SUI-100 Mainsail Check - Comment and Images.

by nzeditor@sail-world.com on 29 Jun 2007
As soon as Race 4 finished, Race Officer Peter Reggio advised competitors that there would be a check on both boats by the Measurement Committee to ensure that their mainsails could be lowered without the assistance of a man aloft.

A measurer boarded each boat. Emirates Team New Zealand complied, but then aboard Alinghi we saw a man go up to the top of the mast the mast, and then do some no-hands gestures, before the mainsail was lowered. It transpired that he had gone up to the top of the mast to attach a halyard, not to facilitate the lowering of the mainsail but give the crew some control over the sail while it was being lowered to prevent damage to the sail.

The Measurement Committee did not file a report, indicating they felt that there was no infringements. However Emirates Team New Zealand did not see it that way and protested issuing the following statement:

'Emirates Team New Zealand today lodged a protest with the America’s Cup Jury. ETNZ contends that Alinghi’s mainsail locking system on SUI 100 is in breach of the America’s Cup Class Rule. The rule is:

31.6 Mainsails shall be able to be lowered to the deck without the necessity of a crew member going aloft.

We have been advised that protest will be heard at 11.00 hours on Thursday 28 June.

The rule is primarily a safety one, designed to prevent a man being sent aloft, particularly in heavy seas to prevent incidents which have previously occurred when the crewman has lost contact with the mast, and been severely injured as he swung like a pendulum hitting the mast and stays.

Which way the International Jury goes on this one will be interesting. One school of thought has it that Alinghi could, in an emergency situation have lowered the main, even though it was going to damage the sail. And that the attachment of the halyard is a 'nice to have'. In that view, they are probably in compliance.

The other school is that this is a safety rule, and while Alinghi may be entitled to remove their halyard after hoisting, they have to stay in compliance with the rule while lowering, and need to have a line (albeit it lighter than the halyard) to give the required upward control and fix a jammed sail if lowering in a seaway. The key argument will hinge around the word 'necessity'.

As we saw in the backstay 'discussion', the Measurement Committee tended to look at the meaning of words in the rule and interpreting those, rather than looking at the intent of the rule, and trying to interpret what was in the rulewriters’ minds when the rule was drafted.

In the backstay Interpretations, the Measurement Committee were directed by the International Jury, at one point in the convoluted process, to look at Intent of the Rule. And to be consistent, they have to follow this path.

Measurement checks are not unusual in international racing, in fact they are standard practice at World Championship level and above - and on a daily basis. A fundamental principle of sailing is that it is a self-policing sport and that the competitors are both trusted and required to comply within the rules. The penalties for non-compliance when a rule is broken usually severe, and will far outweigh the material gain of an infringement.

Readers with longer memories, will recall the incidents and protests in the 1992 Louis Vuitton Cup Final when Il Moro di Venezia won a technical protest against then New Zealand Challenge and NZL-20 for carrying a spinnaker for too long when not attached to a spinnaker pole. The Kiwi's error was that while the pole was allowed to be detached while gybing, they infringed when they left the sail attached to their bowsprit for longer than necessary for the gybe.

The Italians used video and other evidence to persuade the Jury that NZL-20 infringed and she was deducted her win of 25 April 1992. This took NZL-20 from being 4-1 in the series to 3-1 and Il Moro went on to win the Louis Vuitton Cup. Ironically it was just after this incident that Brad Butterworth and Russell Coutts took over as tactician and skipper respectively of NZL-20.

Tomorrow is a layday. The major point of interest will be Jury Hearing which will no doubt be led By Emirates Team New Zealand’s Jim Farmer QC. It is understood that Alinghi is being protested directly by Emirates Team NZ, and not the Measurement Committee, or some other body.

The America's Cup doesn't always follow mainstream sailing practice, and the outcomes could range from the protest being withdrawn by Emirates Team New Zealand before the Hearing, to the the Int Jury deducting a win from Alinghi, with many options in between.

The image sequence below shows some of the actions that appear to have taken place at the top of the masthead of SUI-100 after Race 4. These are stills from the television coverage.

[Sorry, this content could not be displayed]