Kiwing

How many challengers will there be?

How many challengers?  

126 members have voted

  1. 1. How many challengers will race the Prada Cup?

    • 3 - that is no new challengers
    • 4 that is one new challengers
    • 5 that is two new challengers
    • 6 that is three new challengers
    • more than three new challengers


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

they claimed that all teams were conspiring against them because they were willing to choose the AC50.

ETNZ didn't sign the framework agreement. The other teams that did were against them. This is common knowledge.

3 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

For me the beginning of the end for TNZ

Fear leads to hate. Hate leads to insanity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

 Obviously a Cup is won by a team but without Guillaume Verdier you would not have the AC75.

Nice little video on Guillaume Verdier

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in the last Cup cycle, all the teams except ETNZ were indeed colluding to continue in the 50 ft class regardless of which won (clearly OTAUS expected to but perhaps wanted a tame CoR). 

So I am not a rabid NZ fan but my tin hat does twitch a bit and I would not disagree it was an "us all vs them" thing.  So it was fucking hilarious ETNZ won so handily.

But this is now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

For me the beginning of the end for TNZ was when they claimed that all teams were conspiring against them because they were willing to choose the AC50.

The problem ETNZ had (if we're referring to the replacement of the AC62 class rule) was not that it happened at all, but that it happened late into the cycle when both ETNZ and LR were well into the design stage of their AC62. Coupled with this was the fact that the decision to replace the AC62 came with the stipulation that the Auckland qualifier would also be pulled, even though it was already signed and agreed to. At the time, ETNZ was very much dependent on government funding, which would also not eventuate if the Auckland qualifier was pulled.

Given that this decision directly impacted ETNZ's financial situation late into the cycle, as well as forcing them to file a protest to the Arbitration panel which would also be time critical, it is hardly surprising they would feel "conspired against" as it was widely reported that at least one challenging team (apparently) voiced their disapproval of the Auckland qualifier. The problem was, once the Auckland qualifier was signed, what the teams "wanted" became irrelevant. They would have to either come to Auckland and participate, or kiss their Americas Cup aspirations goodbye. The rest is history. Again, these are facts you choose to ignore.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I am willing to stipulate the other teams chose a path that was going to fuck over ETNZ.  Was it a conspiracy or did it "just work out that way"? 

Well, rather that explore that distinction for the rest of my days, I reflect that in my own experience things like racial profiling, redlining neighborhoods, and school admissions have all been variously described as "just working out that way, not based on discrimination."  So the effect is what I look at, not the mental state of the doers.

The fact that the path those doers chose ended up with ETNZ winning the way it did is a great testament to ETNZ.  Man plans, God laughs. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@NeedAClew,

The Bottom Line is: It's now New Zealands AC. The Ball is now in their Court!

As yourself these Questions:

Has ETNZ done better than OTUSA since winning AC35 in Bermuda 2017? Are we better off or ain't we? The only thing they managed to do was release the Protocol sort of on time. All the other significant Issues got delayed.

# 1 The AC75 Class Rule should have been released with the Protocol or at least a couple of weeks after that. It took ETNZ/LR a Full two months to release the Concepts to the so called "Stakeholders" and half a year later to publish the Full AC75 Class Rule.

# 2 The First Event, the so called "America's Cup Overture Promotional Event" took place a Full 14 Months after their victory in Bermuda

# 3 The Foil Arm Issues

# 4 Constantly changing the Protocol to give the "3 Late Challengers" multiple lifelines and not respecting the other 3 Teams who complied to everything the Protocol stipulated.

# 5 No America's Cup World Series Events in 2019 as originally planned in the Protocol.

and lastly

# 6 Either as many Challengers as in Bermuda or even fewer Challengers depending on DutchSail and Stars & Stripes Team USA.

All this talk having 7-8 Challengers by Mr. Grant Dalton was just pure nonsense.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

@NeedAClew,

The Bottom Line is: It's now New Zealands AC. The Ball is now in their Court!

As yourself these Questions:

Has ETNZ done better than OTUSA since winning AC35 in Bermuda 2017? Are we better off or ain't we? The only thing they managed to do was release the Protocol sort of on time. All the other significant Issues got delayed.

# 1 The AC75 Class Rule should have been released with the Protocol or at least a couple of weeks after that. It took ETNZ/LR a Full two months to release the Concepts to the so called "Stakeholders" and half a year later to publish the Full AC75 Class Rule.

# 2 The First Event, the so called "America's Cup Overture Promotional Event" took place a Full 14 Months after their victory in Bermuda

# 3 The Foil Arm Issues

# 4 Constantly changing the Protocol to give the "3 Late Challengers" multiple lifelines and not respecting the other 3 Teams who complied to everything the Protocol stipulated.

# 5 No America's Cup World Series Events in 2019 as originally planned in the Protocol.

and lastly

# 6 Either as many Challengers as in Bermuda or even fewer Challengers depending on DutchSail and Stars & Stripes Team USA.

All this talk having 7-8 Challengers by Mr. Grant Dalton was just pure nonsense.

Are we better off? Yes.

Why? Because we now have teams who are not beholden to the Defender, and who's intentions are to win, as opposed to help the defender retain.

The "Stakeholders" were kept informed of the concept well before it was released. On INEOS Team UK's Facebook page they were hyping the release of the new boat concept well before it was released.

The Foil Arm issues were a setback which has since been resolved through a collaborative effort by all teams. When was the last time that happened? Certainly not during Oracles tenure as defender.

"Constantly changing the protocol" - You're kidding right? First Oracle used the Protocol to replace the class rule last time, late into the cycle, at the behest of the two strongest challengers.

It has been explained and accepted by all teams that the first ACWS event be delayed due to the foil arm setback. 

Oracle talked 10-13 challengers, so that was also pure nonsense.

Russell and Larry couldn't bring the teams together the way ETNZ has. There is now a collaborative effort by all teams to ensure the event is the best it can be. There are no Jury decisions pending, and any disputes there has been have been quickly resolved and the outcome made public, again the exact opposite we saw during the Oracle tenure. We never saw a collaborative approach from all teams during the Oracle tenure, infact we saw the exact opposite. #LetsGetDalton

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

Are we better off? Yes.

Why? Because we now have teams who are not beholden to the Defender, and who's intentions are to win, as opposed to help the defender retain.

The "Stakeholders" were kept informed of the concept well before it was released. On INEOS Team UK's Facebook page they were hyping the release of the new boat concept well before it was released.

The Foil Arm issues were a setback which has since been resolved through a collaborative effort by all teams. When was the last time that happened? Certainly not during Oracles tenure as defender.

"Constantly changing the protocol" - You're kidding right? First Oracle used the Protocol to replace the class rule last time, late into the cycle, at the behest of the two strongest challengers.

It has been explained and accepted by all teams that the first ACWS event be delayed due to the foil arm setback. 

Oracle talked 10-13 challengers, so that was also pure nonsense.

Russell and Larry couldn't bring the teams together the way ETNZ has. There is now a collaborative effort by all teams to ensure the event is the best it can be. There are no Jury decisions pending, and any disputes there has been have been quickly resolved and the outcome made public, again the exact opposite we saw during the Oracle tenure. We never saw a collaborative approach from all teams during the Oracle tenure, infact we saw the exact opposite. #LetsGetDalton

Are you really serious on that? Everyone wants to win so there is no collaboration between the Teams, certainly not between Ineos, American Magic and ETNZ. Maybe it is between ETNZ/LR cuz they actually responsible for running the Event. Don't post such crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

Are you really serious on that? Everyone wants to win so there is no collaboration between the Teams, certainly not between Ineos, American Magic and ETNZ. Maybe it is between ETNZ/LR cuz they actually responsible for running the Event. Don't post such crap.

 

Both videos state a collaborative effort. So how about you stop posting crap dickhead!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

 

Both videos state a collaborative effort. So how about you stop posting crap dickhead!

Nonsense. Every of the 3 Superteams will be running their own thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

For me the beginning of the end for TNZ was when they claimed that all teams were conspiring against them because they were willing to choose the AC50.

You're saying there was no collusion?  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With OTAUS as Defender we had a narcissistic billionaire and his multimillionaire lackeys plotting and scheming in the name of sport.

With ETNZ as Defender we have a passionate group of team advocates and some meddling squabblers like me yammering away online and some actual teams sincerely trying to compete albeit with some possibly questionable sponsors.  

I think the Cup is better off now. Asked, answered.

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

The problem ETNZ had (if we're referring to the replacement of the AC62 class rule) was not that it happened at all, but that it happened late into the cycle when both ETNZ and LR were well into the design stage of their AC62. Coupled with this was the fact that the decision to replace the AC62 came with the stipulation that the Auckland qualifier would also be pulled, even though it was already signed and agreed to. At the time, ETNZ was very much dependent on government funding, which would also not eventuate if the Auckland qualifier was pulled.

Given that this decision directly impacted ETNZ's financial situation late into the cycle, as well as forcing them to file a protest to the Arbitration panel which would also be time critical, it is hardly surprising they would feel "conspired against" as it was widely reported that at least one challenging team (apparently) voiced their disapproval of the Auckland qualifier. The problem was, once the Auckland qualifier was signed, what the teams "wanted" became irrelevant. They would have to either come to Auckland and participate, or kiss their Americas Cup aspirations goodbye. The rest is history. Again, these are facts you choose to ignore.

Did we ever know the outcome of the arbitration panel? I understand it ruled in ETNZ's favour but I don't remember hearing what the compensation was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, NeedAClew said:

With OTAUS as Defender we had a narcissistic billionaire and his multimillionaire lackeys plotting and scheming in the name of sport.

With ETNZ as Defender we have a passionate group of team advocates and some meddling squabblers like me yammering away online and some actual teams sincerely trying to compete albeit with some possibly questionable sponsors.  

I think the Cup is better off now. Asked, answered.

I agree. AC36 is being run within the spirit of the cup. AC35 was a fucking disgrace with the late overturn of the AC62, defender and challengers agreeing to the format of the next cup, a second boat campaign run under the guise of another flag, the all out attempts to sideline a specific challenger (cancellation of the Auckland WS event was a calculated, professional foul) etc etc

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^And OTAUS defended in Bermuda. 

Sorry, but either it was a crass financial move by one of the 10 richest people on the planet and his cronies, or OTAUS was such a pita no US city wanted to host. Or both.  In any case, the Cup is now being defended in the home country of the Defender. Better.

Share this post


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

The problem ETNZ had (if we're referring to the replacement of the AC62 class rule) was not that it happened at all, but that it happened late into the cycle when both ETNZ and LR were well into the design stage of their AC62. Coupled with this was the fact that the decision to replace the AC62 came with the stipulation that the Auckland qualifier would also be pulled, even though it was already signed and agreed to. At the time, ETNZ was very much dependent on government funding, which would also not eventuate if the Auckland qualifier was pulled.

Given that this decision directly impacted ETNZ's financial situation late into the cycle, as well as forcing them to file a protest to the Arbitration panel which would also be time critical, it is hardly surprising they would feel "conspired against" as it was widely reported that at least one challenging team (apparently) voiced their disapproval of the Auckland qualifier. The problem was, once the Auckland qualifier was signed, what the teams "wanted" became irrelevant. They would have to either come to Auckland and participate, or kiss their Americas Cup aspirations goodbye. The rest is history. Again, these are facts you choose to ignore.

The choice of the AC50 had nothing to do against TNZ and everything with making it cheaper to attract more challengers. It did not impact TNZ, they won. LR had just wrongly interpreted the protocol and the rule.

The "collusion" to keep the AC50 was not a conspiracy against TNZ but to keep the present challengers. TNZ refused to join all the other challengers on that way, most probably because they had secret agreement with LR who helped them win.  The consequence of the decision is that instead of having a big AC with lots of challengers they have a small one. Square and simple.

As far as impacting the teams, the present multiple changes of the protocol and delays are much more damaging for the "super challengers".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

LR had just wrongly interpreted the protocol and the rule.

No doubt LR fucked up. Not for wrongly interpreting the design rule (pretty obviously 62ft not 50ft!) but for surrendering their COR status and allowing a majority vote ... which lead to the overturn of the rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Sea Breeze 74 said:

No doubt LR fucked up. Not for wrongly interpreting the design rule (pretty obviously 62ft not 50ft!) but for surrendering their COR status and allowing a majority vote ... which lead to the overturn of the rule.

IIRC, they also missed the fact that the new prot allowed to change of the boat by majority and not unanimity.

Share this post


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

You're saying there was no collusion?  ;)

^^ Take the tin foil hat off, majority is not collusion. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

^^ Take the tin foil hat off, majority is not collusion. ;)

The number or proportion of parties has zero bearing on the definition of collusion... it just needs two or more parties... but in this case it was also the majority.

685157098_ScreenShot2019-06-06at12_46_01PM.png.b3b5f071c24184e620cac447f778123a.png

Was there an agreement between two or more parties? Yes

Was the terms of the agreement keep a secret from the other parties? Yes 

Was the agreement to the detriment of the other parties? Yes

1501598701_ScreenShot2019-06-06at12_58_39PM.png.f273f5ad121f39ba590743b390fda4a1.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

The choice of the AC50 had nothing to do against TNZ and everything with making it cheaper to attract more challengers. It did not impact TNZ, they won. LR had just wrongly interpreted the protocol and the rule.

The "collusion" to keep the AC50 was not a conspiracy against TNZ but to keep the present challengers. TNZ refused to join all the other challengers on that way, most probably because they had secret agreement with LR who helped them win.  The consequence of the decision is that instead of having a big AC with lots of challengers they have a small one. Square and simple.

As far as impacting the teams, the present multiple changes of the protocol and delays are much more damaging for the "super challengers".

L.O.L do you even read what you write before you post it? That whole comment is insanity. You sir, have officially lost your mind.

Just because they won, does not mean it did not impact them. It forced ETNZ to go in a different direction (simulation) due in large part to the breach of agreement between Schiller and ACEA and ETNZ. No government funding meant no boat building until funds were secured from somewhere else.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sea Breeze 74 said:

Did we ever know the outcome of the arbitration panel? I understand it ruled in ETNZ's favour but I don't remember hearing what the compensation was.

No. Because after having an independent jury (comprised of an independent international jurors appointed by World Sailing) find them guilty of cheating in AC34, OTUSA removed the jury and installed their own arbitration panel for AC35, the composition of which was (and still is) a secret. Furthermore, they made it so that any findings of this panel would be kept secret too.

They also appear to have made this part of the framework agreement.

Lone Wolf again... makes interesting, compelling and frankly depressing reading...

727639418_ScreenShot2019-06-06at1_03_33PM.png.f460174522cbff9993dd22dfe65569b0.png

1566607747_ScreenShot2019-06-06at1_04_36PM.png.45b2a5b478fa5cb361e8c9809b94842d.png

490061976_ScreenShot2019-06-06at1_04_56PM.png.8bad773e0074de38c2f7c4e18c720ddb.png

1809631168_ScreenShot2019-06-06at1_05_07PM.png.8359befa0165041c7e9fe119f678a2cd.png

The news of Schiller's arrival to SGP makes this whole situation and SGP even more sleazy....

Yeah, nothing to see here... ;-)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I guess Larry isn't likely to get into the AC Hall of Fame unless he buys it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

IIRC, they also missed the fact that the new prot allowed to change of the boat by majority and not unanimity.

Unbelievably naive of them. The cluster fuck that followed is a direct result of that decision.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rh2600 said:

No. Because after having an independent jury (comprised of an independent international jurors appointed by World Sailing) find them guilty of cheating in AC34, OTUSA removed the jury and installed their own arbitration panel for AC35, the composition of which was (and still is) a secret. Furthermore, they made it so that any findings of this panel would be kept secret too.

I haven't re-posted that Lone Wolf transcript to keep the page size down but wow, what an outrage! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Sea Breeze 74 said:

 

Unbelievably naive of them. The cluster fuck that followed is a direct result of that decision.

I think they were willing to get rid of an inconvenience in order to focus on the race, but they did not realize the impact. What is stranger is why their ally, TNZ, let them do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

I think they were willing to get rid of an inconvenience in order to focus on the race, but they did not realize the impact. What is stranger is why their ally, TNZ, let them do.

It's almost as if the two teams aren't as intimate or allied as you seem to think eh ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rh2600 said:

The number or proportion of parties has zero bearing on the definition of collusion... it just needs two or more parties... but in this case it was also the majority.

685157098_ScreenShot2019-06-06at12_46_01PM.png.b3b5f071c24184e620cac447f778123a.png

Was there an agreement between two or more parties? Yes

Was the terms of the agreement keep a secret from the other parties? Yes 

Was the agreement to the detriment of the other parties? Yes

1501598701_ScreenShot2019-06-06at12_58_39PM.png.f273f5ad121f39ba590743b390fda4a1.png

 

No,

Choice of the AC50: there was a vote, as per the protocol that they signed, they lost.

Keeping the AC50 : they refused, all  the other challengers then agreed to keep it.

But it fits the discourse of victimization that there was a collusion, bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Sea Breeze 74 said:

 

Unbelievably naive of them. The cluster fuck that followed is a direct result of that decision.

Slightly more complex... class rule changes did require unanimity, instead OTUSA engineered a protocol change (to effect a change in the class) which only required majority.

1379206393_ScreenShot2019-06-06at3_04_15PM.png.145a31a17f7b8cbb631010db836caf33.png

LR did not expect OTUSA to do something so shite... something that flies so clearly in the face of the spirit of the Protocol and Class rule instruments.

And those that wish to call LR naive for assuming OTUSA wouldn't act like this, can't then criticise ETNZ's cynicism and paranoia of OTUSA in the same breath... unless not without being a hypocrite...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rh2600 said:

OTUSA removed the jury and installed their own arbitration panel for AC35,

 

I never supported OTUSA at this time but what hypocrisy. TNZ and LR can now make what they want and chose who they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

Slightly more complex... class rule changes did require unanimity, instead OTUSA engineered a protocol change (to effect a change in the class) which only required majority.

 

Ah ah,  any kid knows the prot supercedes the rule :). By giving up their right LR was opening the door to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Ah ah,  any kid knows the prot supercedes the rule :). By giving up their right LR was opening the door to it.

Opening the door to what? Other parties agreeing to using the prot to subvert the intent of the class rule?

Sure! Sounds awfully like a collusion eh! :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

LR did not expect OTUSA to do something so shite... something that flies so clearly in the face of the spirit of the Protocol and Class rule instruments.

This sums it up. OTUSA acted appallingly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

I never supported OTUSA at this time but what hypocrisy. TNZ and LR can now make what they want and chose who they want.

This is not true. Either for panel or jury.

Panel first - COR/D have appointed a public arbitration panel. Not the just defender exclusively, and they haven't kept the individuals secret, nor any submissions or findings. The individuals on the panel have been nominated from World Sailing for AC arbitration panels.

https://www.americascup.com/en/news/22_36th-AMERICA-S-CUP-ARBITRATION-PANEL-NAMED

On paper it's hard to get more neutral than individuals who have already been appointed by World Sailing on previous independent AC arbitration panels or juries, or other independent yachting panels. They are essentially already vetted, and now public, open to any criticism or robust critique from other parties if they are not neutral - fair enough.

Further more the AC36 protocol goes very far to ensure they don't get entangled in teams during the event if they recuse themselves from official roles (don't get us started on this dodgy shit in the past)

1185526874_ScreenShot2019-06-06at3_58_08PM.png.0187fe3d9b80f01d655a77235ff1a770.png

As for the jury?

Back to the old days of a) not being in the pocket of the defender or COR, and b) being appointed in consultation with World Sailing. Just like it should be.

619046155_ScreenShot2019-06-06at3_58_29PM.png.a9a53f7de9021d5d33bd7b045bedaae0.png

The hypocrisy is not the COR/D can do what they want - of course they can, it's their fucking AC! It's what they choose to do, and in this case they appear to have acted fairly and reasonably, not an assessment anyone can make in regards to OTUSA's previous shenanigans in their punitive response to being caught cheating more than once.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

I never supported OTUSA at this time but what hypocrisy. TNZ and LR can now make what they want and chose who they want.

And they’re completely within their right as defender and CoR to do just that. Now we understand why LR have chosen to keep their veto rights. As even @Tornado-Cat has stated, it was LR’s waiving of veto rights which opened the door for OTUSA to “amend” the protocol to replace the class rule without requiring a unanimous vote. By retaining veto rights, that “clusterfuck” does not happen again. Another reason this AC is better off.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

And they’re completely within their right as defender and CoR to do just that. Now we understand why LR have chosen to keep their veto rights. As even @Tornado-Cat has stated, it was LR’s waiving of veto rights which opened the door for OTUSA to “amend” the protocol to replace the class rule without requiring a unanimous vote. By retaining veto rights, that “clusterfuck” does not happen again. Another reason this AC is better off.

Works for me!  LR's waiver last time upset the applecart.  They're not making that mistake again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sea Breeze 74 said:

This sums it up. OTUSA acted appallingly. 

At this point I don't care if it is collusion, conspiracy, sharp dealing, or what.  What OTAUS did was appalling.  

Only thing I wonder...it might not be out of character for LE given Oracle's famously unpleasant business dealings with competitors, potential aquirees, etc. over the decades. Organizational rot comes from the top.  But the rest of his merry band went along with it.  Was it just the money?  Was it blind lust for glory?  Self-delusion?  Fear of getting blacklisted? I hope some of them at least still know what they went along with and that their ethics had a price tag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, NeedAClew said:

At this point I don't care if it is collusion, conspiracy, sharp dealing, or what.  What OTAUS did was appalling.  

Only thing I wonder...it might not be out of character for LE given Oracle's famously unpleasant business dealings with competitors, potential aquirees, etc. over the decades. Organizational rot comes from the top.  But the rest of his merry band went along with it.  Was it just the money?  Was it blind lust for glory?  Self-delusion?  Fear of getting blacklisted? I hope some of them at least still know what they went along with and that their ethics had a price tag.

 

It was a large operation with multiple years of commitment and diff teams settled in Bermuda. There's something to be said re being a professional in the trades and sailor vs being LE's personal retinue. 

LE isn't the type of billionaire to care about his reputation or sporting qualities. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again.  What is conveniently left out by Kiwi fans ragging on OR is that the main person at OR that gave us all the BS mentioned is a Kiwi. 

How ironical.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, WetHog said:

Here we go again.  What is conveniently left out by Kiwi fans ragging on OR is that the main person at OR that gave us all the BS mentioned is a Kiwi. 

How ironical.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

Thats Funny, last I checked, the man paying the bills was an American. Are you telling Me Ellison had nothing what so ever to do with anything Oracle has ever done? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, WetHog said:

Here we go again.  What is conveniently left out by Kiwi fans ragging on OR is that the main person at OR that gave us all the BS mentioned is a Kiwi. 

How ironical.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

I am not a Kiwi or an ETNZ fan. I am a US person who is ashamed of the actions of a team that purportedly was "Team USA." 

 

Justice delayed is justice denied.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_delayed_is_justice_denied

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Here we go again.  What is conveniently left out by Kiwi fans ragging on OR is that the main person at OR that gave us all the BS mentioned is a Kiwi. 

How ironical.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

Well I was just going to bring that up. I'm not sure that Larry had the time or interest to work out knife twists like ripping up the Auckland venue. I reckon wussel is a snake, made bold by Larry's ethical stance ( none). And yes he is a kiwi, but a mercenary has no nation in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, WetHog said:

Here we go again.  What is conveniently left out by Kiwi fans ragging on OR is that the main person at OR that gave us all the BS mentioned is a Kiwi. 

How ironical.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

Of course RC is entangled in this...

That you think this is about race/nationality says much... this is not about race or nationality, this is about teams, not the nationality of who is on those teams. This is about what OTUSA did, irrespective of the nationalities involved, vs what ETNZ does, irrespective of the nationalities involved...

Share this post


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

Here we go again.  What is conveniently left out by Kiwi fans ragging on OR is that the main person at OR that gave us all the BS mentioned is a Kiwi. 

How ironical.  

Yes, Russell is a Kiwi, a tool and donkey deep in the shameful running of AC35. But don't you worry, us Kiwis hold a special vitriol for our own. Coutts and Butterworth had their citizenship morally revoked ex 2003.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, rh2600 said:

This is not true. Either for panel or jury.

Panel first - COR/D have appointed a public arbitration panel. Not the just defender exclusively, and they haven't kept the individuals secret, nor any submissions or findings. The individuals on the panel have been nominated from World Sailing for AC arbitration panels.

https://www.americascup.com/en/news/22_36th-AMERICA-S-CUP-ARBITRATION-PANEL-NAMED

On paper it's hard to get more neutral than individuals who have already been appointed by World Sailing on previous independent AC arbitration panels or juries, or other independent yachting panels. They are essentially already vetted, and now public, open to any criticism or robust critique from other parties if they are not neutral - fair enough.

Further more the AC36 protocol goes very far to ensure they don't get entangled in teams during the event if they recuse themselves from official roles (don't get us started on this dodgy shit in the past)

1185526874_ScreenShot2019-06-06at3_58_08PM.png.0187fe3d9b80f01d655a77235ff1a770.png

As for the jury?

Back to the old days of a) not being in the pocket of the defender or COR, and b) being appointed in consultation with World Sailing. Just like it should be.

619046155_ScreenShot2019-06-06at3_58_29PM.png.a9a53f7de9021d5d33bd7b045bedaae0.png

The hypocrisy is not the COR/D can do what they want - of course they can, it's their fucking AC! It's what they choose to do, and in this case they appear to have acted fairly and reasonably, not an assessment anyone can make in regards to OTUSA's previous shenanigans in their punitive response to being caught cheating more than once.

Yes the CoR/Defender can do what they want, they select 2 out of th3 of the arbitration panel, the 3rd being selected by the first 2 and then they have to accept them.Same for the Jury: "in consultation" with the WS. But you agree on that, as you say it's their fucking AC.

So you say that the difference is what they choose to do right ? Well, like OTUSA they change the protocol as often as needed to get more challengers at the expend of the first teams.

Not that I defend OTUSA but let's stop the hypocrisy.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Yes the CoR/Defender can do what they want, they select 2 out of th3 of the arbitration panel, the 3rd being selected by the first 2 and then they have to accept them.Same for the Jury: "in consultation" with the WS. But you agree on that, as you say it's their fucking AC.

So you say that the difference is what they choose to do right ? Well, like OTUSA they change the protocol as often as needed to get more challengers at the expend of the first teams.

Not that I defend OTUSA but let's stop the hypocrisy.

 

 

Uhh so you're saying they could have chosen whatever arbitration/jury system they wanted?

giphy.gif

 

Share this post


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

Yes the CoR/Defender can do what they want, they select 2 out of th3 of the arbitration panel, the 3rd being selected by the first 2 and then they have to accept them.Same for the Jury: "in consultation" with the WS. But you agree on that, as you say it's their fucking AC.

So you say that the difference is what they choose to do right ? Well, like OTUSA they change the protocol as often as needed to get more challengers at the expend of the first teams.

Not that I defend OTUSA but let's stop the hypocrisy.

 

 

But they didn't get "More challengers" thats the point. Oracle, ETNZ, Artemis, LR and Land Rover BAR were all going to be a part of AC35, even with the AC62 Class. They created a poodle challenger with the intent of helping them retain, and used the French as a scapegoat as to why they had to change the class rule! If you look at it, those teams were beholden to the Defender at that time, otherwise they would still be a part of the AC. 

Japan wound up as soon as Larry pulled the pin, and the French were the scapegoat for changing the Class Rule, and aren't even part of the Cup anymore. These are the teams Oracle favored over those who were strongest (LR and ETNZ) but go ahead...just use the go to line "It wasn't a conspiracy, it was a coincidence and just ended up that way" lol

There is no hypocrisy here.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oracle business practices began with LE as their first "salesman" and have been honed to perfection over 42 years. See for example the description of their how their license audits/cloud sales work and how the software is configured to facilitate that:

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/06/06/oracle_cloud_pansion_lawsuit/

If any lawyers, consultants, advisers to OTAUS ever worked with or talked to counterparts from  Oracle Corp. it wouldn't have taken LE's time, just his tacit approval, to add value to OTAUS knife twisty snake maneuvers. Delaying redress via mandatory arbitration is a standard practice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't SoftBank and Groupama basically serve as Oracle voting/training team? With design package basically sold and who knows what level of boat building?

How much of the funding was from the title sponsors and how much from LE/sponsored by Oracle's design package?

Share this post


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

But they didn't get "More challengers" thats the point. Oracle, ETNZ, Artemis, LR and Land Rover BAR were all going to be a part of AC35, even with the AC62 Class. They created a poodle challenger with the intent of helping them retain, and used the French as a scapegoat as to why they had to change the class rule! If you look at it, those teams were beholden to the Defender at that time, otherwise they would still be a part of the AC.  

TF and TJ were there to prepare for the next AC. They were surely more serious than your fake Malta.

It's time for you to understand that OR diminished the size of the boat to get more challengers, that TNZ is modifying the protocol for the same reason and that future defenders will probably do the same.

But I can't prevent thin skinned kiwi fans to think that all the teams were plotting against TNZ. Nonsense.

Share this post


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

Japan wound up as soon as Larry pulled the pin, and the French were the scapegoat for changing the Class Rule, and aren't even part of the Cup anymore. These are the teams Oracle favored over those who were strongest (LR and ETNZ) but go ahead...just use the go to line "It wasn't a conspiracy, it was a coincidence and just ended up that way" lol

There is no hypocrisy here.

  

What paranoïac and stupid thinking, OR was not obliged to organize a forum, they could have handpicked a challenger, ask him the be the CoR and organize a protocol where they could do everything like now with TNZ and LR. They just wanted to have challengers.

I hate poodles, I was not an OR fan, but their challenger forum was much more democratic than what TNZ organized with LR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rh2600 said:

Uhh so you're saying they could have chosen whatever arbitration/jury system they wanted?

 

They can even change what you quoted from their protocol, if it suits them. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

They can even change what you quoted from their protocol, if it suits them. :)

Again

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Forourselves said:

But they didn't get "More challengers" thats the point. Oracle, ETNZ, Artemis, LR and Land Rover BAR were all going to be a part of AC35, even with the AC62 Class. They created a poodle challenger with the intent of helping them retain, and used the French as a scapegoat as to why they had to change the class rule! If you look at it, those teams were beholden to the Defender at that time, otherwise they would still be a part of the AC. 

Japan wound up as soon as Larry pulled the pin, and the French were the scapegoat for changing the Class Rule, and aren't even part of the Cup anymore. These are the teams Oracle favored over those who were strongest (LR and ETNZ) but go ahead...just use the go to line "It wasn't a conspiracy, it was a coincidence and just ended up that way" lol

There is no hypocrisy here.

  

That's incorrect. Ainslie struggled for money & financial support. His challenge was accepted in June 2014 yet Jaguar Land Rover came onboard just before the 1st World Series Event in 2015. Without the Boats being downzised BAR wouldn't have made the Start Line in Bermuda.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

TF and TJ were there to prepare for the next AC. They were surely more serious than your fake Malta.

It's time for you to understand that OR diminished the size of the boat to get more challengers, that TNZ is modifying the protocol for the same reason and that future defenders will probably do the same.

But I can't prevent thin skinned kiwi fans to think that all the teams were plotting against TNZ. Nonsense.

Oh dear, the defender changing the rules to suit themselves? That's a new concept - NOT!

Around 100 years ago the NYYC wrote the rules that the defending yacht could be selected on the morning of race with a different defender each day - that kind of makes DC's 3 rating certificates in '83 look a little half hearted. 

Or competing yachts getting to the course on their own bottom - Defender could have a light coastal yacht while the defender (usually the Brits) had to have a yacht capable of an ocean crossing with the associated heavier scantlings.

Or Alinghi's CNEV puppet or allowing in QIYC which had never run a race let alone a regatta. Or the AC72 initial rules supposedly to not promote foiling (that one nearly didn't work out so well)

Or ETNZ changing the Deed of Gift challenging club rules - that one didn't enhance challenger number at all.

Bottom line is teams don't have to enter a event if they don't want to for whatever reason. Surely it is up to the organisers, and in the case of multiple challenger America's Cups those organisers are the Defender & Challenger of Record who in partnership formulate the 'Protocol', to put together a set of rules that attracts other challengers, if indeed they want multiple other challengers.

I would suggest that, given the current Protocol & the class of boat selected perhaps, although publicly they have been saying they want loads of teams, the reality is that they ae quite happy to prevent others muddying their waters.

Don't get me wrong, like any keen sailor and a keen follower of the AC I 100% wish AC36 to be a resounding success but perhaps the focus needs to be more on the event ahead with what they have instead of trying to produce PR over 2 further teams that will most likely be there just to make up numbers as cannon fodder.

At least after July 1st (I think that is the final, final, final cut off date) the sailing world will be able to concentrate on which teams actually WILL contest the Prada Cup and then the America's Cup itself.

Incidentally the above is not intended to be criticism of anyone, Kiwi, Italians,  the Dutch & 2nd US team, it is just how I see it. In many ways the America's Cup perhaps wouldn't have maintained it's mystique or intrigue without disagreements, the odd 'Dunraven' moment or a bit of 'Keelgate' here and there down through the years.

May the best team win!

See ya on the water 

SS

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

What paranoïac and stupid thinking, OR was not obliged to organize a forum, they could have handpicked a challenger, ask him the be the CoR and organize a protocol where they could do everything like now with TNZ and LR. They just wanted to have challengers.

I hate poodles, I was not an OR fan, but their challenger forum was much more democratic than what TNZ organized with LR.

Bollocks! Then why didn’t they prepare for the next AC? They shut up shop as soon as Oracle did. They bought Oracles first AC50, they had the same group of sponsors, they shared the same compound on the dock and even trained together after the challenger series finished. SoftBank was created to help Oracle get around the 2 boat rule. The SoftBank Team allowed Oracle to have a second boat without having to build 2 of their own. They would also have a foot in the challenger camp as well as being the defender. It’s not democratic if you’re buying votes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Forourselves said:

Bollocks! Then why didn’t they prepare for the next AC? They shut up shop as soon as Oracle did. They bought Oracles first AC50, they had the same group of sponsors, they shared the same compound on the dock and even trained together after the challenger series finished. SoftBank was created to help Oracle get around the 2 boat rule. The SoftBank Team allowed Oracle to have a second boat without having to build 2 of their own. They would also have a foot in the challenger camp as well as being the defender. It’s not democratic if you’re buying votes. 

They are now racing the Sailgp.

But you did not bite, in fact OR could not have handpicked a new challenger because there was a succession plan (the new one could have been TNZ, I don't remember). But if that was happening now TNZ could handpick him by refusing the previous one in the line. Si before criticizing Larry or Ernesto you could watch Foryourselves. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Forourselves said:

Thats Funny, last I checked, the man paying the bills was an American. Are you telling Me Ellison had nothing what so ever to do with anything Oracle has ever done? 

Nope, Larry is complicit but Russell has had a hard on for a multi-hull world sailing league since he first tried to get one off the ground with Paul Cayard last decade.  AC34 and AC35 were Russell's attempt to make that a reality with the AC.  He failed with the AC but the vision lives on with the Sail GP.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, barfy said:

Well I was just going to bring that up. I'm not sure that Larry had the time or interest to work out knife twists like ripping up the Auckland venue. I reckon wussel is a snake, made bold by Larry's ethical stance ( none). And yes he is a kiwi, but a mercenary has no nation in the end.

The mercenary does have a nation when he is appointed (do I have that right?  Appointed?) to the New Zealand Order of Merit.  ;)

As I said above, Larry is complicit.  Did he have intimate knowledge of everything Russell did in his name?  Doubtful, but Larry foot the bill.  

Russell won Larry the Cup in 2010.  As a result Larry gave Russell carte blanche to make his world sailing league dream a reality.   Russell tried to bend and twist the AC into his world sailing league vision but Russell ultimately failed.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Nope, Larry is complicit but Russell has had a hard on for a multi-hull world sailing league since he first tried to get one off the ground with Paul Cayard last decade.  AC34 and AC35 were Russell's attempt to make that a reality with the AC.  He failed with the AC but the vision lives on with the Sail GP.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

You seem to conflate being a cat-fan with being a duplicitous arsehole... I'm sure the likes of TC would take issue this... :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

You seem to conflate being a cat-fan with being a duplicitous arsehole... I'm sure the likes of TC would take issue this... :-)

No comment.  ;)

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


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

The mercenary does have a nation when he is appointed (do I have that right?  Appointed?) to the New Zealand Order of Merit.  ;)

As I said above, Larry is complicit.  Did he have intimate knowledge of everything Russell did in his name?  Doubtful, but Larry foot the bill.  

Russell won Larry the Cup in 2010.  As a result Larry gave Russell carte blanche to make his world sailing league dream a reality.   Russell tried to bend and twist the AC into his world sailing league vision but Russell ultimately failed.  

WetHog  :ph34r:


This. I don't really care if the defenders or challengers are ETNZ, Japan, Sweden, USA, UK, Italy, etc - I just want to see good competition under some level of sporting equity, but there ought to be some respect for the deed of gift that the winner of the cup, gets to establish the next event or face a deed of gift match. 

Coutt's method in Bermuda with the agreement was looking to hijack the prestige of the event and lock it in to some existing interested parties at the expense of everyone else. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, WetHog said:

The mercenary does have a nation when he is appointed (do I have that right?  Appointed?) to the New Zealand Order of Merit.  ;)

History is full of anointed fallen knights. 

38 minutes ago, Miffy said:

I don't really care if the defenders or challengers are ETNZ, Japan, Sweden, USA, UK, Italy, etc - I just want to see good competition under some level of sporting equity, but there ought to be some respect for the deed of gift that the winner of the cup, gets to establish the next event or face a deed of gift match. 

Same here. The team of LarryandRC are globalists, but they play the game with the same disrespect that globalist often affect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, shanghaisailor said:

Oh dear, the defender changing the rules to suit themselves? That's a new concept - NOT!

Around 100 years ago the NYYC wrote the rules that the defending yacht could be selected on the morning of race with a different defender each day - that kind of makes DC's 3 rating certificates in '83 look a little half hearted. 

Or competing yachts getting to the course on their own bottom - Defender could have a light coastal yacht while the defender (usually the Brits) had to have a yacht capable of an ocean crossing with the associated heavier scantlings.

Or Alinghi's CNEV puppet or allowing in QIYC which had never run a race let alone a regatta. Or the AC72 initial rules supposedly to not promote foiling (that one nearly didn't work out so well)

Or ETNZ changing the Deed of Gift challenging club rules - that one didn't enhance challenger number at all.

May the best team win!

See ya on the water 

SS

Yes, all defenders try to modify the rules at their advantage, which is why we can denounce the hypocrisy of some who blame the past to hide the present.

See you on the water !

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Kiwing said:

@Tornado-Cat I presume you mean by "you" ETNZ but I am interested as you who represents you?

SS, but it can also be whatever sailor on the water !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We say in NZ we cheer for NZ "and any team playing Australia" this is a friendly brotherly saying suggesting that "any opposition" would be the underdog.

Is this your meaning,   SS "and any team competing against ETNZ" in a similar friendly competitive way?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

We say in NZ we cheer for NZ "and any team playing Australia" this is a friendly brotherly saying suggesting that "any opposition" would be the underdog.

Is this your meaning,   SS "and any team competing against ETNZ" in a similar friendly competitive way?Tna

Thanks for the explanation Kiwing. So I cheer for my still to be decided team and any team playing Australia :)

Share this post


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

We say in NZ we cheer for NZ "and any team playing Australia" this is a friendly brotherly saying suggesting that "any opposition" would be the underdog.

Is this your meaning,   SS "and any team competing against ETNZ" in a similar friendly competitive way?

We have the same concept in Scotland except it is any team playing England. However as INEOS is a British entry I suppose I should support them. In reality though, as someone who likes to see games (especially our sport) played by the rules ensuring honest and fair competition.

Share this post


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

We have the same concept in Scotland except it is any team playing England. However as INEOS is a British entry I suppose I should support them.

If we remember the fierce repression and killings of the anglo saxons in the history of Scotland, you should, as done before, side with the french if they had one team :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

If we remember the fierce repression and killings of the anglo saxons in the history of Scotland, you should, as done before, side with the french if they had one team :)

William the Conqueror or the Plantagenets?

Share this post


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

We have the same concept in Scotland

SS, I always enjoy your commentary but this took me by surprise. I never would have guessed you lived in Scotland!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sea Breeze 74 said:

SS, I always enjoy your commentary but this took me by surprise. I never would have guessed you lived in Scotland!

Did I actually say that?

As the saying goes "You can take the Scot out of Scotland, but you cannot take Scotland out of the Scot" 

Good job you never guessed I lived in Scotland because you would have been wrong :-)

The 'nom de plume' is in fact, 100% accurate.

See ya on the water - most likely in China.

SS

PS -By the way, my daughter does exactly the same with her (black) Labrador on her paddleboard - neat!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

So, there were good and bad French for Scotland...
See, generalization is never good ;)

^^ See, we can agree sometimes ;)

Share this post


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

Did I actually say that?

As the saying goes "You can take the Scot out of Scotland, but you cannot take Scotland out of the Scot" 

Good job you never guessed I lived in Scotland because you would have been wrong :-)

The 'nom de plume' is in fact, 100% accurate.

See ya on the water - most likely in China.

SS

PS -By the way, my daughter does exactly the same with her (black) Labrador on her paddleboard - neat!

 I assumed China originally but no reason to think you weren't widely travelled as well!

Yes, our little dog loves it on the board .... not so much when he falls in the water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, big cuddles on the forum for a change...is it Xmas? :)

 

xmas_charlie_brown.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, barfy said:

Wow, big cuddles on the forum for a change...is it Xmas? :)

 

xmas_charlie_brown.jpg

Yes shocking isn’t it?

In the end we all post on here for one reason and that is our love of the AC.  One big dysfunctional family. 

WetHog  :ph34r:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, WetHog said:

Yes shocking isn’t it?

In the end we all post on here for one reason and that is our love of the AC.  One big dysfunctional family. 

WetHog  :ph34r:

Agreed WetHog, sailing and AC !!!

Cheers !

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites