The Official
Website of the
Sailing Federation
5 November 2001, 11:41 am
Protest No 2 v Illbruck Upheld
No ALT tag specified
The offending weed cutter

Volvo Ocean Race

It was found by the International Jury that illbruck was not compliant with the class rules having attached a weed cutting device to the leading edge of the S-Drive. illbruck were fined GBP 1000 for the infringement.
The International Jury, chaired by Mr Bryan Willis (GBR) upheld the protest by the Race Committee against illbruck Challenge, finding that:

a. The weed cutting device attached to the leading edge of the S-Drive does constitute a modification.

b. The issue of a measurement certificate does not constitute explicit permission for the modification.

c. The boat illbruck was not compliant with the class rules for leg one.

d. illbruck Challenge was fined GBP1,000 for the infringement. No points were docked.

The Race Committee did not believe a place penalty was appropriate. Race Director Michael Woods pointed out that V.O60 rule interpretation number 53 states that a separate weed cutter would not be contrary to the rules, although an integral weed cutter is clearly a modification. Additionally, the device as installed on illbruck was likely, if anything, to create more drag. Whilst illbruck was in contravention of the rule, an oversight by a measurer did occur.

illbruck also noted that the device would increase drag and called the
issue an administrative oversight and maintained that it should not result in a points penalty.

Jury Chairman Bryan Willis allowed submissions from interested parties
(the other teams) as the penalty ruling would possibly affect them.

Assa Abloy pointed out that with 51 measurement interpretations issued leading up to the race start, the process where a boat asks for a measurement interpretation was well established, and illbruck would hardly have made an oversight in neglecting to ask. Assa Abloy pointed out that when an interpretation is sought, it becomes public knowledge and all the other boats can then decide whether to make the same modification. By not asking, illbruck could have gained an advantage because none of the other boats would know what they were modifying.

Team News Corp and dJuice Dragons both pointed out that by having a weed cutting device on the S-Drive illbruck gained considerable advantage by not having to slow or stop to clear weeds from the S-Drive. Team News Corp estimated this would have cost between 25 and 30 miles on the leg and pointed out that could be greatly amplified when one takes into account hooking into a favourable weather system.

No other teams were present.

Commenting on the day of protests, illbruck Challenge CEO Glenn Bourke said: 'The first protest for us was always very questionable. We didn't understand what Assa Abloy were getting at and I think in retrospect now, they didn't realize how simple it was to track through the Internet to find that website that we had nominated. The hearing went on for three hours, looking at all the nuances and the technical side of the protest but when we showed them [the jury and Assa Abloy representatives) how easy it was to find the site through the nominated websites, they withdrew the protest. They understood that it was really frivolous and they didn't want to continue wasting any more time with it.'

'The boat who wins the leg is always the focus and really, from our perspective it's good to have ourselves cleared and to know exactly what the direction is for the future. It is good for all of us, and that is why the jury chose to have an open forum (for the first protest) like they did today. It is educational for everyone and we go into the next leg with a deepened level of knowledge and we are less likely to make a similar type of mistake.'

On the second protest regarding the modification to the stern drive Bourke said: 'We have been penalized £1000 for infringing V.O.60 class rule 5.4.2 and we believe the case is over and we are happy with that. The jury have instructed us to take the stern drive back to its original configuration which is quite easy for us and we will be doing that pretty much straight away.'

Commenting on the earlier protest regarding Internet access, Bourke said:

'It was a very long day, and even with as much experience as we have had in protest rooms, it's never easy and you never know which way the jury is going to go and we are very glad to have it over.'

Bryan Willis, Chairman of the Jury commenting on the second protest said: 'There were mitigating factors. It would be usual in these circumstances for a measurer to have spotted this sort of thing and to have made a report immediately to the syndicate representatives so that they could put it right. His attention was on other matters and he failed to do that. Although he is not obliged to do that, it would be normal and the syndicate would have relied on that.

'It was a minor matter from the point of view of it making a difference but obviously breaking any rule like this is something we take seriously and I think that £1000 is a meaningful penalty.'

Regarding Internet access, Mr Willis confirm that the jury will be recommending to the Race Committee that they arrange a forum for the competitors to meet and discuss their concerns about Internet access.
Volvo Ocean Race Press/News Editor
Share this page
World Sailing TV
Latest News
News Archive
© 2015 Copyright ISAF/ISAF UK Ltd. All Rights Reserved Privacy & Cookies delivered by Sotic powered by OpenText WSM