to be experiencing at the Games where it’s just 15 other boats, and it’s not so costly if you miss a windshift.”

Of course you have to cling to this type of thinking when things are against you, but there is some truth to it. Qingdao is a very different task to Miami. The one constant in the Star fleet, however, is the irrepressible ability of Robert Scheidt and Bruno Prada to keep themselves in the chocoloates no matter what the challenge. The Brazilians took the bronze last week in Miami. In the past three Star Worlds, they have recorded results of 2,1,3. Torben Grael may not be in China to defend his Olympic title from Athens, but at the moment all the signs are that the gold medal is still most likely headed towards Brazil again.

According to readers of US website Scuttlebutt whose Olympic Events 2012 poll concluded recently, the keelboats shouldn’t make the cut for Weymouth. Below are the results.

Ironically, this result comes in a week when 104 Stars are competing at their World Championships in Miami. That is a phenomenal turn-out and speaks volumes for the health of the class, although of course Miami is the spiritual home of the Star fleet. Turnouts here are always going to be good.

The strength in depth of the competition is impressive too. Former Finn Olympic Champion Mateusz Kusnierewicz and his Polish team mate Dominik Zycki (shown below in Fried Elliott’s photo) turned in an outstanding performance to win the first two heats, only to drop to 8th overall after scoring 44th in the third heat. There are some very good sailors finding themselves very deep in the results.

Americans John McCausland and Kevin Murphy hold the lead, tied for points with Australians Iain Murray and Andrew Palfrey. Now in his early 50s, Murray is showing he is as sharp as he was when he made his name winning a clutch of 18-foot skiff titles on Sydney Harbour in the 70s. Good on him.

So who’s right? The pollsters who voted the keelboats out, or the 208 keelboat sailors going about their business in Miami? Such a strong show from the ancient Star couldn’t come at a better time for the class, as its Olympic future hangs in the balance.

If the revote does take place this November, and it came down to a battle between multihull and keelboat, who deserves to win? Regular SailJuice readers know where my preferences lie, although of course I’d love to see both stay in.

I just can’t see ISAF going back to the IOC, cap in hand, begging for that 11th medal back. Remember, it wasn’t so long ago when the Star crept in through the back door to be reinstated for the Sydney Games. What’s a responsible parent to do when his prodigal son keeps overspending on his pocket money? We’ve already been bailed out once. I can’t see ISAF having the cheek to go back with the begging bowl for a second time. Yes, Jacques Rogge is a former Olympic sailor and it’s useful to have friends in high places. But he’s so keen to be seen as whiter than white and break the old accusations of corruption in the IOC, that his association with our sport could even work against us in situations like this. Never mind the fact that, with all the controversy around China and Tibet, Rogge has rather bigger fish to fry this side of August.

Nevertheless, former ISAF President Paul Henderson says this is what ISAF should seek to do, and he knows the politics much better than me. So I hope the ex-Pope is right to be so optimistic. Getting that 11th medal back would solve all the in-fighting about whose boat is better than whose – for the time being anyway. At some point we’re going to have to cut down to 10 Events. If not this November, it will be four years hence.

So who’s going to go? The Stars have thrown down the gauntlet with their 100+ entry list. That’s a strong statement by any measure. How will other Events under threat respond?

QUESTION: Someone once said: “The Olympics needs the Star boat more than the Star boat needs the Olympics.” What say you?

For overall results from the Star Worlds, click here…

For some ‘my boat’s better than yours’ arguments about the Finn, click here…

What a week for Jacques Rogge and the flickering Olympic flame. It makes our complaints about the sailing events for 2012 look rather trivial by comparison.

But that’s not going to stop us banging on about our favourite subject! It has been a busy week out there in the webosphere in the way of debate and discussion about Olympic Events for 2012. Scuttlebutt has been running a two-part poll to gauge what its readers would do if they were sitting around the ISAF Council table in Qingdao for the Mid-Year Meeting this May.

This was the premise for phase one of the Scuttlebutt poll:

“In our poll, we assumed that the majority voted not to reaffirm the decision, so we then voted on whether the selected events for the Men and Women needed to be changed. The yes-no target was two-thirds, or 66.67%. By the end of the vote, this is how the ‘buttheads felt regarding the following events that had been selected in November 2007 for the 2012 Olympics”:

So, a heavy suggestion to ISAF Council from Scuttlebutt’s readers that ISAF Council NOT ‘reaffirm’ its decision in Estoril last November. Of course, one can always take these online polls with a pinch of salt. Except to say that Scuttlebutt is a US-based publisher, and is likely to have a disproportionate number of US voters on its poll. Bearing in mind that US Sailing was the one that influenced the outcome of the vote in November, the results of this poll do not look very representative of US Sailing’s stance.

Anyway, having resolved that the vote should be reopened, Scuttlebutt is now asking its readers to vote on which Events are the most suitable for the Olympics in 2012. Here is a screen grab of the state of play on Thursday evening.

Right now, if you look at the two Men’s events that were facing off against each other last November, the Multihull is beating the Keelboat. And in the Women’s events, the Skiff is beating the Keelboat. There are a few other notable stats in there which might of interest.

If you don’t like the way this vote is going – or indeed if you do and you want it to stay that way – get yourself over to Scuttlebutt before voting closes sometime on Friday.

Not everyone has welcomed ISAF’s new submission with open arms. The UK Catamaran Racing Association’s Simon Morgan sent SailJuice this response to the submission, and Simon questions some of the language used by ISAF in this new document.

Here is Simon’s interpretation of things:

This is a welcome move in the right direction by ISAF, but it may sadly turn into a public relations disaster, the more closely it is publicly examined, because the leadership’s proposal is legally imprecise and open to suspicion of bias, to which its Members have now become highly sensitised.

Firstly, ISAF Members (MNA’s) should be congratulated for responding to the public concerns of the sailing community. It is impressive not only how widespread but also how comprehensive are their initiatives in seeking a better solution. They include submissions from 15 countries and 2 international classes on the selection of Events. Should a majority of Council vote in favour of change, but fail to reach the additional two-thirds hurdle that the leadership seeks to impose, (perhaps unnecessary at this juncture) they also include a further dozen submissions for multihull equipment to be considered alongside monohull equipment for the currently approved Events.

Strategically, there are also proposals to ask IOC for an 11th Event and to set up a new Multihull Committee, like Windsurfing. These are from nations rich and poor, large and small and all around the world.

They all should be thanked, especially those who have had to back down on their original decision for doing the decent thing in saying, ‘sorry we simply did not think about the multihull community because you were politically unorganised. Having read your lengthy report and listened to the enormous body of public opinion against the Estoril Events decision, we see that you are a significant part of the sport we all love and have organised yourself and we want to find a place for you somewhere in our “big church”.

But has ISAF leadership got that message?

Remember the November Council Meeting where Charley Cook “proposed that the voting process could be simplified…by making a slight modification”.

Remember Arve Sundheim’s letter to Members in November which excused the failure to advise Councillors of the 2002 IOC document on guidelines for Olympic Events entitled “Recommendations” on the basis that this was not “a policy of the IOC to recommend that if any events are to be removed from the Olympic Programme for sailing that it could be keelboat”

Remember the Minutes of the February Executive Meeting that responded to the host nation’s concerns by describing the choice of Events as “closed”, but now “recognizing the level of concerns over the decision as per the submissions received” the selection of Events is no longer closed.

If the leadership were genuinely open-minded why propose that Council “reaffirm” rather than “review” and why continue “upon reaffirmation”, rather than “if reaffirmed”, when such alternative neutral language is available? The accompanying press release continues in similar manner “The Executive Committee intent in making this submission is to bring to a close the current speculation challenging the Council decision”.

The proposal is even more grudging in that the Executive oddly asks Councillors to reaffirm rather than reject their decision. This raises questions about impartiality.
· Will the weight of authority be used to influence Councillors to vote for affirmation?
· Will the Executive be bound by the doctrine of collective responsibility or will they be allowed a free vote as their conscience dictates?
· Will David Kellett of Australia, as portfolio holder for Olympic issues, be obliged to speak favourably for the motion when he presents it, even if he voted for the two Events rejected in November?

The reality implied in this choice of words is that this is in effect a guillotine motion on the many valid submissions from members, which they would have the right to debate in May, if the Executive regards them as urgent, or in November if it does not. Worse still, it says Council will vote on this particular proposal, whatever its defects, because the Executive deems this to be urgent and can deem any other version to be not urgent.

Furthermore it sweepingly includes “all submissions” but what exactly are they? Does this mean rejection of the F18 proposal for a Multihull Committee like the Windsurfing Committee? Does this mean rejection of the New Zealand submission that ISAF apply to IOC for an 11th Event? Surely Regulation 1.5.1 on the proper form for submissions requires the leadership’s own submission to state what article, regulation or rule applies? How can Councillors decide if they do not know who has submitted what?

Why have Councillors not been given the list of Events submissions? They were made public for the Annual Conference, so why not for the Mid-Year Meeting? The agenda contains summaries of 25 other submissions, so why are these Events submissions not published? Does the leadership want to stop Members from finding out which other Members are unhappy?

The lack of legal precision causes further problems because Submission M06-08 asks Council to “reaffirm their decision” when in fact there was a complex of four procedural and five substantive decisions concerning the selection of Events in November. To which one is this proposal addressed? If all or none, why deny Councillors the right to choose from the menu?

According to the February Minutes, “The Executive Committee further observed that had such timely decision not occurred there would now exist an urgent need to make the event selection decision”. If it is now up for reconsideration, and would have been urgent, had it not been decided, why is it now urgent to start the process, but not complete it by deciding in May what the Events should be?

How can the Equipment Committee make recommendations if it does not know what the Events will be? Specifically, can it recommend either a mono- or a multihull class for Dinghy Events? Following the America’s Cup decision, can it recommend a multihull for a Keelboat Event?

There is one further demanding legal issue. Can a submission to reaffirm something, ever be legally valid? Submissions are made to change something. How absurd would it be for the British Parliament or US Congress sitting to pass an Act that already exists? They would surely only do so, if there were proposals to change it. This could be achieved by replacing the word “reaffirm” with “reject”.

In sum this proposal raises so many questions that it should be sent to the Constitutional Committee, with the request that it reformulate the proposal or proposals so that they are specific, unbiased and legally valid.

Simon Morgan

Founder Wildwind Holidays
Co-author UKCRA report to ISAF Council, March 2008

Question: Do you think there is more to this submission than meets the eye? Or is Simon just being paranoid?

The Royal Yachting Association has welcomed the International Sailing Federation’s move to reconsider the slate of sailing events for the 2012 Olympic Games.

It’s press statement says:

A controversial decision by ISAF Council during its annual conference in November 2007 led to the decision not to include a modern high performance dinghy for women, the expulsion of the multihull event and the introduction of a match racing format for the women’s keelboat event.

The RYA lobbied ISAF and fellow Member National Authorities, believing that the decisions taken were not in the best interests of the sport of sailing throughout the world, and requested that ISAF reviewed its decision on three grounds:

• That the current list of events will not maximise media interest.
• That the decisions are likely to attract fewer nations and young sailors into the sport of sailing
• That an amendment to the previously agreed voting procedure was hasty, and the process ultimately used for selecting events was flawed.

ISAF has agreed to re-open the discussion surrounding the sailing events for 2012 at its mid-year conference at Qingdao, China, in May.

RYA Chief Executive Rod Carr said: “We welcome the opportunity ISAF have presented to us to have a full and frank debate on these issues at the mid-year meetings.

“We believe the original decisions at the November conference were made in haste, and with many delegates not having a clear understanding of the issues involved and the process concerned.

“We hope that the meetings next month will pave the way for an inclusive and modern slate of events which will showcase our sport in the best possible light in 2012.”

Question: What do you think was most instrumental in getting the case for 2012 reopened? Pressure from the RYA? Other MNAs like Yachting Australia or the change of heart by Yachting NZ? Was it the well-orchestrated multihull lobby? Could any of this have happened 10 years ago without the Internet? Give us your expert analysis…

The list of Equipment Submissions for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition makes interesting and/or alarming reading, depending on your preferred flavour of sailing craft. Scroll to the bottom of this blog post and click on the images to see the list, or else download the pdf document here….

equipment-2012-sailjuice.pdf

The Ministry of Sports Affairs in Oman is putting a cat among the pigeons with multiple submissions of multihull classes as possible contenders for the two-person dinghy slots.

I can see another ‘keel yacht’ argument developing along similar lines to the America’s Cup debate of a few months back. Indeed it has already begun with the Hobie Class Executive Director David Forbes’ letter to Scuttlebutt this morning. Does a two-hulled sailing boat have equal claim as a monohull to the term ‘dinghy’? I doubt that was the intention, but it goes to show how dirty this fight is going to get, with not enough places to satisfy everyone.

The Sonar class has made a submission for Women’s Match Racing, which you’ll see on page 3. Instead of putting itself into the fray, the Sonar’s generous submission is for the Soling to be considered for the ladies. Yes, the ladies will thank you for that one, I’m sure. Female shot-putters of the world unite! Shurely shome mistake here, methinks… [ISAF has subsequently been in touch to say that the Sonar is putting itself up - and not the Soling - for consideration after all. Sorry to raise your hopes, shot-putters...]

Other notable pretenders to various crowns include the Musto Skiff and the Laser SB3. Seeing as both of these classes have recently earned ISAF International status, perhaps they should be taken seriously. I don’t see any challengers to the 29erXX from other skiff manufacturers, so if a Women’s High Performance Doublehander prevails over Women’s Match Racing, perhaps the selection sail-off will be between a 29erXX and a number of multihulls.

Strange, but interesting times indeed.

Question: Can a multihull be considered a dinghy? If yes, why? If no, why not?

Here are the four pages of Equipment submissions. CLICK ON THE IMAGES to see them in full. Enjoy!

Congratulations to Penny Clark, who has just been selected as GBR’s Olympic representative in the Laser Radial. This brings to an end the four-way battle for selection in one of the few classes where Great Britain’s chances are not all that strong. Having said that, Penny did win a bronze on Qingdao waters two years ago at the first Test Regatta.

Having recently won a surprise Bronze medal at the Women’s Laser Radial World Championships, Andrea Brewster will doubtless be disappointed that this wasn’t enough to keep her selection hopes alive. But Penny Clark has been the more consistent performer and this is doubtless what has given her the place ahead of her three team mates and rivals. The other two in the frame were Charlotte Dobson and Lizzie Vickers.

The British Olympic Association also announced the rest of the sailing team who were still to be formally confirmed, although there are no surprises here: RS-X sailors Nick Dempsey and Bryony Shaw; 470 teams Nick Rogers/Joe Glanfield and Christina Bassadone/Saskia Clark; and Tornado sailors Leigh McMillan/Will Howden.

Penny Clark commented: “I think the trials process for us has been really important preparation for China, and has actually been a good experience. There was lots of pressure on me heading into the Worlds as I felt the trials were mine to lose after Miami. Learning how to sail under pressure and still delivering a result at the Worlds has shown that I can carry it off – and working with the girls and training as a squad has played a big part in that.”

Like Penny Clark, Saskia Clark (no relation as far as I’m aware) will be a first-timer at the Games. “I am massively excited, we packed up our first two boxes last week and it’s a silly thing, but it indicated it’s all getting very close now. Everyone says the Olympics are a very different regatta and you don’t appreciate it until you’ve done one. But Christina competed at Athens and there are many other members of the team who have competed at past Games so I’ve been able to get an invaluable insight into what it’s likely to be like.

“From the outset Qingdao was a bit of a controversial choice of venue because of its reputation for the light winds but we have all just been getting on with it. At the Test Event last year, they managed to get a reasonable series of races in so it might not be as disastrous as some people have been forecasting but you never know and have to be ready for anything.”

Question: Do you think the sailors will get a full series of races in Qingdao? If they don’t, will the right people still win?

If you’ve just put your Tornado up for sale, then withdraw it from the market immediately!

ISAF has just published a new submission that might interest you.

Yes, it’s official. The Events for the 2012 Olympics are back on the agenda.

Here is what the new Submission says:

REPORTING COMMITTEE – EXECUTIVE

Submission: M06-08

OTHER COMMITTEE – EVENTS

2012 Olympic Events

A submission from the Executive Committee

Proposal:

That Council reaffirm their decision on the 2012 Olympic Events made in November
2007 by a simple majority vote.

Upon reaffirmation, the matter will be concluded and all submissions made whether
accepted as urgent or not urgent, will be considered to have been dealt with.

Should Council vote not to reaffirm the decision, two separate votes will then follow:

1. Should the selected events for the Men be changed – A majority of two thirds
will be required to effect any change as per Regulation 16.1.3 (a).
2. Should the selected events for the Women be changed – A majority of two
thirds will be required to effect any change as per Regulation 16.1.3 (a).
In case one or both of the votes under 1 and 2 above achieve the required majority,
the ‘new’ decisions on the list of events for the 2012 Olympic Events shall be made in
November 2008 and submissions on the events can be made in accordance with
Regulation 1.

Current Position:

See above.

Reason:

Due to the degree of correspondence since the Council decision in November 2007
plus the submissions lodged by 15 MNA and 2 Class Associations, the Executive
submit that Council be requested to reaffirm their decision on the events for the 2012
Olympic Sailing Competition made in November 2007. This will then bring to a close
any concerns over the Council decision.

In case one or both of the votes under 1 and 2 above achieve the required majority,
submissions on the events can be made in accordance with Regulation 1. This
would include the submissions made for the Mid-Year Meeting which were deemed
not urgent, which will become ordinary submissions received before the 1 August
submission deadline.

Click below to download the pdf document

2012-submission-sailjuice.pdf

Question: The Multihull and the Women’s Skiff have been given a second chance. What do you think ISAF Council will vote for this time?

It seems the America’s Cup is heading back to court.

Again.

So SailJuice will stay away from this tedious topic until it shows signs of returning to a sailing contest.

I will just draw your attention to an open letter written by Mascalzone Latino boss Vincenzo Onorato, one of the disgruntled ‘non-Challengers’. It’s called How To Save the America’s Cup. He makes a few sensible suggestions (which admittedly are worth diddly in the strange netherworld of the 33rd AC) and he drops a few bombshells too.

You can read Vincenzo’s full text here.

Here’s a bit to whet your appetite (if you’ve got any appetite left for this legal borefest. Even John Grisham lost interest months ago):

“Following the launch of the challenge, ACM sent us an invoice for fifty thousand euros which we paid immediately. Are we perhaps the only ones to have done so to date? They replied in writing that they would accept our challenge only if we withdrew our declaration filed with the Supreme Court of New York. This is not required by the protocol, but it is clear that Alinghi writes and rewrites the rules to suit its needs.

“I answered by reminding them that a citizen accepts the laws even if he doesn’t agree with them and that in a democracy there is freedom of speech and criticism. The simple metaphor was not understood. ACM/Alinghi replied by claiming a public abjuration. It would have been pointless to remind them that the last Italian forced to make such a strong retraction was Giordano Bruno, in medieval times under the Holy Inquisition…

“It’s a harsh precedent that will weigh on the future of the Cup and those who love sailing, but leaving irony aside, we must seriously consider that this event has been profoundly damaged by Alinghi. The sponsors have disappeared and people are tired of all these controversies.”

Was Lijia Xu unlucky to lose the gold at the Women’s Laser Radial Worlds last week, after her disqualification from the final race due to excessive kinetics? Or should the Chinese sailor count herself lucky to hang on to silver?

It depends on how you view kinetic infringements, I suppose. It wasn’t so long ago that Paige Railey fell foul of the system on two big occasions - racking up three RR42 penalties which up until recently was sufficient to see you disqualified from the whole regatta. Railey was booted out of the 2006 Worlds and then at the Rolex Miami OCR in early 2007. You could argue that Railey got what she deserved, if the American sailor was pushing the limits to such an extent when the penalty was so harsh.

But are pumping, ooching, or other forms of kinetics really the worst misdemeanours that we see in sailing? I don’t think so. And yet they are punished more harshly than almost anything else in the sport. Under the old system, disqualification from an entire regatta was a penalty far too far.

The punishment must fit the crime.

So at least ISAF has relaxed the penalities to the point where non-discardable disqualification from the race (DNE) – and not the series – is the penalty for your third RR42 infringement. This is a step in the right direction. I doubt this would have happened under Paul Henderson’s watch when he was President of ISAF.

Here’s a clip from an interview he did with Sailing Anarchy about a year ago. Anarchy asked the past President:

If a sailor gets three yellow flags for Rule 42 violations, should they be considered as a cheater?

Henderson:

I consider it anarchy. They have decided that they will change the game to “Air Rowing” and not play by the game called “Sailing”.

Sailing uses “wind” not “air”. Wind is moving air and is a natural action on the sails not a contrived action of fanning against air.

The “Air Rowers” believe that they can gain an advantage by knowingly breaking the rules which I guess is cheating. The Rules give the benefit of the doubt to the sailors by allowing 3 flags then they are sent home.

Read the rest of the article to understand the full extent of Paul’s objection to ‘air rowing’.

That, if I may say so, is an extremist’s viewpoint. Kinetics are a legitimate part of a sailor’s armoury. Kinetics done well, will accelerate the boat. Kinetics done badly, will slow the boat down. So kinetic propulsion is a skill.

Now, I’m not saying kinetics should be a free-for-all. Pumping and ooching certainly shouldn’t run unchecked, and in many cases I think they are probably policed at about the right level. But unlike Paul - who would probably want to see the old rule of being kicked out of the whole regatta for a third infringement reinstated - I still think the new, softer rule is too harsh.

My suggestion would be a 720 degree turn for any infringement picked up by the on-water judges. 720 for first offence, second offence, third, fourth and however many more times a sailor might be foolish enough to stray the wrong side of the grey line. A 720 is a big penalty in a fleet as closely fought as an Olympic class like the Laser Radial. If a 720 doesn’t curb the fleet’s general behaviour regarding RR42, then increase it to a 1080 turn! But don’t disqualify them.

Unlike Paul’s interpretation of this misdemeanour, where he seems to view Rule 42 infringers as premeditated cheats, this is patently not the case. The whole area of Rule 42 is a big grey wishy-washy place, open to all kinds of interpretation. If you don’t believe me, take a look at the whole list of interpretations which I’ve pasted at the bottom of this post. Knowing how far to push your kinetics is part of the game, but just because you stray the wrong side of the grey line doesn’t make you a cheat.

Let me give you an example which I witnessed at the start of the Medal Race at this year’s 49er World Championships in Melbourne. It was blowing about 18 to 20 knots, with a choppy sea. The Ukrainian team, Rodion Luka and George Leonchuk, were lining up the for start, trying to maintain their position when an umpire whistled them for excessive rudder sculling and forced them to take a 720 penalty. In the process of taking the penalty they capsized and were very late off the line. It blew their chances of winning the regatta and they had to settle for bronze.

Now, the capsize is not the umpire’s fault, but if he knew what effect a heavily-sculled 49er rudder has on forward propulsion – ie none whatsoever – then he wouldn’t have felt the need to penalise the UKR team in the first place. You can scull a 49er rudder all day and it will get you absolutely nowhere. Certainly not in 18 knots’ breeze! The only reason why skippers do it is to stop the boat going head to wind and stalling.

CORRECTION: Although I did ask after the Medal Race what had happened, it seems I didn’t ask the right people, as the umpire in question, John Doerr, sent in this reply. My apologies to John for the error. I have