Barnyb

Team UK

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, sosoomii said:

But that is a list of the British Isles which is quite separate from the UK or Great Britain. 

:lol: Too funny

You can drag a horse to water.... List of islands of the British Isles

What is the name of the island in the British Isles with a size of 209,331km² then - you know the big one, the one Cowes is not on :D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_islands_of_the_British_Isles

Hint: It's 1st on the list - or do you need the braille version?

"...quite separate".......OMG. So remedial geography and reading comprehension

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you on about?  I have literally no idea...

The British Isles include Isle of Man etc, which is categorically not part of Great Britain nor the UK (the political union).  The Isle of Wight, on the other hand, is part of the British Isles (the archipelago which also includes the island of Ireland) AND also the UK.

*Great Britain is the big island made up of mainland England, Scotland and Wales but is Great Britain is also commonly used to mean the UK excluding Northern Ireland.  By this use it includes IoW.

Anyway this is a boringly pedantic debate in a sailing forum!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he/she probably did that because of the bit @ 1.30 where it confirms yet again that the Isle of Wight is not part of Great Britain

Just the facts Ma'am..... Poms are struggling with them it seems

 

Note, not perfect, i.e. India did not 'break away (from the British Empire) violently' @2:30.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, didn’t mean to downvote...

I thought I was agreeing with you Nav - GB is an island (the big one). Maybe you just like to argue with your own shadow.  However, GB is also used to mean England, Scotland & Wales, I.e. UK excluding NI - by which terms includes IoW.  That’s not just lose talk - here is what Ordnance Survey say:

Great Britain is the official collective name of of England, Scotland and Wales and their associated islands. It does not include Northern Ireland and therefore should never be used interchangeably with ‘UK’ – something you see all too often.

Here at Ordnance Survey, we’re responsible for mapping Great Britain, which is why we don’t make maps of Northern Ireland.”

Perhaps it’s a bit like defining “skiff”, meaning something very specific to some and something more general to others.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nav, what an idiot.

Sure Great Britain is the largest island in the British Isles, but it's also a political term used to refer to the UK (maybe begrudgingly in NI, but certainly England, Scotland and Wales). Pretty much all teams who represent the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Island go by some sort of GB / Great Britain / GBR title. Historically, Great Britain was the name of the state. This has been carried forward in many circumstances after the inclusion of NI. 

IoW, just like the other two islands in the Solent is part of England, Great Britain and the UK. The fact that not one person picked up on the fact the BAR was now Team 'GB' and not 'UK' on the whole of the internet and the relation it had to where the RYS is based except one kiwi on the internet kind of proves the point about the meaning of the terms. 

I mean, I looked on google maps, and I can't see one island called New Zealand, only a South Island and North Island and some smaller ones... does New Zealand even exist? I mean, their accent and flag is stolen from the Australians and the place is named after part of Holland... they can't even spell Zeeland!!! It's crazy!

Your argument is like saying NYYC can't represent USA, because they have a clubhouse in Manhatten, which is an island not on the American continent, so it can't possibly be part of any United States of said continent.  

Maybe Tasmania isn't Australian? Maybe Gozo isn't Maltese? Maybe, maybe, maybe... there of hundreds examples of islands that are part of states, where the name of the state is also the name of the mainland? 

p.s. I'd take OS's interpretation above. But note that GB and GBR are correct shorthand for the United Kingdom. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, nav said:

A small but significant mistake in there mate .......

A single Kingdom of Great Britain resulted from the union of......

The island has naturally existed for eons.

But in case you are still confused check here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_islands_of_the_British_Isles

I call your attention to the first and the 12th placed on that list

 

love the attitude :lol:

 

You keep talking historic geographical names, which are totally irrelevant. It is a simple fact that as a country recognised by the international community, the United Kingdom consists of 2 parts, Great Britain and Northern Ireland (which is why the full name is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland). If Northern Ireland ceded from the United Kingdom, you would be left with Great Britain.

Please can you advise us which part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland the Isle of Wight is actually in. Is it Great Britain or Northern Ireland, or is the Isle of Wight not part of the United Kingdom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Truth be told it was you that started the historical lecture on the Union in 1707 for some misguided reason.

Politically and historically, Great Britain was formed by the combining of the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland in 1707 Acts of Union.

I can understand if you not wanting to acknowledge that though :lol:

It's great that the 'mistake' has been corrected (theirs and yours ;)), 'the all inclusive' UK has been adopted and the stroppy billionaire is back in his box - for now.

Bon Voyage......

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2018 at 7:37 PM, Team_GBR said:

How about an NZer stops trying to give lessons in geography and history to Brits who know a lot more than him.

 The use of "Great Britain" in geography is a fairly recent thing,

but I personally believe it is a bullshit discussion, because what counts is the political and diplomatic use of the term.

First, I don't know why Kiwis would not be able know Brits geography and history .

Second, what do you mean be fairly recent thing ???

Third, pretty ironic that after your pompous diatribe you tell us it's bullshit discussion.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tornado-Cat said:

[snip]

Third, pretty ironic that after your pompous diatribe winge you tell us it's bullshit discussion.

 

fixed. Cause reading the last page was ten minutes of my life i'll never get back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim Ratcliffe, who founded chemical firm Ineos, topped the list with an estimated worth of £21.05bn - after coming 18th last year.

 

So it just happened to be an 'accidental' meeting  - pull the other one BentA!    How much more spin are we going to see from this lot?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and he's got his 'K' now as well.  So that makes him one of good guys right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stingray~ said:
 
Why Britain's richest man Jim Ratcliffe has invested $153M in sailing

Nothing new in there, nice to see the media interested in them though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great to see BAR and Ainslie with a backer like Ratcliffe but money alone doesn't win nor defend the cup. Ellison was rich too. How do you replicate NZ's ability to think outside of the box?. Ainslie has Grant Simmer on board but he was the guy that lost the cup. Let's hope they can match or better the Kiwi's in the design department and then you still have to beat Burling if he is that good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, terrafirma said:

Great to see BAR and Ainslie with a backer like Ratcliffe 

If your sole criterion for judging a team sponsor is the depth of his wallet, then yes. Not everyone is ecstatic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dogwatch said:

If your sole criterion for judging a team sponsor is the depth of his wallet, then yes. Not everyone is ecstatic. 

Quote "but money alone doesn't win nor defend the cup' which was my point. Better to have the money then not so at least Ben has the funds to see what he can conjure....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was indeed your point. Mine is that plenty in the UK don't like Ineos or Ratcliffe and the switch in sponsors will have both gained the team extra £££ and lost supporters. I am far from being the only person feeling that way. Ineos' sponsorship could be viewed as an attempt to redress the negative light in which the company is widely viewed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, terrafirma said:

Quote "but money alone doesn't win nor defend the cup' which was my point. Better to have the money then not so at least Ben has the funds to see what he can conjure....

Actually worse... some say sold his soul and did a deal with the devil, and what then if he *still* doesn't win?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dogwatch said:

Ineos' sponsorship could be viewed as an attempt to redress the negative light in which the company is widely viewed.

I don't think Ratcliffe cares how the brand is viewed by Joe Bloggs on the street. The public don't buy from INEOS and the public are going to protest fracking no matter the imagine of the company carrying it out. 

He's not in it to win friends, I think he's in in to demonstrate his power through wealth. It's more about oneupmanship between the ultra rich.  And the America's cup is the perfect format to play that game. 

I got the impression from the start that BAR was looking for multiple backers, Charles Dunstone put in a lot of his own cash, then pulled in Land Rover as he was on their board (and carphone warehouse doesn't have the cache to be an AC title sponsor). But you got the impression it was favour from his buddies and the team were always looking for additional title sponsors... so if INEOS had wanted, they could have come on board without kicking out the rest and still got the beneficial public image. But I feel for Ratcliffe it is about having it as his team and his team only. 

I think what we're gong to see is a no holes barred full tilt at the cup. Not just financially, but in PR concessions too. Land Rover were hot on their involvement with local schools, education and trusts, environmental issues etc. They were very keen on a high media profile to push their message and ethos. I don't think that will be retained. 

How will it play out on a sporting level? Well the extra finance has got to be good. They will reduce the amount of distraction with 'litter picks' and 'education days' plus nice social media posts about gym workouts. If Ratcliffe goes full ego trip and fancies himself as a sailor or designer, then it could quickly turn out quite negative. 

I'm interested to see how it will pan out. Two things I am relatively sure of: INEOS won't be as popular, and; Ratcliffe won't give a crap.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Mozzy Sails said:

I don't think Ratcliffe cares how the brand is viewed by Joe Bloggs on the street. The public don't buy from INEOS and the public are going to protest fracking no matter the imagine of the company carrying it out. 

 

That's half the story. The other half is how local and more critically central government react to those protests and the image of the company plays a part in that. In the eyes of the present regime frackers look like the Roundheads in "1066 and all that" i.e.right but repulsive. Government wants the oil taxation but not the flack and that's a dilemma, especially when potential sites are in Tory heartlands.  So I don't agree with your analysis, I think PR is important for Ineos.

Oh and these guys do public affairs for Ineos and they don't come cheap.  http://powerbase.info/index.php/Burson-Marsteller

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dogwatch said:

That was indeed your point. Mine is that plenty in the UK don't like Ineos or Ratcliffe and the switch in sponsors will have both gained the team extra £££ and lost supporters. I am far from being the only person feeling that way. Ineos' sponsorship could be viewed as an attempt to redress the negative light in which the company is widely viewed.

Cheers not aware of the UK politics in case here, but I can understand the attempt to redress. Thanks for filling me in. So Ainslie takes the money without conscience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

That's half the story. The other half is how local and more critically central government react to those protests and the image of the company plays a part in that. In the eyes of the present regime frackers look like the Roundheads in "1066 and all that" i.e.right but repulsive. Government wants the oil taxation but not the flack and that's a dilemma, especially when potential sites are in Tory heartlands.  So I don't agree with your analysis, I think PR is important for Ineos.

Oh and these guys do public affairs for Ineos and they don't come cheap.  http://powerbase.info/index.php/Burson-Marsteller

 

I don't pick up any attempt at PR from the INEOS - BAR buyout though... not saying they don't do PR though. 

The INEOS press releases basically all spell out how rich Ratcliffe is, how he can afford to chat shit in posh square mile bars then back it up x10 the next day. Nothing about that is going to gain favour for fracking. A lot of the fracking lobby is about excessive and expensive hurdles prior to licensing... which is hard to measure up against Ratcliffe spending hundreds of millions at a whim. If anything the personal excess is damaging. 

He would of done better spending on community funds, science in school, jobs for the community. Or university research projects. Or just plain old lobbying. 200 million would have gone much further there for the cause than an AC team. 

Then compare to Land Rovers press material. All about British engineering and a Solent maritime hub, sustainability etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ainslie, Simmer and Scott racing Etchells in the Solent.
A Truly Golden Experience.

One of the great things about sailing is the old adage that you get to play on the same course as Tiger Woods. It’s an idea which most of us are aware of, the dream of getting on the course with the best. But unlike golf, in sailing it really is true, as the Solent Etchells fleet will find out on June 23rd and 24th when one of the greatest collections of gold medals and Americas cup wins in history will settle themselves in an Etchells and do battle with the weekend warriors for the Royal Yacht Squadron's Sir Kenneth Preston trophy.

Among the fleet there have been a fair few boats called The Trio based on the fact that it was traditionally a three-man boat (now sailed by a lot of smaller crews 4-up) but it is hard to imagine a more successful trio than Ben Ainslie, Giles Scott and Grant Simmer who will make up this trio. Between them they have five Olympic Gold medals, one Silver, five Americas cup wins as either sailor or design coordinator and an astonishing eight Finn World Championships

The Trio will line up in perhaps the Solent’s most competitive one-design class, although it should be noted that Ainslie and Simmer have both finished on the podium at previous Etchells world Championships so it's not exactly all new to them.

For details on how to join the fleet or for charter options for Sir Kenneth Preston Trophy contact David Franks davidfranks80@gmail.com +44 7768 063868

Written by Laurence Mead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do know teams aren't allowed to have independent sites? Protocol 42, Wussell-vision control-freakery lives on into AC36,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Protocol 42 doesn't come in until 3 months after entries closing, although I guess it might be possible to move to teh AC36 group site before this. In the mean time they have this: https://www.ineosteamuk.com/ which is second page on google, so AKL does kinda have a  point. Maybe they're just not bothered with PR that much? Maybe not worth the effort knowing the site will have to be taken down in September? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mozzy Sails said:

Protocol 42 doesn't come in until 3 months after entries closing, although I guess it might be possible to move to teh AC36 group site before this. In the mean time they have this: https://www.ineosteamuk.com/ which is second page on google, so AKL does kinda have a  point. Maybe they're just not bothered with PR that much? Maybe not worth the effort knowing the site will have to be taken down in September? 

Don't let facts about simple organisational arrangements when the regatta is underway get in the way of someone having a good piss now ;-)

All the cats and dogs and hogs need to get the sand out of their knickers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2018 at 2:55 AM, AKL wino said:

I like how shit their SEO / whatever is when you Google their team site. Nice PR guys! 

 

Not good is it.... Possibly need to work on that one.

I am pretty ashamed by this development in British sailing.......

Ineos Rebels..... I wonder who they paid to come up with that name!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2018 at 9:09 AM, terrafirma said:

Quote "but money alone doesn't win nor defend the cup' which was my point. Better to have the money then not so at least Ben has the funds to see what he can conjure....

A very healthy retirement fund!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

Not good is it.... Possibly need to work on that one.

I am pretty ashamed by this development in British sailing.......

Ineos Rebels..... I wonder who they paid to come up with that name!

Image result for facepalm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2018 at 8:57 PM, mad said:

A very healthy retirement fund!

Anyone care to speculate what Ainslie would earn a year from his AC Campaign? And then while your at it  do Burling's earn in comparison? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't a clue what either of them earns but their roles are hardly the same. BA does what Burling does and also what GD does. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dogwatch said:

I haven't a clue what either of them earns but their roles are hardly the same. BA does what Burling does and also what GD does. 

:lol::lol:

You should know better.

Look at all the experts called in last time - both on and off the payroll, and again this time, you know he is just a pretty face.

Try'n since August 22, 1851

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, nav said:

:lol::lol:

You should know better.

Look at all the experts called in last time - both on and off the payroll, and again this time, you know he is just a pretty face.

Try'n since August 22, 1851

I wouldn't even call him that, but each to their own. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, nav said:

:lol::lol:

You should know better.

Look at all the experts called in last time - both on and off the payroll, and again this time, you know he is just a pretty face.

Try'n since August 22, 1851

Haven't really got a firm handle on BA or his intellect and skill sets, other than his fierce ability to win.  However his latest sponsorship shows some nouse and a lightning reaction time as he grabbed for the top rung!  We shall see what eventuates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KiwiJoker said:

Haven't really got a firm handle on BA or his intellect and skill sets, other than his fierce ability to win.  However his latest sponsorship shows some nouse and a lightning reaction time as he grabbed for the top rung!  We shall see what eventuates.

Your right, he certainly has Grant Dalton level skills at sponsorship attraction that is for sure!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditched the TP52 campaign. That always sounds like a cost saving way of getting the team sailing, at the cost that Langley would be helming and the BAR just crewing for him. 

Also interesting that the GC32 will carry projekt grenadier branding... can't help but think it's a dig at Land Rover.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pay cut for the boys coming up?  

Presumably though BenA can offer more dosh than anyone else to attract whatever crew he wants - nationalistic angle gone out the window along with the green credentials and everything else.

""

Petrochemical firm Ineos has lost its legal challenge against the Scottish government's "effective ban" on fracking.

The firm claimed that ministers had acted illegally in announcing the block in October 2017.

But the government argued that there is no ban in place as the policymaking process is still ongoing.

Judges agreed that the challenge was "unfounded" because "there is no prohibition against fracking in force".

Scottish energy minister Paul Wheelhouse welcomed the decision, saying that the ongoing moratorium - enforced via planning powers - meant that "no fracking can take place in Scotland at this time".

'End of story'

The government first announced a halt on fracking in 2016 while it carried out consultations with experts and the public on whether the controversial oil extraction technique should be allowed north of the border.

Ministers concluded in October 2017 that there was "overwhelming opposition" to fracking, and announced what Mr Wheelhouse called an "effective ban".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's a point but all announced so far are two Aussies on the GC32. I don't think that's enough to throw the "nationalistic angle out the window".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now