My protest was about the pushing of my boat and them not giving me room (and worse still pushing my boat into the reeds with their hands). This was not desputed by the other boat. The committee agreed that the other boat was wrong in doing that.
However, the "committee" also agreed I tacked in the middle of the narrow channel, ahead and beneath the starboard tack boat, but they decided I should not have done this.
"You broke the rules and he broke the rules so no-one gets DSQ."
I'm wondering which rule they are refering to. Any ideas ?
If I had been you, I would have argued that the only question before them for decision was not whether I
committed a violation, but whether he
committed one. I would have said, "...even he
knows I didn't commit a violation. He's
an acknowledged rules expert, and if he thought I violated a rule, he would have protested me
. Since the only protest before the committee is mine, the only question for the committee to decide is whether my protest is valid. Since he admits
the violation, it seems to me that the answer, and the committee's duty, is clear."
That having been said, I still think there was enough ambiguity in the facts that we have been provided so that we can't fairly say that the committee made an incorrect decision.