Hot button
Over the years, the Scuttlebutt editors have discovered some of the hot buttons for the ‘buttheads. When the topics wander toward racism, sexism, religion, and politics, the tide of incoming email rises quickly. From the rate of email last Friday, a new hot button was discovered, which was all in response to the open letter in Issue 2583 by Giovanni Maspero, owner of Joe Fly, following their disqualification at the recent Farr 40 World Championship in Miami (USA). Maspero was critical of a number of things from the event, and the ‘buttheads were seemingly unanimous in their contempt for his criticism.From Scuttlebutt 2579:
By all witness accounts, Joe Fly seriously overplayed their hand at the
weather mark situation (final day, ninth race of 10-race series). They were on the port tack layline, with Barking Mad ahead and to leeward, also on port. Barking Mad tacked to starboard on layline, with Mascalzone near but slightly overstanding the mark on starboard. As Joe Fly approached Barking Mad, the Italians delayed their tack to make sure they were on layline, but ended up tacking too close to the Americans, who then luffed hard to avoid collision. Barking Mad didn’t want their protest to decide the Worlds, but offered to witness when Mascalzone did file a protest. Click here to listen to an audio explanation of the situation by commentator Matt Ciesicki that is on the Pro Sight Sailing website.
From Scuttlebutt 2581:
The Jury Decision from the 2008 Farr 40 World Championship protest in the ninth race between winning team Mascalzone and second place team Joe Fly is posted on the Scuttlebutt website: http://sailingscuttlebutt.com/news/08/0422b
posted by Blogger @ 8:51 AM
20 Comment(s)
Comments
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
20 Comments:
As a participant in the Farr 40 Worlds in Miami, and a participant who easily could have protested Joe Fly out of contest on the third day of racing, I feel that Scuttlebutt readers should learn another side of the Joe Fly story.
Reality is, that Joe Fly showed great arrogance and sailed a highly risky regatta. In race eight at the start, Joe Fly made a very risky move, which could have ended in a crash with our boat "Backbone" or the committee boat, had we not given room. The jury on the water saw the incident and whistled to let them know that they had made a mistake, which should have made them to correct this by making a 360 turn.
Even though we hailed protest and informed them loud and clear about the Jury´s whistle - which was heard by all others in the area, Joe Fly arrogantly continued leaving us behind with a terrible start and with a gesture which no one could misunderstand. And Joe Fly ended up second in that race. At the dock we realized that Joe Fly was second in the regatta, only one point behind Mascalzone Latino, and basically we could have decided the Worlds by going through with our protest - which we would have won, with the jury as witness.
We decided, after serious considerations NOT to file the protest, as we did not want to be the decider at the Worlds. We did have a serious talk with Joe Fly´s owner and tactician about their arrogance and risky strategy, and while the owner seemed to understand, their tactician continued to play the arrogance style, not understanding what on earth he had done wrong. I can only comment, that Joe Fly should find another class to play in, if they do not want to play by the rules - sailing is still a gentleman sport, even at this level, and the kind of risky game and arrogant attitude Joe Fly showed in Miami we will not miss them in the class, nor in any class.
I have never understood the concept that someone who manages to cross the finish line first while fouling another boat "won it on the water". It seems to me that they lost it on the water when they committed the foul, especially one as obvious and egregious as it sounds like Joe Fly committed at the Farr 40 Worlds. They could have done their penalty turn, but then they wouldn't have crossed the line first and they couldn't claim that they'd won it on the water.
Anyone who thinks Tom Ehman or any other certified race official, be they a judge or a PRO, would be influenced by relationships with the competitors or their employers really doesn’t understand why they are there or the Corinthian ethic that they and the those of us who love the sport still believe in.
A statement by Vincenzo Onorato, 2008 Farr 40 World Champion: http://www.mascalzonelatino.it/home.html?MainID=1&SubID=35&ArticleID=221
Beyond my personal high regard for the complete integrity of Mr. Henry Menin, his selection as a member of the Jury for the 32nd America's Cup would indicate that his impartiality towards Oracle was unquestioned. Also as a matter of fact, Mr. Menin was an umpire during the 2000 America's Cup and went to work for Oracle during the 2003 event. Top level sailing is a small family and suggesting incestuous relationships is easy for someone familiar with that sort of thing, but seldom productive.
To the casual observer here in the Midwest, the protestations of Giovanni Maspero seem to ignore several previously reported aspects of the incident:
1. The competitors knew the makeup of the Jury well beforehand.
2. Commentators quoted by Scuttlebutt remarked that Joe Fly had "overplayed their hand" at mark roundings during the event. Could "overplayed their hand" be a polite phrasing of "repeatedly violated the rules"?
3. There is no allegation that the facts found by the Jury were at all incorrect or improper.
It seems to me that deciding a championship on the final day in this way is a foreseeable consequence of a lack of competitor protests earlier in the event to establish an expectation of rule compliance throughout the fleet. Perhaps the Farr 40 Class would be better off without Joe Fly if the cause of their exit is a willingness by the Jury to hear a valid protest.
If the rules don't support you, pound on the facts. If the facts don't support you, pound on the rules. If you don't have the facts or the rules on your side, pound on the table. In 'Butt 2579 - "By all witness accounts, Joe Fly seriously overplayed their hand at the weather mark situation." They say they want to be judged by what happened on the water - sounds like they got their wish.
I find it inconceivable that Barking Mad would not protest. It is just this sort of behavior that encourages the bully tactics of the jerks on Joe Fly. If you slap them right away, they might just learn. Instead, they got exactly what was coming to them. Find it interesting that Barking Mad had only enough stones to witness a third-party protest, rather than lodge the protest themselves, when they were the one’s fouled in the first place! Protests can’t be “situational”, especially up at the front end of the fleet. If you are both fighting it out for last at the hoist, then that is an entirely different affair.
With respect to the Farr 40 protest, did the protest committee follow Appendix M2 - BEFORE THE HEARING:
Make sure that
>> Each party has a copy of or the opportunity to read the protest or request for redress and has had reasonable time to prepare for the hearing.
>> No member of the protest committee is an interested party. Ask the parties whether they object to any member?"
Why didn't Joe Fly object to the makeup of the committee prior to the hearing??
I thought sailboat racing had rules? After Joe Fly stated how upset they were on their website, I fail to see where they were shorted a world title. There was an infraction on the water, there is even video of it happening, and with 3rd party involvement, which is "allowed" how could one think that they were ill served. I have been in Terry Hutchinson’s position and you must remember one thing, if you do not call those "rules" on anyone, front or back of the fleet competitors, they will never learn, they will continue to violate and intimidate on the water, and they will cost you places in regattas.
Every racer has a choice, penalty turns or protest, and if you’re lucky enough to not get protested and walk away free, then remember the next time you’re on the wrong side of a shift and use the work "lucky" to describe your competitors position...just shut up and bite your tongue!
I was very interested to read that Mr Maspero, owner of Joe Fly is thinking of withdrawing from the Farr 40 fleet. Having seen his manoeuvre on your video, I wonder what fleet would have him? This is not the first time a competitor has come out of the room "very cross" after having lost a protest, and I suspect not the last. To suggest the jury must somehow have been rigged, and to threaten to leave the class smacks of poor sportsmanship at the very least. How do you say "Get over it" in Italian?
If those are your beliefs and you think the people who give their time up to run it are so corrupt, then it’s probably time to get out of the sport. Goodbye.
In reference to my earlier e-mail regard the flag, Giovanni Maspero says no flag was hoisted and no whistle blown. It would be interesting to see a transcript of the protest proceedings. In the few times I've been in the room, the very first issues to be settled were the procedures for establishing the right to protest. Maspero may have been wrong on the course, but the others had to be right in following the rules for a protest; otherwise there's no right to protest, regardless of how wrong he was.
Following the rules is not between two boats, it's between all boats. Barking Mad had a "duty" to protest. I'm assuming that if Joe Fly had done poorly, no protest would have been made. That's not right. All boats positions are affected by an infringement or a protest.
The attitudes evidenced by Mr. Maspero's two web statements regarding the outcome of the Farr 40 World Championship are abhorrent. Mr. Maspero... (1) Sailing by the rules and accepting the judgment of those called upon to adjudicate the rules is every bit a part of sailboat racing as what goes on "between the marker buoys". Your statement reminds me of the moment from the movie "Wind" when the two skippers agree to let it all hang out, ignore the rules and settle things on the water. It was laughable then, it's laughable now. (2) To denigrate the integrity of the judges after a decision goes against you shows a total lack of class (3) To assert that your loss was decided on a purely technical basis is hardly true. A Rule 18 violation is certainly not technical. (4) Finally and most importantly... do not presume to represent me or anyone else who races sailboats by threatening additional action you do so "for everyone who invests in this sport..." This is arrogant in the extreme. I have a hard time imagining many people have any desire to see you pursue measures beyond those available to you through the Rules other than perhaps quitting the Farr 40 class.
Finally... "At the end of the Worlds, the standings were unequivocal, with Joe Fly on top." Not true. At the end of the Worlds, Mascalzone Latino was/is on top. Move on.
Sorry, but I can't help but feel that Mr. Maspero is just whining about getting caught at the Farr 40 worlds and the winner being decided off the water.
1. He had the opportunity on the water to take a penalty (the safe move in the final race of a world championship).
2. He had the opportunity in the room to object to the judges hearing the protest.
Since items 1 and/or 2 weren't addressed at the event, why had he now come out with his open letter complaining about the event? Seems a little late.
Morten Lorenzen of Farr 40 DEN 2900 "Backbone" writes that they didn´t want to decide the Worlds by filing in a protest against Joe Fly in a situation where JF had clearly committed a rule infringement with the jury as a wittness. I strongly disagree with Morten´s logic. One part of following the rules is to file in a protest when there is reason to do so.
If you find yourself in a major race fouled by one of the big boys you can´t escape having an impact on the results. You either protest and see that the good guys win. Or you don´t protest and decide the end results by letting the bad guys win. I find it unsportsmanlike not to protest in the first place and then complain afterwards.
How could class owner Geoff Stagg let this conflict of interest be so blatant as to empower a jury as biased as this one to be chosen for a World Championship? It’s obvious that Tom Ehman, Richard Slater, Henry Menin and John Kostecki all work for Oracle and cannot help but be biased. Isn’t Stagg supposed to be there to protect the owners? It is time for ISAF to step in.
I believe that Stagg brought together the same crew that had been doing the event for the past few years, and as to conflict with competitors like Kostecki, I suspect that it is hard for Stagg or anyone to know who would be entered in the event (Kostecki wasn’t even supposed to be there).
It should be noted that Menin was a member of the 32nd ACUP jury, which no one opposed. Also, no one opposed the 2008 Farr 40 Worlds jury until after an event that had the fewest protests ever, but had one where the result was agreed upon by everyone except for the losing party. Bertarelli did try to have Ehman removed from the jury prior to the 2007 Worlds, but the class denied the request.
It will be interesting to see who is on the jury for the 2009 Worlds.
In my opinion the level of the Farr 40 Worlds was alarmingly low. Concerns the open letter in issue 2583 by Giovanni Maspero, owner of Joe Fly: “… I’m not an ‘expert’ on the rules …” wrote Mr. Maspero, but his jockeys ought to be. And the rules say: a party to the hearing who believes a member of the protest committee is an interested party shall object as soon as possible. And not afterwards, in a open letter, when you have lost the protest.
Concerns the letter from Morten Lorenzen, DEN 2900 Backbone, in issue 2584: “… We decided, after serious considerations NOT to file the protest, …”. Mr. Lorenzen, your gentleman sport lives thanks to the all respected rule: when you think a boat has broken a rule and you do not protest the boat: keep your mouth shut. And “We did have a serious talk with Joe Fly´s owner and tactician about their arrogance and risky strategy …” Who showed arrogance? Again: no protest? Keep your mouth shut. And a basic of the rules is that competitors do not compromise. You have a jury for the job. (This applies also for Barking Mad). Therefore we got the third party rule, among other things.
I’m a rather old man now, was one of the first international judges in the 1970’s, reading all this I sang: “What have they done to my sport.”
The self-policing sport of sailing requires us all to both ahere to the rules in our conduct and to report perceived mis-conduct when we see it. Difficulty arises when we attempt to also be judges and juries. In the case of Joe Fly, there seems to have been several times when other competitors took it upon themselves to act as judges by deciding NOT to help police the race course. Certainly this is understandable from a social perspective. However, any boat feeling fouled, raising a flag, and then deciding NOT to protest because they "didn't want to decide the regatta" goes against the way our sport is set-up. The ironically named "Backbone" did in fact decide to be a judge at an important part of the event and all the other competitors and the subsequent tenor of the event are worse off for it.
Post a Comment
<< Home