My first Head Of The Charles was in 2003. The tradition since the regatta's first year in 1965 was that officiating would be done by local volunteers, from the founding Cambridge Boat Club (CBC), other clubs along the Charles such as Riverside and Union, and others from the collegiate crews that called the Charles home water. Over time the volunteer Umpire roster at each of the observation stations along the course became somewhat hardened by informal rules approaching dynastic succession: this is my station, I've been here for n-number of years, and when I stop participating, I'm going to bequeath it to others in my family.

OK, understood; but I didn't understand at the time. That first year I was one of four licensed officials participating as Umpires; I was in the Basin as a marshal, and Leah White was driving for me (the Basin is the crew assembly and warm up area between the Massachusetts Avenue bridge connecting Cambridge and Boston, and the starting line at Boston University's DeWolfe boathouse); John Quinn was ensconced in his usual role as the head of the Jury at CBC; and John was accompanied by our colleague Laura Kunkemueller, who had been the captain of the Princeton women's team.

I had had a lot of trouble even making it to a position in the Basin; no one seemed to know how to handle a participation request from a USRowing Referee, and Chief Referees (or Umpires - we're Umpires at the Head of the Charles) are aware there's a tension between inviting in folks "from away" and in the process supplanting or disadvantaging the locals. And the locals were very much embedded in the officiating structure.

Pete Peterson was the Chief Umpire that year; Bob Appleyard had been the Chief multiple times but gave it up after he moved to the Chicago area. There had been a local FISA Umpire selected to be the Chief, but she and the HOCR committee couldn't reach an agreement about standards, logistics, or other issues so she withdrew and Pete as a member of CBC became the Chief-designate.

But... Pete had been in the process of resigning his USRowing Referee license; HOCR is a "registered regatta" and one of the stipulations is that the Chief must hold a full USRowing Referee license. Pete consulted with Bob to obtain some advice about being the Chief, and Bob - who at the time was also Chair of the Referee Commission - had to inform Pete of a small complication:

"Uh, Pete? Happy to help you out, but there's an issue."

"What's that?"

"I have your resignation letter in front of me, and you can't be the Chief without your license, if HOCR wants to continue to be a registered regatta."

[Pause] "OK CAN YOU JUST TEAR THAT UP?"

"Sure Pete. I'll take care of it."

Bob told me later that an excessive number of penalties had been reported at the 2003 HOCR, and he had been sheepishly asked "Bob: do you think we can get a few more USRowing Referees to come to the Head of the Charles to help out?" Bob allowed, with one of his enigmatic grins I suspect, that sure, that would be entirely possible. Sure enough, there were about 25 Referees present in 2004 and we've been on hand ever since.

Neither John Quinn or myself were surprised at the excessive number of penalties; in the twenty years since, one of the guiding principles has been to ensure that any penalties imposed are "righteous" penalties. A righteous penalty is one that should be imposed, versus one that is questionable. Fewer penalties - reducing as far as possible penalties that should not be imposed - in turn limits the overall number of appeals, which then does not clog up the Jury process and makes the process much simpler and streamlined-which benefits all concerned.

For the HOCR some penalties-cutting buoys, going through the wrong bridge arch, etc.-are cut and dried: either a crew did, or didn't. These penalties don't require a lot of judgement by the Umpires, only accurate observation. Because they're of the did/did not sort, they are unlikely to be appealed, and if they are they can be resolved quickly-it's like calling balls and strikes, and one can't argue those calls with the Umpire!

But experienced judgement is called for when considering a penalty of Interference, or similar violations with major time penalties of up to one minute. At the HOCR Interference takes the form of "Non-yield" (a slower crew fails to give the line or course desired by a faster crew that is try to pass them) or "Severe Collision" (when two or more crews collide impeding their progress and perhaps others). Because of their consequences for placement and return invitations, violations with major time penalties are more likely to be appealed-so there's a premium on getting the judgement right, or righteous.

Trained USRowing officials may observe Interference more than a few times in any given year, and multiple times over a number of years. Given our experienced and nuanced judgement, it's as important for the Lead Umpires (all of whom are USRowing Referees) to guide their station teams to a conclusion of "No penalty" as it is to assign a penalty when appropriate. On any number of occasions we can make the call that the situation observed is not an infraction, where a less experienced set of eyes may think otherwise. For us the metric of success is how many penalties stand upon appeal; some are always overturned, but those that stand mean we're doing the work correctly.