Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

phomchick

OTUSA renounces AC45 Championships

Recommended Posts

I'd be disappointed if ETNZ or LR didn't raise the surrogate issue with the jury.

 

Some of the early jury cases were logged by AR and OR asking questions about what constitutes a surrogate - targeting the LR Purchase of an ETNZ design, suggesting that was a surrogate for ETNZ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG!!!!!

I can see the bumper stickers now. OR means ORFUL RACING 45GATE.

The media will have a field day for years.

The questions going forward will include.

Who knew ?

Who kept quiet?

Who sanctioned this behaviour?

What else is undisclosed?

 

Thanks for ruining an already horrible AC 34.

So disappointed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"one of the biggest scandals in international yachting history" (ETNZ on TVNZ website)

 

now THATS over the top, compleetly

 

ETNZ need to taek a chill pill

 

from an OR vewpoynt, there over-reackshun is a gift, turns it into a shit-fite,

ensewing showting and shuvving perfict smokescrene for there minor misdemeener

 

Bring it on, kiwis ! yore playing into ORs hands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"one of the biggest scandals in international yachting history" (ETNZ on TVNZ website)

 

now THATS over the top, compleetly

 

ETNZ need to taek a chill pill

 

from an OR vewpoynt, there over-reackshun is a gift, turns it into a shit-fite,

ensewing showting and shuvving perfict smokescrene for there minor misdemeener

 

Bring it on, kiwis ! yore playing into ORs hands

Delibbrat cheetin - ownlee a mynoar misdemmeener?

Seems dyrektly under handed two mee. Yew doant have eny Ozziness in yew Mr Kearns?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The burning question is... there musthave been someone in the Oracle team who authorised these mods. The shore team don't just make changes without authorisation, and if no one takes responsibility (And I hope someone does) the buck does, unfortunately stop with "The boss" Now, that has some really far-reaching consequences, if Russell is made to take the fall for this, and maybe have to cop a ban from sailing, that would really be infuriating! For all his faults in this Cup cycle, I really DON'T believe Russell knowingly, and intentionally authorised illegal mods. He may be a lot of things, but a cheater, no, I would need some concrete undisputable evidence to believe that. But someone did and that someone needs to step up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty bizzare that someone would authorise it and then allow them to go and get measured. Just doesn't make sense. Hard to believe 5kg could make that much difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The burning question is... there musthave been someone in the Oracle team who authorised these mods. The shore team don't just make changes without authorisation, and if no one takes responsibility (And I hope someone does) the buck does, unfortunately stop with "The boss" Now, that has some really far-reaching consequences, if Russell is made to take the fall for this, and maybe have to cop a ban from sailing, that would really be infuriating! For all his faults in this Cup cycle, I really DON'T believe Russell knowingly, and intentionally authorised illegal mods. He may be a lot of things, but a cheater, no, I would need some concrete undisputable evidence to believe that. But someone did and that someone needs to step up.

Yes someone knew alright and sailed them to win all those races. Now which skipper would that be?

Oh no not yet another underarm bowl for kiwis to quote !!

What top skipper does not know every last thing about his own boat? Who will believe the denials? NOT ME!!! Chop Chop.

If Russell didnt know he should have. Chop Chop.

Surrogate boat rules.???

Hand the cup over now to the winner of the challenger series. Winner takes all. Chop Chop.

WOT A MESS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"one of the biggest scandals in international yachting history" (ETNZ on TVNZ website)

 

now THATS over the top, compleetly

 

ETNZ need to taek a chill pill

 

from an OR vewpoynt, there over-reackshun is a gift, turns it into a shit-fite,

ensewing showting and shuvving perfict smokescrene for there minor misdemeener

 

Bring it on, kiwis ! yore playing into ORs Hands

 

You ain't Snaggy, so give it a rest with your stupid childish English attempt. Learn how to spell correctly (and leave EB out of that Farce. Fucker!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about this the more serious it appears.

 

They can not deny it was a deliberate contravention of the rules.

 

The guy who ordered the changes will need to be banned from sailing (that guy is likely to be one level lower than RC)

 

However, win or lose RC will have to resign in 7 weeks if not before. And I think his bonus is now out the door.

 

They will need to get to the matter ASAP otherwise the internal strife within the OR team will tear it apart going into the final weeks before a major regatta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that JS is mixed up in it. I might be mistaken but I don't think he has been in front of the media for 2 weeks or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

^

 

Enquiring minds would like to know why you'd bolt lead to your boat, contrary to class rules, if "the modifications had no impact on the performance of the boats." Decorative effect, perhaps?

 

Every time Coutts opens his mouth, I'm waiting for the lie to slip out. It seems he can't help himself.

 

Before rushing into conclusions we do need to know more details. It could have just been the maintenacne team reinforcing the kingpost as OR's three AC45's were working harder than most as opposed to an attempt to conceal lead inside the post to improve performance. The IJ report should make it clear and any parties involved duly punished if guilty.

With lead? Do you seriously believe that yourself?

 

I did not realise that it has been confirmed that there was 2.5kg of lead inside the kingpost. Yes, that is definitely a Rule 69 cheat in a one design class (I remember reports of people putting lead inside their spinnaker poles for inclination tests in the good old days of the IOR rule).

 

Everybody who was involved or knew should be banned by ISAF, can't see how else you could read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be very interested to know a bit more about the modifications and what possible beneficial capabilities they may have. An innocent explaination is that maybe a king post broke and someone decided to strengthen them all to stop it happening again. Another less palatable possibility is they added a bit of strength there to get better platform rigidity and forestay tension - which is a pretty damning action. If they were true master criminals they would have removed their mods again before the scrutiny. Idiocy really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tvnz peice suggested that these boats like the weight forward. Given that the crew would hike along way forward that seems feasible. Weight in that location presumably has a lot of leverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"An innocent explaination is that maybe a king post broke and someone decided to strengthen them all"

 

The RD’s Application was based on an attached report from the Measurement Committee (MC), which alleged that an unauthorised modification had been made to the three AC45 Yachts, by adding weight to the forward king post in contravention of AC45 Class Rule C1.5, which prohibits modification to components listed in Class Rule C1.2. The ‘forward king post’ is included in the component list in Class Rule C1.2.

 

It says "adding weight" not "strengthening".

 

I guess we don't know for certain this was bolting on lead. But if the objective was strengthening, I'd have expected the MC to describe it as such,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were there crew weight limits?

Is there a leverage factor for a few kgs forward.

Other than for 'pencils', how does added lead add 'strength'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"An innocent explaination is that maybe a king post broke and someone decided to strengthen them all"

 

The RD’s Application was based on an attached report from the Measurement Committee (MC), which alleged that an unauthorised modification had been made to the three AC45 Yachts, by adding weight to the forward king post in contravention of AC45 Class Rule C1.5, which prohibits modification to components listed in Class Rule C1.2. The ‘forward king post’ is included in the component list in Class Rule C1.2.

 

It says "adding weight" not "strengthening".

 

I guess we don't know for certain this was bolting on lead. But if the objective was strengthening, I'd have expected the MC to describe it as such,

Hmmm Ok. Well that's me all out of innocent explanations...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about this the more serious it appears.

They can not deny it was a deliberate contravention of the rules.

Likewise. This is bad news- cheating in your own regatta, that you invite others to. At this level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"An innocent explaination is that maybe a king post broke and someone decided to strengthen them all"

 

The RD’s Application was based on an attached report from the Measurement Committee (MC), which alleged that an unauthorised modification had been made to the three AC45 Yachts, by adding weight to the forward king post in contravention of AC45 Class Rule C1.5, which prohibits modification to components listed in Class Rule C1.2. The ‘forward king post’ is included in the component list in Class Rule C1.2.

 

It says "adding weight" not "strengthening".

 

I guess we don't know for certain this was bolting on lead. But if the objective was strengthening, I'd have expected the MC to describe it as such,

 

The extra weight was inside the hollow section of the king posts i.e deliberately hidden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://tvnz.co.nz/americas-cup-news/dalton-slams-oracle-cheats-5530306

 

In one of the biggest scandals in international yachting history, Oracle Team USA has been found guilty of cheating after modifying its AC45 catamarans illegally in last year's America's Cup World Series.

The syndicate is now being charged with bringing the sport into disrepute, following an internal investigation.

The investigation determined that prior to racing in the regattas the yachts were modified without the permission of the Measurement Committee.

The boats were used by Oracle Team USA in the America's Cup World Series which the American team went on to win.

Team New Zealand boss Grant Dalton is fuming.

"It was a deliberate attempt to circumvent the rule. That's cheating. It's as bad as it gets and it's a team we respect as competitors we've been racing against in the 45s our competitors were cheating us to try and beat us.

"What are they capable of in the America's Cup?

 

 

America's Cup expert Peter Lester says it comes down to who made the call.

"I think a banning from this sport but let's get it very clear - I don't think it's necessarily who did the work on the boats. Who gave the instruction to do the work on the boats is probably the more pertinent point and getting to the bottom of that could be difficult.

An investigation has started under sailing's rule 69.

 



Oh what a surprise!!! Oracle Team USA had been cheating for nearly a year in the America's Cup World Series...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Cioè...? Oracle si ritira dalle AC45 World Series dopo averle vinte (a parte il fatto che non contavano nulla, se non per far vedere quanto sarebbe bella una Coppa disputata in Italia) dichiarando che le sue barche erano taroccate a "insaputa" dei dirigenti. Cos'è la barzelletta del giorno o l'ennesima riprova che Oracle Racing sta rischiando di far perdere ogni credibilità a quello che era l'evento trainante della vela mondiale per oltre 150 anni? Sempre più forza kiwi. dellahttp://www.americascup.com/en/news/3/news/17160/otusa-withdraws-from-past-ac45-regattas

Ie ...? Oracle withdraws from identical AC45 wing World Series won them (aside from the fact that they were nothing if not to see how it would be nice a cup held in Italy) stating that its boats were "unknowingly" people. What is the joke of the day or the umpteenth proof that Oracle Racing is risking to lose any credibility to what was the driving force behind world sailing for over 150 years? Increasingly strength kiwi. dellahttp://www.americascup.com/en/news/3/news/17160/otusa-withdraws-from-past-ac45-regattas(Translated by Bing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And all the worlds sailing press are assembling in SF to cover this

Oracle Team USA have caught themselves cheating in the AC World Series according to their press release tonight:

'Between June 2012 and April 2013

ORACLE TEAM USA’s AC45 yachts have withdrawn, retrospectively, from the last four AC World Series regattas.

This follows an internal investigation led by CEO Russell Coutts

“Our team is very disappointed by this turn of events, and I believe that voluntarily withdrawing from these past AC45 regattas is the appropriate corrective action,” Coutts said. “Going forward we remain focused on our AC72 training in preparation for the upcoming America’s Cup this September.” '

 

So many questions to ask but OTUSA say there will be no press conference to allow media to address this revelation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way "management" did not know what was going on with the boats. Absolutely no way. What Russell is saying is that he didnt know that his own AC45 he raced had extra weight in the sprit. I call bollocks.

For Russell to come out and pin blame on others below management level is a disgrace. The matter has only just come to light and He is already making statements known to false and playing the blame game within his own team.

This can not be good for OTANZAC and may well become a major distraction. I guess luckily for them they still have heaps of time.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably that hidden weight forward and central would have been beneficial when driving through choppy seas.

Methinks there's an Aussie behind this, can't be a Kiwi (they of the no underhand ball).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OR is just too big for it's lines of communication

 

fits in well with that pic of the painter proudly putting the usa flag sticker over unpainted fairing compound

 

sammy sosa - cork in the bat

 

OR - lead in the king post

 

simple mistakes

 

could happen to anyone

 

l.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems some don't appreciate the description of AC34 as a fiasco. So here are some alternatives.

 

blunder

breakdown

debacle

disaster

embarrassment

failure

farce

flop

mess

washout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somethings these stories go away.....and others....

 

Putting weight in a component that would otherwise have been hollow(?) is clearly intentional attempt to trim the bow down...must have been an interesting moment for whoever was disassembling the boat, expecting to take off a lightweight component and suddenly feeling an extra 5kg! Motorsport is full of this and scrutineering in F1 is maniacal, measuring everything to the mm/less.

 

The real question is going to be who asked for the change. Whoever did the change is just a pawn.

 

Very sorry.......but it is the kind of change that a helm would ask for.....a helm looking at the bow and stern wave and instinctively knowing that a change was needed. Maybe they even asked for the change innocently....but then you ask the measurer. If he says no, you try to get forward in the boat.....

 

Got a bad feeling about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way "management" did not know what was going on with the boats. Absolutely no way. What Russell is saying is that he didnt know that his own AC45 he raced had extra weight in the sprit. I call bollocks.

For Russell to come out and pin blame on others below management level is a disgrace. The matter has only just come to light and He is already making statements known to false and playing the blame game within his own team.

This can not be good for OTANZAC and may well become a major distraction. I guess luckily for them they still have heaps of time.....

 

I do think that helmsmen like RC and Spithill might 'feel' the difference that 2.5kg of lead concealed (see the Martin Tasker video report on TVNZ) in the king post makes.

 

Anyway there must have been a chain of command as Peter Lester (wasn't he involved in some 470 controversy many years ago?) says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that OR wasn't the only team implicated in this. BA has also withdrawn from the same or similar events. Lead was apparently accidentally added to more than one boat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that both boats were altered. If it was an experiment by a single skipper i.e. 'guys, can we get some weight forward in the boat as an experiment?' that is one situation.....but that both boats got altered suggests that someone tried it, found it worked and then the second boat was altered. I wouldn't have just been both boats at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 17 people were let go from Core a few days ago. I hope that is not related!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems some don't appreciate the description of AC34 as a fiasco. So here are some alternatives.

 

blunder

breakdown

debacle

disaster

embarrassment

failure

farce

flop

mess

washout

You forgot "Mongolian Cluster Fuck".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

^

 

Enquiring minds would like to know why you'd bolt lead to your boat, contrary to class rules, if "the modifications had no impact on the performance of the boats." Decorative effect, perhaps?

 

Every time Coutts opens his mouth, I'm waiting for the lie to slip out. It seems he can't help himself.

 

Before rushing into conclusions we do need to know more details. It could have just been the maintenacne team reinforcing the kingpost as OR's three AC45's were working harder than most as opposed to an attempt to conceal lead inside the post to improve performance. The IJ report should make it clear and any parties involved duly punished if guilty.

With lead? Do you seriously believe that yourself?

 

I did not realise that it has been confirmed that there was 2.5kg of lead inside the kingpost. Yes, that is definitely a Rule 69 cheat in a one design class (I remember reports of people putting lead inside their spinnaker poles for inclination tests in the good old days of the IOR rule).

 

Everybody who was involved or knew should be banned by ISAF, can't see how else you could read.

SIMPLE PROCEDURE

 

ISAF RRS 2013 - 2016

 

 

SECTION C GROSS MISCONDUCT
69 ALLEGATIONS OF GROSS MISCONDUCT
69.1 Obligation not to Commit Gross Misconduct
(a) A competitor shall not commit gross misconduct, including a gross breach of a rule, good manners or sportsmanship, or
conduct bringing the sport into disrepute. Throughout rule 69, ‘competitor’ means a member of the crew, or the owner, of a
boat.
(B) An allegation of a breach of rule 69.1(a) shall be resolved in accordance with the provisions of rule 69.
69.2 Action by a Protest Committee
(a) When a protest committee, from its own observation or a report received from any source, believes that a competitor may have
broken rule 69.1(a), it may call a hearing. If the protest committee decides to call a hearing, it shall promptly inform
the competitor in writing of the alleged breach and of the time and place of the hearing. If the competitor provides good
reason for being unable to attend the hearing, the protest committee shall reschedule it.
(B) A protest committee of at least three members shall conduct the hearing, following the procedures in rules 63.2, 63.3(a), 63.4 and 63.6.
© If it is established to the comfortable satisfaction of the protest committee, bearing in mind the seriousness of the alleged misconduct, that
the competitor has broken rule 69.1(a), it shall either
(1) warn the competitor or
(2) impose a penalty by excluding the competitor and, when appropriate, disqualifying a boat, from a race or the
remaining races or all races of the series, or by taking other action within its jurisdiction. A disqualification
under this rule shall not be excluded from the boat’s series score.
If the standard of proof in this rule conflicts with the laws of a country, the national authority may, with the approval of the
ISAF, change it with a prescription to this rule.
(d) The protest committee shall promptly report a penalty, but not a warning, to the national authorities of the venue, of the
competitor and of the boat owner. If the protest committee is an international jury appointed by the ISAF under rule 89.2(B),
it shall send a copy of the report to the ISAF.
(e) If the competitor does not provide good reason for being unable to attend the hearing and does not come to it, the protest
committee may conduct it without the competitor present. If the committee does so and penalizes the competitor, it shall
include in the report it makes under rule 69.2(d) the facts found, the decision and the reasons for it.
(f) If the protest committee chooses not to conduct the hearing without the competitor present or if the hearing cannot be
scheduled for a time and place when it would be reasonable for the competitor to attend, the protest committee shall collect all
available information and, if the allegation seems justified, make a report to the relevant national authorities. If the protest
committee is an international jury appointed by the ISAF under rule 89.2(B), it shall send a copy of the report to the ISAF.
(g) When the protest committee has left the event and a report alleging a breach of rule 69.1(a) is received, the race
committee or organizing authority may appoint a new protest committee to proceed under this rule.
69.3 Action by a National Authority or Initial Action by the ISAF
(a) When a national authority or the ISAF receives a report alleging a breach of rule 69.1(a) or a report required by rule
69.2(d) or 69.2(f), it shall conduct an investigation, in accordance with its established procedures, and, when appropriate,
conduct a hearing. It may then take any disciplinary action within its jurisdiction it considers appropriate against the competitor or boat,
or other person involved, including suspending eligibility, permanently or for a specified period of time, to compete in any event held
within its jurisdiction, and suspending ISAF eligibility under ISAF
Regulation 19. The national authority shall promptly inform the other national authorities involved and the ISAF of its
decision and reasons, even if its decision is to take no further action.
(B) The national authority of a competitor shall also suspend the ISAF eligibility of the competitor as required in ISAF Regulation 19.
© The national authority shall promptly report a suspension of eligibility under rule 69.3(a) to the ISAF, and to the national
authorities of the person or the owner of the boat suspended if they are not members of the suspending national authority.
69.4 Subsequent Action by the ISAF Upon receipt of a report required by rule 69.3© or ISAF Regulation 19, or following its own action
under rule 69.3(a), the ISAF shall inform all national authorities, which may also suspend eligibility for events held within their jurisdiction.
The ISAF Executive Committee shall suspend the competitor’s ISAF eligibility as required in ISAF Regulation 19 if the competitor’s national authority
does not do so.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Given that Throughout rule 69, ‘competitor’ means a member of the crew, or the owner, of a boat. The whole "gang" (THE TEAM) must align up for a trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about it the more I think JS will be tied to this like cement boots off the bay bridge. Wouldn't surprise me to see him have to stand down over this. It could get ugly. There will be no easy way out of this. Serious crisis point for oracle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone is going to get to keep their job.....cast them out now and the real story comes out.

 

maybe going to be a 'Thomas à Becket' situation i.e. 'what do you mean you killed him, i just wanted you to have a word'

 

....what do you mean you added 5kg of lead, I was just musing on the unfortunate stern drag of the design etc etc. ......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that OR wasn't the only team implicated in this. BA has also withdrawn from the same or similar events. Lead was apparently accidentally added to more than one boat...

 

BAs bote was supozedly supplied in altered condishun by OR to teme BA without his nollidge.

 

That will corz considerabel frickshun within the OR teme, I woud think . . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that OR wasn't the only team implicated in this. BA has also withdrawn from the same or similar events. Lead was apparently accidentally added to more than one boat...

All three boats I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that OR wasn't the only team implicated in this. BA has also withdrawn from the same or similar events. Lead was apparently accidentally added to more than one boat...

Wasnt BA's boat an OTANZAC boat in disguise? Imagine that, multi gold medalist implicated in cheating. Wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 7th August 2013, the Jury Chairman and the RD received an email from Ben Ainslie of BAR:

Dear David and Iain,

Due to the recent discovery that the BAR AC45 did not comply with the AC45 class rule, BAR wishes to retire after finishing from the following ACWS regattas in which the team competed.

ACWS San Francisco - August 2012

ACWS San Francisco - September 2012

ACWS Naples - April 2013

BAR was loaned the AC45 for competition by OTUSA and the boat was prepared/maintained by OTUSA.

As skipper of the boat I had no knowledge whatsoever that the boat was being raced out of measurement.

I am deeply disappointed by this incident and will do all I can to assist the relevant parties in any further investigations.

Regards,

Ben Ainslie

 

On 8th August 2013, the Jury Chairman received a copy of an email from Richard Slater of OTUSA to the Regatta Director: etcetera

 

I like the way BA got in a day before his current employer bothered to send the letter withdrawing the Oracle branded 45's.

Really, given the seriousness of the crime and the level of betrayal, he should have resigned.

I wonder if he didn't because he soon might find he has the choice of which AC72 to sail?

What other cheating was attempted that we didn't find out about?

 

I've been racking my brain trying to think about why you'd do this, other than for the obvious reason.

Were they trying to balance the boat in foiling configuration?

Is a secondary reason for the pod on the '72 to conceal tunable weight low down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There is no way "management" did not know what was going on with the boats. Absolutely no way. What Russell is saying is that he didnt know that his own AC45 he raced had extra weight in the sprit. I call bollocks.

For Russell to come out and pin blame on others below management level is a disgrace. The matter has only just come to light and He is already making statements known to false and playing the blame game within his own team.

This can not be good for OTANZAC and may well become a major distraction. I guess luckily for them they still have heaps of time.....

I do think that helmsmen like RC and Spithill might 'feel' the difference that 2.5kg of lead concealed (see the Martin Tasker video report on TVNZ) in the king post makes.

 

Anyway there must have been a chain of command as Peter Lester (wasn't he involved in some 470 controversy many years ago?) says.

Not sure about PL. but wasn't RC overweight on a fin or something. Had to go an dry his gear and re weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only option now is a full, frank and clean explanation, dates, specific actions and instructions etc.....which you can do unless it was a real, cold hard attempt to cheat.

 

If you really have acted innocently just say what you did, who asked for the change, and why you though it would be ok.

 

i.e. "We were adding weight not taking it out so we thought that was ok. We read the rules and whilst it says we cannot alter the post we did not alter the post in order to increase the weight. The post is just as is always was, only we added xxx (ball bearings or whatever they did) and that did not change the component; we did not stiffen it which we thought was the intention of control changes etc etc etc etc etf..We thought we have found an important loop hole in the rules and we exploited it fully but that was not with the intention of breaking the rules "

 

F1 teams have had to provide explanations like this all the time.

 

If you cannot write the above explanation in 5 minutes and release if then you have a serious problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a really bad look for our sport. There are countless people that look at those in these AC teams as heroes and this is how they act?

 

I have friends at OR that are good, honest people that excel at what they do like many others in the team both on and off the boat. Win or lose, many those talented and dedicated people are going to be wearing some mud for quite some time through no fault of their own.

 

I hope the Jury are smart enough to send the appropriate message to the world and sanction OR accordingly. Maybe a ban on sailing till the AC itself and the boat in parc firme for that time?

 

Any respect for OR has gone. Sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The implications of potential gains or losses those mods may have caused is irrelevant. Its not about wether they gained an advantage or not (or at least it shouldn't be) Its about the fact that the changes were made, not declared to the measurers and were hidden and not found until well after the regatta had ended. So someone in the Oracle team was aware that they were winning regattas sailing a boat that was non compliant and kept quiet while the team collected trophy after trophy. Oracle have already been found guilty of one rule infringement, and been penalised, this is strike two, The first may have been forgiveable but this one may be a little less forgiveable given the dodgy track record these guys have. I guess we're on a 3 strikes policy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think that OR wasn't the only team implicated in this. BA has also withdrawn from the same or similar events. Lead was apparently accidentally added to more than one boat...

Wasnt BA's boat an OTANZAC boat in disguise? Imagine that, multi gold medalist implicated in cheating. Wow.

Does anyone have a fly on the OR meeting room walls?

 

We might learn some new bad words...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The implications of potential gains or losses those mods may have caused is irrelevant. Its not about wether they gained an advantage or not (or at least it shouldn't be) Its about the fact that the changes were made, not declared to the measurers and were hidden and not found until well after the regatta had ended. So someone in the Oracle team was aware that they were winning regattas sailing a boat that was non compliant and kept quiet while the team collected trophy after trophy. Oracle have already been found guilty of one rule infringement, and been penalised, this is strike two, The first may have been forgiveable but this one may be a little less forgiveable given the dodgy track record these guys have. I guess we're on a 3 strikes policy?

 

Agree. They have already been penalised with non-sailing days for the spying infringement when their support boat was photographing too close. This time the IJ should consider the previous penalty as well. Non-sailing days or the handing over of performance data might be appropriate and of course a ban for all those involved in deciding to conceal lead in the AC45.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that OR wasn't the only team implicated in this. BA has also withdrawn from the same or similar events. Lead was apparently accidentally added to more than one boat...

 

All three OR-managed AC45s were affected, including the one used by BAR. We don't know if lead was added, although it seems likely. The report just says "weight".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could this have been done and then forgotten about. I mean if you put the lead in there on purpose surely you would remove it asap after the last regatta?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

OTUSA Withdraws from Past AC45 Regattas

Between June 2012 and April 2013

 

San Francisco (Thursday, August 8, 2013) ORACLE TEAM USAs AC45 yachts have withdrawn, retrospectively, from the last four AC World Series regattas.

 

This follows an internal investigation led by CEO Russell Coutts, which determined that prior to racing in the regattas the yachts were modified without the permission of the Measurement Committee. The withdrawal is in spite of the fact that the modifications had no impact on the performance of the boats.

 

The AC45s are a class of 45-foot training yachts used in previous world circuit regattas and have not raced since Naples in April 2013. They are distinct from the AC72 yachts (72-footers) being raced in this years Louis Vuitton Cup and Americas Cup.

 

The modifications were made over a year ago by a small number of team members involved in the AC45 circuit, without the knowledge of management or the skippers, and without having followed standard internal procedures.

 

Our team is very disappointed by this turn of events, and I believe that voluntarily withdrawing from these past AC45 regattas is the appropriate corrective action, Coutts said. Going forward we remain focused on our AC72 training in preparation for the upcoming Americas Cup this September.

 

okaywtfreaction.gif

I'm trying to lip read. Is she saying: "OMG not another a safety job"? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Oracle release "The modifications were made over a year ago by a small number of team members involved in the AC45 circuit, without the knowledge of management or the skippers, and without having followed standard internal procedures. "

 

Hypothetical conversation by the Oracle shore crew "Hey guys, I know we are going ok, but i have an idea to add weight to the boat in the front.....I know it's not what we do every day of the week, but there is no need to talk anyone else about this.....see you back at the boats at 4am to make the changes. And remember, changes like this have a way of throwing a helm off their game and really they are busy and important people with other things on their mind so no need to bother them with the detail, really they are not half as sensitive to the boat as they like to think"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could this have been done and then forgotten about. I mean if you put the lead in there on purpose surely you would remove it asap after the last regatta?

 

stupid cheats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"It is not clear how the addition of an additional 2.5kg of weight to the kingpost on the AC45's was discovered. But it is most likely to have been during scrutineering and boat equalistion ahead of the Red Bull Youth America's Cup."

 

Not sure where RG got the 2.5kg figure which isn't in the IJ report? I'm not saying it's wrong, just don't know the source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect BA was informed by email/telephone. Some messages are safest delivered that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you can bet OR will be trying to put as much distance between the two as possible now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stingray!

 

Help us understand!

 

Please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There is no way "management" did not know what was going on with the boats. Absolutely no way. What Russell is saying is that he didnt know that his own AC45 he raced had extra weight in the sprit. I call bollocks.

For Russell to come out and pin blame on others below management level is a disgrace. The matter has only just come to light and He is already making statements known to false and playing the blame game within his own team.

This can not be good for OTANZAC and may well become a major distraction. I guess luckily for them they still have heaps of time.....

I do think that helmsmen like RC and Spithill might 'feel' the difference that 2.5kg of lead concealed (see the Martin Tasker video report on TVNZ) in the king post makes.

 

 

I'm not sure about that. Even a helm like dogwatch can feel the difference of crew moving fore or aft a few inches but I don't think I could identify the difference in feel of the boat from one day to the next that way. Could JS or RC? Don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pls remind me is the WS part of the AC or not?

It is. Or not.

 

Same protocol/governance. Different regatta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stingray!

 

Help us understand!

 

Please?

WWSS (what will Stingers say) ?

 

Safety?

You reckon we can try that again?

Yeah...give it a go.

No worries, whatever you say ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to think all the teams bought "identical" boats from OR for the inflated $1m price hoping to compete fairly with everyone else.

 

Not knowing that the team that sold them the boats had altered their own boats for an advantage.

 

I would be looking at a refund for the $1m and other costs

 

 

Maybe Queenie was right to ask?

 

There is no second (unless the first boat is disqualified!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There is no way "management" did not know what was going on with the boats. Absolutely no way. What Russell is saying is that he didnt know that his own AC45 he raced had extra weight in the sprit. I call bollocks.

For Russell to come out and pin blame on others below management level is a disgrace. The matter has only just come to light and He is already making statements known to false and playing the blame game within his own team.

This can not be good for OTANZAC and may well become a major distraction. I guess luckily for them they still have heaps of time.....

I do think that helmsmen like RC and Spithill might 'feel' the difference that 2.5kg of lead concealed (see the Martin Tasker video report on TVNZ) in the king post makes.

 

I'm not sure about that. Even a helm like dogwatch can feel the difference of crew moving fore or aft a few inches but I don't think I could identify the difference in feel of the boat from one day to the next that way. Could JS or RC? Don't know.

Any chance we could see it if they were static on a mooring on a nice still morning?

I can't imagine there are two many published photos of moored boats but I bet the pro photographers have plenty of them archived away.

Do these boats have a fixed fore stay length; did the change allow more mast rake without as much effect on overall balance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did America measure?

 

:lol:

 

If it didn't then we should call it

 

" Aurora's Cup"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think the measurement committee will pay suitable attention to OR17 when they apply for their measurement certificate prior to Sept 7?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

pls remind me is the WS part of the AC or not?

It is. Or not.

 

Same protocol/governance. Different regatta.

If OR has cheated in WS should GGYC dismiss OR as having brought their club into disrepute? Anyone from GGYC care to comment?

 

Paging Spinot Noiray to aisle 168 :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If OR has cheated in WS should GGYC dismiss OR as having brought their club into disrepute? Anyone from GGYC care to comment?

 

Paging Spinot Noiray to aisle 168 :lol:

Bring a big big bucket and spare mop...

 

There are no safety rudders on this puppy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dean Barker's Blog] Well yet another bizarre twist today when Oracle withdrew from four AC45 events over the lat 12 months because they had been caught cheating. I do not know the exact details but supposedly lead ballast was discovered in the king posts of both the Oracle boats and also the BAR boat which was also prepared by the Oracle Team.


It is incredibly disappointing to say the least to find out your competitors have been straight out cheating. It is an insult to the other competitors, particularly in an event that they have been running.


The AC45 is a strict one design class and this was one of the great appeals of this type of racing. To deliberately break the class rules is hard to understand.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stingray!

 

Help us understand!

 

Please?

 

Be keerful what you wish for.

 

Unless yore ewezing "understand" with sum nyoo, different meening . . .

 

 

Putting that asyd: Heers MY best gess:

 

Oracle Team USA has been secretly infilltrayted by one or more furriners. Sounz farfetshed, I no . . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

pls remind me is the WS part of the AC or not?

It is. Or not.

 

Same protocol/governance. Different regatta.

If OR has cheated in WS should GGYC dismiss OR as having brought their club into disrepute? Anyone from GGYC care to comment?

 

Paging Spinot Noiray to aisle 168 :lol:

I can see the hearing going well:

 

Larry, Russell, you have bought shame on this club. We fine you $100,000,000. If you care to make a donation to the club of $100,000,100 I'm sure we could sweep this under the carpet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1

8th August 2013 JURY CASE AC30 JURY NOTICE JN096 REGATTA DIRECTOR & ORACLE TEAM USA & BEN AINSLIE RACING Protest alleging breach of AC45 Class Rule in specific America’s Cup World Series regattas ORDERS APPLICATION


1. On 5th August 2013 the Jury received an Application from the Regatta Director (RD) protesting the two Oracle Team USA (OTUSA) AC45 Yachts, and the Ben Ainslie Racing (BAR) AC45 Yacht. The Application followed the receipt of a report from OTUSA to the Jury dated 4th August 2013, which related to the matters referred to in the Application.


2. The RD’s Application was based on an attached report from the Measurement Committee (MC), which alleged that an unauthorised modification had been made to the three AC45 Yachts, by adding weight to the forward king post in contravention of AC45 Class Rule C1.5, which prohibits modification to components listed in Class Rule C1.2. The ‘forward king post’ is included in the component list in Class Rule C1.2.


3. The MC’s Report concluded with the phrase ‘The modifications appear to be intentional efforts to circumvent the limitations of the AC45 class rule, and are therefore serious in nature’.


4. The Application included a request for the Jury to extend ‘all relevant time limits for protests in all applicable America’s Cup World Series (ACWS) Regattas on the basis there is good reason to do so as disclosed in the following protest’. CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER (published in JN093)


5. On 5th August 2013, the Jury issued a Confidentiality Order following the Application by the RD and a request by OTUSA, ordering that the Application, the MC’s Report, and all related matters are to remain confidential to the Jury, the RD, the MC, ACRM, OTUSA, and BAR. The

2

Order was to remain in force until the Jury considers it just and equitable to withdraw the Order. LIFTING OF THE CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER


6. The Jury has received a request from OTUSA to lift the Confidentiality Order. Pursuant to the Jury Rules of Procedure Rule 6.1, the Jury considers it just and equitable to lift the Confidentiality Order. RETIRING FROM ACWS REGATTAS


7. On 7th August 2013, the Jury Chairman and the RD received an email from Ben Ainslie of BAR: Dear David and Iain, Due to the recent discovery that the BAR AC45 did not comply with the AC45 class rule, BAR wishes to retire after finishing from the following ACWS regattas in which the team competed. ACWS San Francisco - August 2012 ACWS San Francisco - September 2012 ACWS Naples - April 2013 BAR was loaned the AC45 for competition by OTUSA and the boat was prepared/maintained by OTUSA. As skipper of the boat I had no knowledge whatsoever that the boat was being raced out of measurement. I am deeply disappointed by this incident and will do all I can to assist the relevant parties in any further investigations. Regards, Ben Ainslie


8. On 8th August 2013, the Jury Chairman received a copy of an email from Richard Slater of OTUSA to the Regatta Director: Dear Iain, RE: America’s Cup World Series in AC45 Yachts ORACLE TEAM USA 4 and ORACLE TEAM USA 5 – retires after finishing from all the races in the following ACWS regattas: ACWS Newport – June 2012 ACWS San Francisco – August 2012 ACWS San Francisco – September 2012 ACWS Naples – April 2013 The team has recently discovered that both yachts did not comply with the AC45 Class Rule. The team prepared and lodged a report on this matter to the America’s Cup Jury on August 4, 2013. Yours sincerely, Richard Slater RETIREMENT FROM ACWS REGATTAS


9. The Jury notes that no rule prevents a competitor from retiring from a race or series when he/she discovers his/her yacht was sailing out of class or breached a rule, even when the series or regatta is complete.

3

INVESTIGATION BY THE JURY


10. Upon receipt of the Report from OTUSA, and the MC reporting that ‘The modifications appear to be intentional efforts to circumvent the limitations of the AC45 class rule, and are therefore serious in nature’, the Jury has commenced an investigation under Racing Rules of Sailing (America’s Cup Edition) Rule 69, and Protocol Article 60. This investigation is ongoing. WITHDRAWAL OF PROTEST BY REGATTA DIRECTOR


11. The RD has advised the Jury that ‘as the racing aspects of the protest have been resolved by the retirement of OTUSA and BAR from the relevant ACWS regattas and as the Jury has commenced an investigation under the Racing Rules of Sailing (America’s Cup Edition) Rule 69, and Protocol Article 60, the RD has withdrawn the protest’. ORDERS


12. The Confidentiality Order is lifted with immediate effect.


13. The Regatta Director is to re-score the relevant ACWS regattas and the ACWS Championships.


14. OTUSA and BAR are ordered to return all relevant prizes, awards, and trophies within fourteen days to the Regatta Director for reallocation.

David Tillett JURY: David Tillett (Chairman), John Doerr, Josje Hofland, Graham McKenzie, Bryan Willis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all this time Jimmy has been sailing a heavier boat and still kicked everyone's ass?

No Tony. Did he reduce the OR hulls weight to make them go faster(less wetted surface etc) then added weight in the most optimum place to bring the total craft up to minimum weight.....or did i accidentally forget the ???? in the hollow kingpost?

I can smell the uranium from here sport!! A top skipper knows every aspect of his own boat. No excuses, the gangplank is over by the portaloos. Sayonara baby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

pls remind me is the WS part of the AC or not?

It is. Or not.

 

Same protocol/governance. Different regatta.

If OR has cheated in WS should GGYC dismiss OR as having brought their club into disrepute? Anyone from GGYC care to comment?

 

Paging Spinot Noiray to aisle 168 :lol:

Forget Spinray. Lets see Tom Ehman spin his way out of this one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kiwis are just there for the US sheep - adding some spice to life and that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Dean Barker's Blog] Well yet another bizarre twist today when Oracle withdrew from four AC45 events over the lat 12 months because they had been caught cheating. I do not know the exact details but supposedly lead ballast was discovered in the king posts of both the Oracle boats and also the BAR boat which was also prepared by the Oracle Team.

It is incredibly disappointing to say the least to find out your competitors have been straight out cheating. It is an insult to the other competitors, particularly in an event that they have been running.

The AC45 is a strict one design class and this was one of the great appeals of this type of racing. To deliberately break the class rules is hard to understand.

Paging Spinot Noiray to the OR tent where the Measurement Committee are seeking clarification of the AC45 One Design Rules :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the way BA got in a day before his current employer bothered to send the letter withdrawing the Oracle branded 45's.

Really, given the seriousness of the crime and the level of betrayal, he should have resigned.

What makes you think that contractually he can resign at this moment?

 

But some of us weren't too delighted when BA saw fit to join the Evil Empire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that JS is mixed up in it. I might be mistaken but I don't think he has been in front of the media for 2 weeks or so.

 

The more I think about it the more I think JS will be tied to this like cement boots off the bay bridge. Wouldn't surprise me to see him have to stand down over this. It could get ugly. There will be no easy way out of this. Serious crisis point for oracle.

 

This may explain why JS went paddleboarding recently... might be the only vessel he will compete in in the near future :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Provisional look at the ACWS Results

 

Naples 2013 - Fleet Races

1. LR - Swordfish

2. TNZ

3. LR - Piranha

 

San Francisco 2012 - Fleet Races

1. Artemis Racing

2. TNZ

3. Artemis Racing Red

 

Do not know how they are to recalculate the match races as OR and BAR are a big portion of the regatta fleet numbers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would give OR/BAR credit for doing the right thing here.

 

It's not a good look but they have acted responsibly.

 

 

RC: Christ that's all I need. Who the hell thought that was a good idea?

 

Public relations bod: Look, it's going to get out. These things always do. But I smell an opportunity! If you tell the story like this (refer statement above), all our fans will be able to sleep easy, knowing we fessed up. And our enemies, well, they won't have a leg to stand on. We'll have the moral high ground for owning up. You might even be able to drop the hint that perhaps other teams haven't been so honest.

 

RC: Brilliant! Pass me the phone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is effing hilarious. Not so for the guys involved, but good for publicity.

 

I'm sure the measuring team will be making a few dates for ORTNZAUS with the 72.

 

'Check the rudder first fellas' lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would give OR/BAR credit for doing the right thing here.

 

It's not a good look but they have acted responsibly.

 

 

RC: Christ that's all I need. Who the hell thought that was a good idea?

 

Public relations bod: Look, it's going to get out. These things always do. But I smell an opportunity! If you tell the story like this (refer statement above), all our fans will be able to sleep easy, knowing we fessed up. And our enemies, well, they won't have a leg to stand on. We'll have the moral high ground for owning up. You might even be able to drop the hint that perhaps other teams haven't been so honest.

 

RC: Brilliant! Pass me the phone.

 

RC: Get me Stinger on the line.

 

Public relations bod: Sir, perhaps you should try Iain Murray first?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could this whole debacle of an AC get any worse for OR...

post-94565-0-65850700-1376049498_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I would give OR/BAR credit for doing the right thing here.

 

It's not a good look but they have acted responsibly.

 

 

RC: Christ that's all I need. Who the hell thought that was a good idea?

 

Public relations bod: Look, it's going to get out. These things always do. But I smell an opportunity! If you tell the story like this (refer statement above), all our fans will be able to sleep easy, knowing we fessed up. And our enemies, well, they won't have a leg to stand on. We'll have the moral high ground for owning up. You might even be able to drop the hint that perhaps other teams haven't been so honest.

 

RC: Brilliant! Pass me the phone.

 

RC: Get me Stinger on the line.

 

Public relations bod: Sir, perhaps you should try Iain Murray first?

RC: Good Idea

 

RC: Iain, I need another safety recommendation. Just tell whoevers left, that for safety reasons we don't exactly have to measure anymore on anything. Got it? Thanks, bye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"one of the biggest scandals in international yachting history" (ETNZ on TVNZ website)

 

now THATS over the top, compleetly

 

ETNZ need to taek a chill pill

 

from an OR vewpoynt, there over-reackshun is a gift, turns it into a shit-fite,

ensewing showting and shuvving perfict smokescrene for there minor misdemeener

 

Bring it on, kiwis ! yore playing into ORs hands

+1

 

I 100% agree. ETNZ needs to hire OR's public relations consultant and learn to STFU and let the media and everyone else do the angry thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious to hear what exactly was done, but won't stand behind a team that cheats. Very sad. Thanks for the spectacle and fun times OR.

 

This really sucks for us fans. The only way to wash the stink off would be to go racing on a clean one design boat against others. Oh wait, I gotta go!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites