Umpire Calls Explained - Louis Vuitton Cup Day 4
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ต.ค. 2024
- The rules, protests and umpire calls have been a hot topic down here…especially on Day 4 when the British had all four of their protests green flagged.
There’s been plenty of bar room chat and speculation and in some cases guesswork….so in case you missed it, here’s chief umpire Richard Slater’s detailed breakdown to all four protests and his explanation as to why they were not given…..it’s very interesting stuff as we’ve seen several of the scenarios repeated since and will no doubt see them again.
Day 5 - Louis Vuitton Cup Finals - View From The Bridge - America's Cup - 1-10-24
• Day 5 - Louis Vuitton ...
Day 4 - Louis Vuitton Cup Finals - Incredible - America's Cup - 30-9-24
• Day 4 - Louis Vuitton ...
Day 3 - Louis Vuitton Cup Finals - Smash & Grab - America's Cup - 29-9-24
• Day 3 - Louis Vuitton ...
Day 2 Louis Vuitton Cup Finals - Reveal Day - America's Cup - 28-9-24
• Day 2 - Louis Vuitton ...
Day 1 Louis Vuitton Cup Finals - Reveal Day - America's Cup - 26-9-24
• Louis Vuitton Cup Fina...
Day 5 Louis Vuitton Semi Finals - Decider Day - America's Cup - 19-9-24
• Louis Vuitton Semi Fin...
Day 4 Louis Vuitton Semi Finals - One Out..One to Go - 18 9 24
• One Out..One to Go - A...
Day 3 Louis Vuitton Semi Finals - Marginal Monday - America's Cup - 16-9-24
• Day 3 Louis Vuitton Se...
The Next Phase - America's Cup - Louis Vuitton Semi Finals - Day 1 14-9-24
• Day 1 Louis Vuitton Se...
What They Said - Louis Vuitton Cup Semi Final Press Conference 13-9-24
• Semi Final Press Confe...
Elimination Day - AC37 News Report 9-9-24
• Elimination Day - AC C...
Stop, Start…Stop AC Challenger Trials - AC37 News Report 8-9-24
• Stop, Start…Stop AC Ch...
Big Day in Barcelona - AC37 News Report 7-9-24 LVC D7
• Big Day in Barcelona -...
The Unexpected - AC37 News Report 5-9-24 LVC Day 6
• The Unexpected - AC37 ...
Show Stopper - AC37 News Report 3-9-24 LVC Day 5
• Show Stopper - AC37 Ne...
Super Saturday - Americas Cup News LVC Day 3 - 31-8-24
• Super Saturday - Ameri...
A Difficult Day - - Louis Vuitton Cup Day 2
• Americas Cup Challenge...
Challenger Trials Under Way - Louis Vuitton Cup Day 1
• Challenger Trials Unde...
What They Said - Press Conference - LV Challenger Series
• What They Said - Ameri...
Preliminary Regatta - Day 3
• Foot to the Floor - AC...
Preliminary Regatta - Day 2
• Louis Vuitton America'...
Preliminary Regatta - Day 1
• America's Cup Kicks Of...
Ben Ainslie interview
• Ben Ainslie interview
The First America's Cup & Why it matters
• The First America's Cu...
How & Why The America's Cup Began
• How & Why The America'...
The American Dream - American Magic’s slippery machine
• The American Dream - R...
Playing Catch Up - The Alinghi Story
• Playing Catch Up - Roa...
Human Power - How do teams power an AC75?
• Ep8 - Human Power - Ro...
OnCourse magazine show:
The Biggest Events in Sailing - Ep34 OnCourse
• The Biggest Events in ...
Atlantic Flight - New York Special - OnCourse Ep33
• Atlantic Flight - OnCo...
It all sounds like the umpires trying to justify wrong decisions, and failing. This is very dangerous stuff
Sailing aggressively and hunting for a penalty is part of the game and has been for a very long time. The competitors will not stop aiming to penalise their opponents so they will push the margins till there is an accident or the umpires start calling fouls. At this point an accident is more likely to happen than foul being called. We are talking about
1) Ok
2) you cannot have a situation where overlapped boat can just keep bearing away into the leeward boat at such tight distance -its just dangerous! umpire is wrong.
3) ok
4) GBR were so close and could easily have hit LR. LR did not keep clear. Umpire not giving penalty is just dangerous and wrong.
IN case 2, the question you raise only arises for about 0.7s, during the period where GB had established overlap but before the wind crossed LR's stern.
The amount of their heading change during this period was available to the umpires, who have a high resolution data stream including accurate heading and true wind direction for each boat. Presumably they decided it was so close to a straight line as not to constitute "changing course" toward the other boat.
For the following brief moment (also under a second) when LR had gybed onto starboard and GB had not, it was now GB's obligation to keep clear (boats on diff tacks, LR on stbd).
And then when GB gybed, being now windward boat with overlap on the same tack, they still had to keep clear.
But here's the interesting twist: under both those new situations, LR initially had the obligation, because they were changing course, to give GB *room* to keep clear, which was demonstrated to be the case. GB were able to do so without even coming off their foils.
IN case 4, the starboard pilot/trimmer on GB, (I can't remember if it was Luke or Bleddyn) talking through the situation after the race on "Inside Tack" (TH-cam series by INEOS) said that from the feel of the boat he was not surprised that the port helm (Dylan F) was not prepared to luff LR, because they were on the hairy edge of losing the rudder. That would have been catastrophic as they were well overlapped, and they would have rounded up uncontrollably and smacked into their opponent. If they do not luff, the other boat has no obligation to respond.
GB could have dropped back a metre or two and luffed, but in doing so would risk losing their advantage. It was probably smarter (this was not discussed, just my hunch) to hope that the threat of their presence would help distract LR. The tiniest lapse with their trim or balance would allow GB to sail through their lee and round their bow. My sense is that GB are generally sailing quite conservatively, except for the occasional times when (at close quarters) they decide to engage aggressively. It's an interesting strategy and must be a bit unsettling for their opponents.
Peter Burling is another example of this, I reckon.
#1 WAS Never a protest . But in Case #4 Lots of Debate on what IS or ISN'T Too Close by the Judges themselves; YET freely concede that THIS was on Edge.
However, this throws Case #2 into sharp relief, where the overlap WAS established, the closing spped WAS Alarmingly Fast, GBR HAD to pull out, to avoid contact and serious consequences, and in doing so lost their controlling position. This is a Black and White case for penalty, especially when you apply the Judges own reasoning.
Highly unprofessional judging in my honest opinion on that case #2 for these reasons.
It is asking for Dangerous levels of proximity at speeds and angles where you are only tenths of a second away from Disaster to achieve a Penalty in a competition whose cornerstone is Match Racing where the concept of drawing penalties upon your opposition is paramount.
I Don't have a Dog in this Fight; but GBR must feel aggrieved, and ITA must feel like they won the Lottery here.
Pretty inadequate answers for the 2nd two cases, and up to it again on Wednesday with another luff up turned down and a move of the windward mark after Ineos selected its leeward rounding.
The umpires are playing with fire to allow these boats to get so close! In "normal" racing, the antagonist can prove their position by hitting the other boat, and in top level regattas, they aren't afraid to do so. I think Ben has been very careful to NOT be too aggressive, but the umps need to recognize that and award him penalties because in all 4 of those situations, he was in the right! He could very easily have kept closing the gaps and forced Luna Rossa to take real avoiding action. I think Spithill feels like he can get away with anything now.
Matt - great coverage, and thank you! I am enjoying your daily summaries as much as the racing itself. And you obviously have great rapport and credibility (Justifiably so.) with the sailors because you AWLAYS get one on one interviews with all the top guys. Congrats!
I think it's interesting that the umpire was so liberal with penalties in earlier races against Luna Rossa and now they've gone the other way! Has there been a change to the boat diamond perimeter?
No they had already decided Prada is the boat they want in the finals. lol
GLORY!!!'m favoured, $140K every 3weeks! And I am retired i can now give back to the locals in my community and also support God's work and the church. God bless America🇺🇸❤️
Hello, how do you achieve such biweekly returns? As a single parent i haven't been able to get my own house due to financial struggles, but my faith in God remains strong.
Excuse me for real?,how is that
possible I have struggling
financially, how was that possible?
Thanks to my co-worker whom God used to give a great opportunity of crossing paths with 'Mrs ELIZABETH ANN LARSON'.
YES!!! That's exactly her name (Elizabeth Ann Larson) so many people have recommended highly about her and am just starting with her 😊 from Brisbane Australia🇦🇺
I have heard a lot of wonderful things about Elizabeth Ann on the news but didn't believe it until now. I'm definitely trying her out
In protest 2, only the umpires examining the situation after the fact actually know the point at which LR gained right of way. In normal racing this would be indicated by the boom crossing the boat but in the rules for this regatta it is apparently dictated by true wind angle instead. As INEOS were approaching on a different heading it is impossible for them to know when the transition occurs, so they have no way to judge when the onus is on them to begin keeping clear. To all intents and purposes the way the rules are working here seems to be "just avoid each other and keep racing".
In protest 4, this seems like a clear message that 4m isn't close enough to get a penalty, so we want the boats travelling at 30+kts in a seaway to get closer. Wow!
I posted some thoughts on these two situations in response to FredCacti on this page.
Thank you ... clear explanations. I didn't like the logic of the 4th decision ... "this far and no farther" ? So you 'll have to overlay a future situation on top of this one to ensure consistency. Of course part of the logic is there was no foul, I didn't see Ineos bear away (though I'm sure others did !). And of course you don't need a foul to prove an infraction (in fact the 1st rule is "avoid a collision").
part of the problem is the conditions, I think boats need different stay out zones in high winds. In the 4th protest (what to my eye looked most egregious on the course) there was little chance on an "explosive" contact ... unlike the 1st pre-start (where they seemed to be coming together a a high rate of knots !).
The rules seem to have been written for the umpires, 'the software', to reach a result using the information available to them (from the software).
However, the helmsmen do not have the same information, for example which tack the other boat is on. It is not defined by the position of the sail.
The umpires seem to have acknowledged that here, but are letting it go.
I fear that only when a collision between the racing boats occur will this be addressed. However as a yacht should not cause a collision even when they have the right of way; the right of way boat will be penalised..... Therefore a collision will probably never occur; "Go figure....!!"