Salty Seacock

Emirates Team New Zealand.

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Monkey said:

Choosing a COR that’s virtually guaranteed to pull this shit is the fault of one team only. 

 

A “shit” that’s just been endorsed by the Arbs ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ETNZ should volunteer itself not to use those race course so no advantage can be gained. Nobody gets to use the inner harbour courses until the AC final. 
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Monkey said:

Not quite sure what all that incoherent response was about. 

If I’m not mistaken, there’s a lot of angry Kiwis because of this ruling. Choosing a COR that’s virtually guaranteed to pull this shit is the fault of one team only. 

The "lot of angry Kiwis" at the ruling is monkey shit and you know it. The Arb.Panel adjudicated and ruled on a valid complaint from the CoR. What's there not to like about the system working as designed??

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mako23 said:

ETNZ should volunteer itself not to use those race course so no advantage can be gained. Nobody gets to use the inner harbour courses until the AC final. 
 

It's the Ports of Auckland Limited and Harbourmaster who've placed Courses A&B out of bounds - nothing to do with ETNZ. The CoR is saying if they can't use them for CSS, then it can't be used in the Match..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, mako23 said:

Is this speculation, or do you know something, and if so what is your evidence 

Not my speculation

58 minutes ago, NZL3481 said:

There's one or two interesting edges on ETNZ B2..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

In every war that Italians have been involved in they've fired their best shots early and always lost!

FFS have you ever heard of the Roman Empire 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NZL3481 said:

There's one or two interesting edges on ETNZ B2..

Is this speculation on your part ........or you have seen something ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Indio said:

It's the Ports of Auckland Limited and Harbourmaster who've placed Courses A&B out of bounds - nothing to do with ETNZ. The CoR is saying if they can't use them for CSS, then it can't be used in the Match..

 

So Kiwis are angry with the Harbour Master which is an oxymoron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mako23 said:

FFS have you ever heard of the Roman Empire 

Yeah, and look how THAT turned out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kate short for Bob said:

So Kiwis are angry with the Harbour Master which is an oxymoron.

Anger is a waste of energy, grasshopper!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ex-yachtie said:

Yeah, and look how THAT turned out!

Yeah over 500 years of stability that has never been seen since

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ex-yachtie said:

Yeah, and look how THAT turned out!

They had some epic orgies...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Indio said:

They had some epic orgies...

Some lasting 500 years apparently. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Ask the ratepayers of Auckland what they think of Ports Auckland, Watercare etc.

We all pay our share - some more than others!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kate short for Bob said:

FFS how far do you want to go back?  In any case they lost eventually.

Modern Italy didn’t exist until 1870’s 

After the fall of the Roman Empire it was split into multiple kingdoms, so there’s not much modern history to compare. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ex-yachtie said:

Some lasting 500 years apparently. 

"Let us turn now to Messalina, empress to Claudius: queen of the imperial whores, she is said to have regularly snuck out of bed while Claudius slept to visit a fetid brothel, using the working name ‘Lycisca’ (‘Wolf Bitch’). Roman author Pliny the Elder tells the distasteful story of Messalina’s epic orgy, in which she challenged a veteran prostitute to a 24-hour sex marathon. The empress won with 25 partners – one client per hour. "

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Indio said:

It's the Ports of Auckland Limited and Harbourmaster who've placed Courses A&B out of bounds - nothing to do with ETNZ. The CoR is saying if they can't use them for CSS, then it can't be used in the Match..

 

.. and fewer people will die trying to get to their favorite fishing spot .. quite a good outcome really

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Storm-Petrel said:

.. and fewer people will die trying to get to their favorite fishing spot .. quite a good outcome really

You're kidding?  You are either like most sports fisher boatsman in Auckland and have no idea of how to navigate or the road rules OR.....

You ain't a sailor on a sailing forum.  Who cares about a bin load of Snapper when you could be watching the next AC on the beach with a beer in hand?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

How many times have the Italians had the AC?

We all know the answer, so what’s your point ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

In every war that Italians have been involved in they've fired their best shots early and always lost!

Hasn't every war the Italians been involved with resulted in them reaching for the white flag?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mako23 said:

We all know the answer, so what’s your point ?

No point really.  This is all noise and part and parcel of any AC.  Grant Dalton will be in his element.  The difference now unlike San Francisco he is in the best place.  Meanwhile ETNZ is keeping on developing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, NZL3481 said:

Hasn't every war the Italians been involved with resulted in them reaching for the white flag?

Factually wrong. This myth comes from WW2 were the Italian Army performed poorly. Not through lack of courage but very poor equipment. Due to Italy forming as a country 1870 it had missed out of the industrial revolution.  Germany who formed as a country in 1880’s did manage to industrialize at a rapid pace. Italy sadly did not manage to industrialize at all, which lead to poorly equipped soldiers. Italy like Germany also had been left out of the spoils of colonialism and had no real colonies. In an attempt to get its “fair share” Italy engaged in foolish campaigns such as Ethiopia. 

In World War One, Italy fought Austria in the mountains. Italy lack of military equipment was not such a disadvantage in such terrain. In all fairness the Italian troops fought the Austrians with much courage. They also payed a terrible price in blood. At worse the war against the Austrians was a draw. I personally think the Italians won this campaign, it was the Austrian who requested peace after reversal on the battle front and starvation at home. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mako23 said:

also the Australian in Singapore also surrendered without “firing a shot” and 14972 went into captivity.  So your cheap shot about British Bravery also applies to the Australians. 
 

also fighting did occur in Singapore, it was the cowardly behaviour of the Australian 18 divisions who lost their sector to a lot smaller Japanese Army help caused the premature capitulation of Singapore. The lack of Australian backbone played an enormous part in the defeat in Singapore. 

That is horse shit. Australians made up just 13% of the ground forces yet suffered 73% of the casualties. Even the Japanese said the Australians fought well. They were poorly deployed by Percival. The British "Singapore strategy" was a debacle from the beginning, assuming the Japanese would attack by sea, and failing to anticipate the Japanese advance down the Malay peninsular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mako23 said:

Factually wrong. This myth comes from WW2 were the Italian Army performed poorly. Not through lack of courage but very poor equipment. Due to Italy forming as a country 1870 it had missed out of the industrial revolution.  Germany who formed as a country in 1880’s did manage to industrialize at a rapid pace. Italy sadly did not manage to industrialize at all, which lead to poorly equipped soldiers. Italy like Germany also had been left out of the spoils of colonialism and had no real colonies. In an attempt to get its “fair share” Italy engaged in foolish campaigns such as Ethiopia. 

In World War One, Italy fought Austria in the mountains. Italy lack of military equipment was not such a disadvantage in such terrain. In all fairness the Italian troops fought the Austrians with much courage. They also payed a terrible price in blood. At worse the war against the Austrians was a draw. I personally think the Italians won this campaign, it was the Austrian who requested peace after reversal on the battle front and starvation at home. 

This could describe LR's current AC campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, See Level said:

Why wasn't this issue addressed when they came up with the schedule to begin with, didn't anyone talk to the port?

This would have come up while Mayo&Calder were in charge....need I say more??

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Horn Rock said:

That is horse shit. Australians made up just 13% of the ground forces yet suffered 73% of the casualties. Even the Japanese said the Australians fought well. They were poorly deployed by Percival. The British "Singapore strategy" was a debacle from the beginning, assuming the Japanese would attack by sea, and failing to anticipate the Japanese advance down the Malay peninsular.

The Japanese would of never said anyone fought well...so that’s bullshit 

Also it was Australian lack of skill, equipment and courage that allowed the Japanese a foot hold in Singapore. They still outnumbered the japs but they bottled it. In any battle it’s essential that the line is held or encirclement can occur. The vast majority of other troops were Indians troops who wanted no involvement. It wasn’t there empire to defend. It was down to British and Australian troops to hold the line. The Australian performance in Singapore is the reason for the lose. A shameful part of Australian history

by the way Australian troops fought like lions in other campaigns, and the Singapore debacle is not a fair reflection on Australian courage. However Australia is to blame not the UK

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

More to come.  Shame Mayo and Calder don't have any money to pillage.

PoAL + Harbourmaster proposal to remove Courses A&B from CSS in January/2020 was only a proposal to be considered at the next stakeholders' meeting. Mayo&Calder would have attended that meeting and would have been responsible for notifying the CoR. Given everything that came out of their treachery since, this may have been one of the issues they were feeding LR. The rest, in the immortal words, is history....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mako23 said:

Also it was Australian lack of skill, equipment and courage that allowed the Japanese a foot hold in Singapore.

Rubbish, they were exhausted after bearing the brunt of the Malaya campaign. Percival over estimated the strength of the Japanese and deployed over a 70 mile line spreading his troops way too thin, allowing a relatively small Japanese force to punch through. It was a British failure through and through, no doubt about that whatsoever. To blame the Aussies is disingenuous and downright disgraceful.

Share this post


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

IF ETNZ Te Aihe-II comes out with some radical hull protrusions, expect the Rules Committee to be inundated with applications for interpretations from the Challengers.

After today, any radical hull protrusions are likely to be sharp(er) and possibly barbed.

0075-British-War-Chariot.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

Rubbish, they were exhausted after bearing the brunt of the Malaya campaign. Percival over estimated the strength of the Japanese and deployed over a 70 mile line spreading his troops way too thin, allowing a relatively small Japanese force to punch through. It was a British failure through and through, no doubt about that whatsoever. To blame the Aussies is disingenuous and downright disgraceful.

The Japanese landed in Singapore in the Australian sector......fact

The Aussies had a large advantage as defender, but did not maximize this...........fact

Australian troops fought very poorly...........fact

It was Australian troops who failed to do their job.........fact

Your attempt to blame the English is disgraceful........in an attempt to obfuscate the facts you ignore reality 

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1993/01/11/Report-Australian-cowardice-led-to-fall-of-Singapore-in-1942/7329726728400/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kate short for Bob said:

LOL I really love the way this forum digresses- boy do we need some AC sailing!

Yes that’s true.....we do need sailing 

Share this post


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

It is all about interest.  The US has a storied history in the automobile, but it is nothing in the world of F1 racing.

Pfff.. f1. Ha ha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Who do you blame for Gallipoli?

The Gallipoli campaign had lots of good logic. The real reason was to knock turkey out and let Russian and allied ships into the Black Sea so the Russians could of been supplied during the winter months  when All northern ports were inaccessible. If successful it would of dramatically shorten the war. The Russians had large number of men without equipment. If armed properly the Russians would of won the eastern war and the whole war  would  of been over a lot sooner.

British failure to maximize its advantage in the first 24 hours count for a lot. Gallipoli was the right idea but wrong place. The original idea was to knock out Turkish gun batteries which were blocking the British navy.  I think landing further west in Greece and marching east would of been better 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, mako23 said:

The Japanese landed in Singapore in the Australian sector......fact

The Aussies had a large advantage as defender, but did not maximize this...........fact

Australian troops fought very poorly...........fact

It was Australian troops who failed to do their job.........fact

Your attempt to blame the English is disgraceful........in an attempt to obfuscate the facts you ignore reality 

All rubbish. So predictable that you'd used Wavell's discredited report as the basis for your scurrilous claims of Aussie cowardice. Wavell was in India, wtf would he know? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mako23 said:

British failure to maximize its advantage in the first 24 hours count for a lot. Gallipoli was the right idea but wrong place. The original idea was to knock out Turkish gun batteries which were blocking the British navy.  I think landing further west in Greece and marching east would of been better 

Churchill's plan was right.  He was let down in the field.  Fisher and Robeck failed in the execution of the plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mako23 said:

ETNZ should volunteer itself not to use those race course so no advantage can be gained. Nobody gets to use the inner harbour courses until the AC final. 
 

And how many hours over the past 2 cup cycles has ETNZ sailed the waters in question (just a question, not a jab)?

Having ETNZ not use those courses for a limited period of time at this point might "look good" but it could be considered a half measure.

This is one of those "change in protocol" type of things that the COR has every right to push back on if it gives ETNZ any advantage that they did not lock in when they issued the protocol.

It would be great for the ETNZ fans, if the unintended consequences of the Harbor Master (no racing on B & C at all) would provide sufficient leverage to be used by the right people to get everything back to what was originally planned (All courses available for all races).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horn Rock said:

All rubbish. So predictable that you'd used Wavell's discredited report as the basis for your scurrilous claims of Aussie cowardice. Wavell was in India, wtf would he know? 

Ahh the sound of defeat, just slag off the Author, 

you can’t back up  with any facts to counter my point

Drunk, Poorly managed, lack of fighting spirit and the list goes on and on 

you started this who knows more pissing contest by mentioning Singapore 

don’t complain if you don’t like were the facts lead to .....and the facts are very uncomfortable for Australia 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, P Flados said:

And how many hours over the past 2 cup cycles has ETNZ sailed the waters in question (just a question, not a jab)?

A lot of hours, however AM has sailed these exact waters a lot as well

To be fair it’s LR and Ineos  who haven’t.......however been late to turn up to Auckland is the most relevant fact in this regard  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mako23 said:

Ahh the sound of defeat, just slag off the Author, 

Wavell was blame shifting because of the humiliation of the largest surrender in British history.

15 minutes ago, mako23 said:

don’t complain if you don’t like were the facts lead to .....and the facts are very uncomfortable for Australia 

They're not facts, they're bullshit. Percival's poor deployments was the main reason for the defeat. By the time of the desertions - by British troops as well - the battle was already lost, and the Aussies had had enough of being  British cannon fodder, having already borne the brunt of the casualties. You're not reprising facts, but British propaganda, that unfairly maligns Australian efforts, and the extreme suffering they endured in Japanese captivity.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

Wavell was blame shifting because of the humiliation of the largest surrender in British history.

They're not facts, they're bullshit. Percival's poor deployments was the main reason for the defeat. By the time of the desertions - by British troops as well - the battle was already lost, and the Aussies had had enough of being  British cannon fodder, having already borne the brunt of the casualties. You're not reprising facts, but British propaganda, that unfairly maligns Australian efforts, and the extreme suffering they endured in Japanese captivity.  

If Australian troops did there job as ordered by Percival there wouldn’t of been a problem.  However poor moral and cowardice is to blame. The moral of the Aussie troops is the responsibility of Australian commanders. The lack of fighting spirit rests on Australian commanders shoulders. Should of Percival given each Australian soldier a cuddle and rock them to sleep ?

Maybe he should of given them a teddy bear 

 

Share this post


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

Which courses were AC 30 and AC 31 raced on?  A and further north?

WetHog  :ph34r:

Alpha, Romeo, and Juliet. All out in the main part of the Gulf

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mako23 said:

If Australian troops did there job as ordered by Percival there wouldn’t of been a problem.  However poor moral and cowardice is to blame. The moral of the Aussie troops is the responsibility of Australian commanders. The lack of fighting spirit rests on Australian commanders shoulders. Should of Percival given each Australian soldier a cuddle and rock them to sleep ?

Maybe he should of given them a teddy bear 

 

And yet those cowards have won a cup and you hero’s have not.   And not likely too 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

And yet those cowards have won a cup and you hero’s have not.   And not likely too 

In how many years???:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mako23 said:

This myth comes from WW2 were the Italian Army performed poorly. Not through lack of courage but very poor equipment

their equipment was quite good

keep going and you might persuade me to spend an hour and a few pages listing it

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Indio said:

In how many years???:D

The first to ever win it . Something the poms could never achieve in how many year of trying 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NZL3481 said:

Hasn't every war the Italians been involved with resulted in them reaching for the white flag?

 

not really

they keep it as part of their flag so its on hand at all times

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, phill_nz said:

their equipment was quite good

keep going and you might persuade me to spend an hour and a few pages listing it

Ok please list equipment and amount available to Italian forces,

it wasn’t that there equipment was so poor but lack of supply 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mako23 said:

it wasn’t that there equipment was so poor but lack of supply 

cant shoot you unless you stand still

all this dancing around confuses my trigger fingers and they cannot keep changing what they need to type

Share this post


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

And yet those cowards have won a cup and you hero’s have not.   And not likely too 

These would have to be the best  comment  yet !!

winning a cup is how you measure a society.....some benchmark. 

By that logic we kiwis are better than the Aussies by a margin three to one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, mako23 said:

If Australian troops did there job as ordered by Percival there wouldn’t of been a problem.

Australians did the bulk of the fighting. The initial deployment by Percival was poor and he failed to reinforce them at a critical moment - leading to their withdrawal and the establishment of a Japanese beachhead.  Percival ordered the surrender when others argued for a counter attack - which could have been successful as the Japs were stretched. If anyone was a coward it was Percival. Anyway, read the up about the battle, your disgraceful contention that the Aussies were cowards doesn't stand scrutiny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

Australians did the bulk of the fighting. 

That’s because the Japanese landed in that sector

One of the reasons the Japanese landed their was their poor fighting spirit .....you land where the enemy is the weakest...in this case fighting spirit 

By this time the Australian division was a bunch of drunk, disorganized, cowardly rabble. 
 

However in other Campaigns Australia fought with distinction, it’s a shame the proud Australian fighting history is tarnished by this lot.

The Battle of Tobruk is an example of outstanding bravery and fortitude by the Australians 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mako23 said:

One of the reasons the Japanese landed their was their poor fighting spirit .....you land where the enemy is the weakest...in this case fighting spirit 

strange

in most places the aussies are rated elite +1 undisciplined

far higher than any standard uk and most other countries troops

the failure of singapore was entirely a failure of leadership / planning / tactics

and like always the poms insisted on being in charge .. because dam colonials could never be as good

 

 

Share this post


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

strange

in most places the aussies are rated elite +1 undisciplined

I do agree with this. Singapore is an example that even good troops can go bad in the wrong conditions. Just simple drunkenness played a part here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, mako23 said:

By this time the Australian division was a bunch of drunk, disorganized, cowardly rabble. 

Yeah, you're going to need to produce some evidence for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The defence of Singapore was poorly conceived and conducted. Despite clear indications that the Japanese would concentrate their attack on the island's north west, the British commander Lieutenant General Percival, sought to defend the entire coastline leaving him with little depth and an inadequate reserve. The 8th Australian Division, considerably weakened after the fighting in Malaya, was allocated the vital north-western sector. When the Japanese attacked on the night of 8 February 1942 it was too weak and dispersed to hold them back, initiating a disorganised retreat towards the centre of the island. In succeeding days Percival's reluctance to commit reserves from other parts of the island, and a virtual command breakdown in the 8th Division, lead to the British Commonwealth forces being pushed back into a steadily decreasing perimeter around Singapore city. It was an untenable position. Over 1 million civilians remained in the city, the Japanese had captured its main water supply, and their aircraft were free to bomb at will. At 8.30pm on 15 February 1942 over 130,000 troops, including 15,000 Australians, were surrendered to the Japanese. 1,789 Australians had been killed since the 8th Division had entered the fray in Malaya in mid-January and 7,000 of those captured would die before the war's end.

https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/E84308

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, mako23 said:

One of the reasons the Japanese landed their was their poor fighting spirit .....you land where the enemy is the weakest...in this case fighting spirit 

Why did Percival deploy the supposedly drunken, cowardly Aussies to the most critical point on the line? Why didn't he deploy the brave, non drinking British there, as it was obvious this is where the attack would take place? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

Why did Percival deploy the supposedly drunken, cowardly Aussies to the most critical point on the line? Why didn't he deploy the brave, non drinking British there, as it was obvious this is where the attack would take place? 

It’s not obvious we’re the japs we’re going to attack. There were a massive number of potential areas of invasion on the Singapore Island. Percival had to put the Aussies some where. 
 

also your article is nothing but an Australian article trying desperately to retell history to cover up cowardice by the Australian division 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, you have all toppled off the fucking twig.  Better get some boats on the water for your mental sanity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, zenmasterfred said:

Okay, you have all toppled off the fucking twig.  Better get some boats on the water for your mental sanity.

I’d happily stop, but with some people slagging off other nationalities, I’ve decided to reply with some facts that other people don’t like. If Horn Rock likes to stop his xenophobia attacks on other nationalities I’d happily stop. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bring back the bacon we had before the war I say!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, mako23 said:

I’d happily stop, but with some people slagging off other nationalities, I’ve decided to reply with some facts that other people don’t like. If Horn Rock likes to stop his xenophobia attacks on other nationalities I’d happily stop. 

Crikey Mako that’s the Kiwi spirit reminds me of Te Ruki Kawiti after the battle for Ruapekapeka Pa.

This story concerns the emmissary who on behalf of the Governor, asked Kawiti whether he had had enough of the fighting. The reply was “If you have had enough I have had enough, but if you have not had enough then I have not had enough either”. The pakeha replied, “You are a noble sort of a New Zealand savage”.

 

Share this post


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

Crikey Mako that’s the Kiwi spirit reminds me of Te Ruki Kawiti after the battle for Ruapekapeka Pa.

This story concerns the emmissary who on behalf of the Governor, asked Kawiti whether he had had enough of the fighting. The reply was “If you have had enough I have had enough, but if you have not had enough then I have not had enough either”. The pakeha replied, “You are a noble sort of a New Zealand savage”.

Your knowledge of New Zealand history is impressive. An area I humbly admit is poor. Also you summarized the position beautifully 

also I’m getting tired of attacks on the country of origin in challenging  syndicates. All three countries USA, Italy and GB have played major parts in the development of the western world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, mako23 said:

It’s not obvious we’re the japs we’re going to attack.

That's a flat out lie, and you know it. The more I look into it, it's obvious your contention is complete crap. Every publication - UK/Australian points to Percival's poor deployment and subsequent indecision as the reason for the loss. A long with a general disregard for the Japanese fighting ability, and a lack of preparedness.

One story told about the attitude of the British Army in Singapore was of a young Army officer complaining that the newly completed defences in Singapore might put off the Japanese from landing there.

“I do hope we are not getting too strong in Malaya because if so the Japanese may never attempt a landing.”

https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-two/the-pacific-war-1941-to-1945/the-fall-of-singapore/

You've still not produced any evidence of drunken, cowardly Aussies being responsible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mako23 said:

Your knowledge of New Zealand history is impressive. An area I humbly admit is poor. Also you summarized the position beautifully 

also I’m getting tired of attacks on the country of origin in challenging  syndicates. All three countries USA, Italy and GB have played major parts in the development of the western world. 

Worth a watch.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, mako23 said:

If Horn Rock likes to stop his xenophobia attacks on other nationalities I’d happily stop. 

You're the one calling the Aussies drunk and cowardly. I'm not an Aussie, but I'll happily defend them from that sort of attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

That's a flat out lie, and you know it. The more I look into it, it's obvious your contention is complete crap. Every publication - UK/Australian points to Percival's poor deployment 

Your attempt to Blame Percival for everything is not feasible. Commanders can take some of the blame,  but the fighting spirit  of the troops plays an impressive part. Any way you try and twist this ....The Aussie fighting spirit was poor. Yet you can’t accept that this is a factor. What ever plans are enacted, somewhere at sometime men have to fight, their  moral is important and you KNOW THAT

Your original attempt to Blame the British for not fighting in Singapore.......started this shit fight

Yet the reality is that UK AND Australia can take blame

next time you decide to attack another country with your XENOPHOBIC attacks get your facts right before opening your gob 

There are enough Racists in this world without you adding your views 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

You're the one calling the Aussies drunk and cowardly. I'm not an Aussie, but I'll happily defend them from that sort of attack.

I don’t care what Nationality you are, if you want to attack other countries expect return fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ed__miller said:

Interesting riposte by LR https://bit.ly/3dLve9w

1: LR had a valid complaint over not being informed when the Harbourmaster's proposal was tabled early in the year, but I'm giving ETNZ the benefit of the doubt that they relied on ACE to inform LR. It must be noted that Mayo&Calder were working for ACE and for CoR36 at this time - a peculiar situation not unlike NZ Real Estate agents working for both vendors and buyers!!

2: LR's charges that ETNZ violated the Protocol and Venue Management Agreement were not upheld by the Arbitration Panel.

3: ETNZ are a little mischievous blaming LR for the exclusion of Courses B&C when it's clearly the Harbourmaster's. LR are equally mischievous blaming ETNZ for the same Harbourmaster's decision.

Storm in a teacup..

 

 

image.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Indio said:

1: LR had a valid complaint over not being informed when the Harbourmaster's proposal was tabled early in the year, but I'm giving ETNZ the benefit of the doubt that they relied on ACE to inform LR. It must be noted that Mayo&Calder were working for ACE and for CoR36 at this time - a peculiar situation not unlike NZ Real Estate agents working for both vendors and buyers!!

2: LR's charges that ETNZ violated the Protocol and Venue Management Agreement were not upheld by the Arbitration Panel.

3: ETNZ are a little mischievous blaming LR for the exclusion of Courses B&C when it's clearly the Harbourmaster's. LR are equally mischievous blaming ETNZ for the same Harbourmaster's decision.

Storm in a teacup..

 

 

image.png

Oh nice a sailing orientated comment 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mako23 said:

Your attempt to Blame Percival for everything is not feasible Commanders can take some of the blame,

and yet percival managed to do it and all on his own

i rate him as good as the the one that was ic of relieving chunuk bair

leaders have to know what the troops he has command of can do and what state they are in to be able to do it

before you even think of planning what they will be tasked to do next

all that aside from his plans were all bound to fail because of lack of thinking into good tactics

you can screw up the best of troops with bad planning

ask any market gardener they will be happy to tell you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, phill_nz said:

and yet percival managed to do it and all on his own

No commander works entirely own their own. A corps will have  a divisional commander meeting to decide tactics. Usually 20 or 30 people will be in such a meeting. Lieutenant Generals don’t sit in a darkened room with a pen and map deciding on their own. Red tabs do not do not operate in this way.....this is not how the British army operates ... Fact.
Also in an British Corps divisional commanders are given a lot of leeway to run things as they see fit. The decentralization of control is essentially in the fog of war, it’s one of the reasons for so much German success. 
Success in war is a team effort, and that involves adapting to changes on the ground. The ability of a Lieutenant Colonel to change plans is an essential element of a successful army. The days of just blindly following Corps commanders rules had long gone by 1941.
 

A lesson of the Somme was those divisional commanders who didn’t obey Corps commanders were more successful and saved 100,000s of British lives. This resulted in changes in British command structures  By 1917 the single point of failure of a bad corps commander had been significantly reduced. To just blame Percival is a lack of understanding of how the British army worked 

The  British would of not defeated Germany in WW1 without these changes. In 1919 the most effective army in the world was British. Do you think they achieved this without changing their  tactics

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the arbitration result its way less contentious than ETNZ make out, LR and the other challengers just requested fair access to the course area, if B+C are not to be available during the CSS to them then it should not be available to ETNZ either for training. It was the Jury who banned all use of B+C unless the access requirements change, I presume as they only had the powers of the protocol to make changes.

The ruling also encourages them to speak to the harbour master and/or amongst themselves to come to a better solution. In short this ruling is a black flag to make everybody play nice.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JonRowe said:

Reading the arbitration result its way less contentious than ETNZ make out, LR and the other challengers just requested fair access to the course area, if B+C are not to be available during the CSS to them then it should not be available to ETNZ either for training. It was the Jury who banned all use of B+C unless the access requirements change, as they only had the powers of the protocol to make changes.

The ruling also encourages them to speak to the harbour master and/or amongst themselves to come to a better solution. In short this ruling is a black flag to make everybody play nice.

To be honest LR complaint seems totally fair 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mako23 said:

To be honest LR complaint seems totally fair 

To . be . honest?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, mako23 said:

The  British would of not defeated Germany in WW1 without these changes. In 1919 the most effective army in the world was British. Do you think they achieved this without changing their  tactics

Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really really disappointed to see ETNZ social media post on this topic..... Having always supported the ethic in the team and been fond of their attitude towards the yacht race, to me this badly shows a darker side; I guess this is Dalts talking........

The arbitration panel is available for challengers to feel supported and to voice their ideas/opinions in a professional manner; to report the result of this in such a childish fashion is pretty poor.

Lets hope the team pick themselves up and show more professionalism from here on. They can do it!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites