As I get more and more into the world of judging, I wonder about the role of the Rules/protests/hearings etc. at the Club level.
In our Club we have no history at all of protests/hearing. There is occasionally a bit of high-volume discussion on the water and then a rehash of the event over beer after, usually with a consensus about who broke the rule.
Is that the best course? Some say we should have more real protests as a way of learning and gaining experience with the whole process. Others are happy to just let things continue as they have been.
I have mixed feelings. I certainly don’t want our Club to become confrontational and tied up in acrimonious disputes. On the other hand, I do think it would be a very good learning experience for our members to be more attentive to the Rules and understand them better. Due to my interest in the rules and the judging experience, members come to me for advice and I am glad to give it, but that is not the same as a more formal hearing – which doesn’t have to be a really adversarial proceeding, but which would let people see how difficult it may be to determine what happened.
What does your Club do? What is the best approach?