Salty Seacock

Emirates Team New Zealand.

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, JALhazmat said:

Why did the arbitration panel uphold the complaint then? 

Because the Protocol states as below:

In January / February 2021, COR shall organise and conduct a Challenger Selection Series for
all Challengers
(“CSS”), at the venue of the Match and within the course areas of the Match,
to be governed under the CSS Conditions.

RACE AREA
4.1 The Racing Area, Course Areas for the Match as detailed in COR/D Notice to
Competitors No 7 dated the 30th of August 2018 will apply to the Prada Cup as also
confirmed in the COR/D Notice to Competitors No 27 dated 6th February 2020
which
include the Auckland Course Location Guidelines.

This is the letter in question:

Ports of Auckland Limited, following a discussion with Auckland Transport Harbour master, would like to put forward
the following scenario for consideration in regards to race courses used during the Prada Cup and Americas Cup
Race series.

We would like the following scenario to be tabled for discussion and adoption at the next on water stakeholder 
meeting, currently scheduled for Thursday 30th January 2020.

1) All key dates ie: Christmas Cup (17-20 December 2020), Prada Cup Finals only (Potentially 2 weeks at the end of February 2021)
are guaranteed to have all race courses available on all designated race and reserve days (excluding Monday 8th March 2021)

2) The Prada Cup Round Robin races are restricted to Race courses A, D or E. Race courses B and C cannot be used
for these races. 

In itself, as the ruling stated, there was no breach by ETNZ or ACE, as the Race courses still allocate all race courses for both the match, and the Prada Cup.

What the Challengers wanted was clarification that the words "Prada Cup" meant the entire Prada Cup and not just part of it.

What it did expose is the incompetence of whoever was responsible from Luna Rossa of organising the Prada Cup as was their responsibility as per the Protocol.

The letter was issued on the 29th of January for discussion on the 30th of January at the on water stakeholders meeting, which involved Luna Rossa. All on water stakeholders were aware of the letter and the discussion around it.

Following that stakeholders meeting, an agreement was made (or so ETNZ, and Auckland City Council thought) to accommodate the Port and Harbour masters request. 

Auckland City Council have issued a public press release confirming the agreement, so its not just ETNZ that is under the impression that Luna Rossa knew. Auckland City Council obviously thought so too.

Nick Hill, Independent Chair of the AC36 Joint Chief Executive Group, says the courses were agreed by all parties including the Challenger of Record and Defender in February, 2020 contrary to claims by the Challenger of Record that they only knew of the arrangement over six months later in September.

Hill was today announced as head of the Auckland Council's Event and Economic Development Agency - a merger of the former ATEED (Auckland Tourism, Events Economic Development) and RFA (Regional Facilities Auckland).

The full statement issued by Hill reads:

We’ve been clear that the parties need to work together to resolve these issues as quickly as possible.

The uses of the courses and the parameters around their use were agreed to by all of the agencies, including the Challenger of Record representative and the Defender in February.

We expect to see an event where Aucklanders and visitors can share in the experience, an event that will showcase Auckland to the world, and we will work with the parties to help achieve that outcome

Someone at Luna Rossa knew, as they are an on water stakeholder, but it seems who ever received, and discussed that information sat on the outcome until it could be used to their advantage at a later date.

The problem is, there is no end game. They want the spectators to miss out? Why? Is it in the name of fairness? If so, why would they want all the racing to be held in the one patch of water ETNZ have done the most training (The back paddock)?? 

Did they want to try and do ETNZ for breach of protocol? Because that didn't work.

Is it to pressure the Ports and Harbour master to reinstate the courses? Probably should've done that a few months ago.

 

Share this post


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

My View on New Zealand Troops

The NZ second division was known as Alibaba and the forty thousand thieves. So notorious was their stealing that other divisions were wary of them. There was nothing they wouldn't steal.

just to correct you a bit

it wasn't just the nz second division

it was used to describe all the on station anzac forces

im also pretty sure you know nothing of who coined it

why it was coined

and the incidences cited for it to be coined

and just to keep you wondering it had nothing to do with pay backs by the anzacs  on local bazaars that had ripped off them and or their mates

Share this post


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

im also pretty sure you know nothing of who coined it

why it was coined

and the incidences cited for it to be coined

and just to keep you wondering it had nothing to do with pay backs by the anzacs  on local bazaars that had ripped off them and or their mates

WW2 is not my specialty.....so feel free to enlighten 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this agreement in Feb exists there should be a signed piece of paper they can show to prove it.

Why wouldn't they have provided it to the AP for this ruling?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

If this agreement in Feb exists there should be a signed piece of paper they can show to prove it.

Why wouldn't they have provided it to the AP for this ruling?

GD says in this audio that they did provide the agreement to the AP. Near the end he also mentions having to relocate TV transmitters if B and C can’t be restored.

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/americas-cup/123185216/team-new-zealand-vow-to-move-heaven-and-earth-to-restore-lost-americas-cup-courses

from the text: 

“.. this organisation will move heaven and earth and already is talking to the council, ports of Auckland, the harbour master to see if we can change this.”

Share this post


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

Because the Protocol states as below:

In January / February 2021, COR shall organise and conduct a Challenger Selection Series for
all Challengers
(“CSS”), at the venue of the Match and within the course areas of the Match,
to be governed under the CSS Conditions.

RACE AREA
4.1 The Racing Area, Course Areas for the Match as detailed in COR/D Notice to
Competitors No 7 dated the 30th of August 2018 will apply to the Prada Cup as also
confirmed in the COR/D Notice to Competitors No 27 dated 6th February 2020
which
include the Auckland Course Location Guidelines.

This is the letter in question:

Ports of Auckland Limited, following a discussion with Auckland Transport Harbour master, would like to put forward
the following scenario for consideration in regards to race courses used during the Prada Cup and Americas Cup
Race series.

We would like the following scenario to be tabled for discussion and adoption at the next on water stakeholder 
meeting, currently scheduled for Thursday 30th January 2020.

1) All key dates ie: Christmas Cup (17-20 December 2020), Prada Cup Finals only (Potentially 2 weeks at the end of February 2021)
are guaranteed to have all race courses available on all designated race and reserve days (excluding Monday 8th March 2021)

2) The Prada Cup Round Robin races are restricted to Race courses A, D or E. Race courses B and C cannot be used
for these races. 

In itself, as the ruling stated, there was no breach by ETNZ or ACE, as the Race courses still allocate all race courses for both the match, and the Prada Cup.

What the Challengers wanted was clarification that the words "Prada Cup" meant the entire Prada Cup and not just part of it.

What it did expose is the incompetence of whoever was responsible from Luna Rossa of organising the Prada Cup as was their responsibility as per the Protocol.

The letter was issued on the 29th of January for discussion on the 30th of January at the on water stakeholders meeting, which involved Luna Rossa. All on water stakeholders were aware of the letter and the discussion around it.

Following that stakeholders meeting, an agreement was made (or so ETNZ, and Auckland City Council thought) to accommodate the Port and Harbour masters request. 

Auckland City Council have issued a public press release confirming the agreement, so its not just ETNZ that is under the impression that Luna Rossa knew. Auckland City Council obviously thought so too.

Nick Hill, Independent Chair of the AC36 Joint Chief Executive Group, says the courses were agreed by all parties including the Challenger of Record and Defender in February, 2020 contrary to claims by the Challenger of Record that they only knew of the arrangement over six months later in September.

Hill was today announced as head of the Auckland Council's Event and Economic Development Agency - a merger of the former ATEED (Auckland Tourism, Events Economic Development) and RFA (Regional Facilities Auckland).

The full statement issued by Hill reads:

We’ve been clear that the parties need to work together to resolve these issues as quickly as possible.

The uses of the courses and the parameters around their use were agreed to by all of the agencies, including the Challenger of Record representative and the Defender in February.

We expect to see an event where Aucklanders and visitors can share in the experience, an event that will showcase Auckland to the world, and we will work with the parties to help achieve that outcome

Someone at Luna Rossa knew, as they are an on water stakeholder, but it seems who ever received, and discussed that information sat on the outcome until it could be used to their advantage at a later date.

The problem is, there is no end game. They want the spectators to miss out? Why? Is it in the name of fairness? If so, why would they want all the racing to be held in the one patch of water ETNZ have done the most training (The back paddock)?? 

Did they want to try and do ETNZ for breach of protocol? Because that didn't work.

Is it to pressure the Ports and Harbour master to reinstate the courses? Probably should've done that a few months ago.

 

All of this doesn't really matter unless they agreed to change the protocol!   The host has all types of negotiations and arrangement to make that are all needed to follow the protocol. 

The fault falls squarely on ETNZ for not getting the matter resolved.  They knew that the local authorities had put a restriction on the venue, they knew it wasn't in the protocol, they didn't attempt to change the protocol, etc...   

It doesn't matter if one of the competitors (LR) hears about some possible restrictions that may violate the protocol.  How are they to know if the defender had already removed these restrictions or not.  All that the challengers know for certain is what is in the protocol.  If the protocol doesn't change, then the restrictions do not exist!

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

So you're trying to tell me, the Harbourmaster and the Ports of Auckland, issued a letter to all "on water stakeholders"of which the CoR is clearly one, the others are ETNZ, ACE and the other Challengers. Not only that, but Auckland City Council is also knew about it, so it seems the only ones who were in the dark about it was Luna Rossa. In the world of the Americas Cup, a game rife with spying and recon programs, that Luna Rossa were unaware of a letter that literally everyone else knew about? 

this means nothing.  Was it in the protocol?

Share this post


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

GD says in this audio that they did provide the agreement to the AP. Near the end he also mentions having to relocate TV transmitters if B and C can’t be restored.

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/americas-cup/123185216/team-new-zealand-vow-to-move-heaven-and-earth-to-restore-lost-americas-cup-courses

from the text: 

“.. this organisation will move heaven and earth and already is talking to the council, ports of Auckland, the harbour master to see if we can change this.”

Now that it affects them, it is important enough to get it resolved.  This is all a little disingenuous, since they did nothing to try and fix it before they got caught trying to violating the protocol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, hoom said:

If this agreement in Feb exists there should be a signed piece of paper they can show to prove it.

Why wouldn't they have provided it to the AP for this ruling?

Verba volant, scripta manent, as my ancestors used to say

 

Share this post


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

Now that it affects them, it is important enough to get it resolved.  This is all A LITTLE ?? disingenuous, since they did nothing to try and fix it before they got caught trying to violating the protocol.

 

Share this post


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

Now that it affects them, it is important enough to get it resolved.  This is all a little disingenuous, since they did nothing to try and fix it before they got caught trying to violating the protocol.

I think the point being alleged by ETNZ is that everyone discussed and agreed with the configuration at the time.

That statement isn't disproved by at a later stage someone going to arb to rule on the configuration to determine if it is compliant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, rh3000 said:

I think the point being alleged by ETNZ is that everyone discussed and agreed with the configuration at the time.

That statement isn't disproved by at a later stage someone going to arb to rule on the configuration to determine if it is compliant.

Meaning no offense, but you don’t seem to have many contract administrators, locally

 

Share this post


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

Meaning no offense, but you don’t seem to have many contract administrators, locally

 

I don't understand what you mean sorry?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rh3000 said:

I don't understand what you mean sorry?

It’s a basic tenet in project management that any deliberation has to be signed for acceptance by all interested parties.  When this would entsil a change to Contract stipulations, however, this is not sufficient and a dedicated procedure (included in the Contract) must be followed, lest the change be null and void. You have no idea how many times I’ve seen that happen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, rh3000 said:

I think the point being alleged by ETNZ is that everyone discussed and agreed with the configuration at the time.

That statement isn't disproved by at a later stage someone going to arb to rule on the configuration to determine if it is compliant.

Well if there was an agreement, why didn’t they follow through and record it on the protocol, or make it official according to the rules of the Americas Cup?

Share this post


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

All of this doesn't really matter unless they agreed to change the protocol!   The host has all types of negotiations and arrangement to make that are all needed to follow the protocol. 

The fault falls squarely on ETNZ for not getting the matter resolved.  They knew that the local authorities had put a restriction on the venue, they knew it wasn't in the protocol, they didn't attempt to change the protocol, etc...   

It doesn't matter if one of the competitors (LR) hears about some possible restrictions that may violate the protocol.  How are they to know if the defender had already removed these restrictions or not.  All that the challengers know for certain is what is in the protocol.  If the protocol doesn't change, then the restrictions do not exist!

Its always been in the protocol, and still is. The protocol states "The Prada Cup" which is why it went to arbitration. Whether that meant part, or all of the Prada Cup.

Secondly, No. It doesn't fall squarely at ETNZ, it falls squarely on Luna Rossa, because according to the Protocol, ETNZ has no responsibility organising the Prada Cup.

ETNZ has the responsibility of establishing Mutual Consent with LR to organise the AC match.

This is LR's mess, not ETNZ's. They are the CoR, it was their job to organise the Prada Cup.

Share this post


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

Now that it affects them, it is important enough to get it resolved.  This is all a little disingenuous, since they did nothing to try and fix it before they got caught trying to violating the protocol.

LR messed up and now the Kiwi's are left to clean up the mess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Xlot said:

It’s a basic tenet in project management that any deliberation has to be signed for acceptance by all interested parties.  When this would entsil a change to Contract stipulations, however, this is not sufficient and a dedicated procedure (included in the Contract) must be followed, lest the change be null and void. You have no idea how many times I’ve seen that happen

 

46 minutes ago, The_Alchemist said:

Well if there was an agreement, why didn’t they follow through and record it on the protocol, or make it official according to the rules of the Americas Cup?

Now that I understand what @Xlot means, I agree it is a very good question. I would have thought it a material enough decision to have documented.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ex-yachtie said:

^Thanks. I see Tom Ehman has always been a dick. 

Funny! I actually like the guy, he’s smart, experienced and has a good sense of humor. His SI Live show starts at the top of the hour, I’m sure it will another fun one. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

Funny! I actually like the guy, he’s smart, experienced and has a good sense of humor. His SI Live show starts at the top of the hour, I’m sure it will another fun one. 

So one hears. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


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

Why did the arbitration panel uphold the complaint then? 

They didn't. The Arb.Panel dismissed the complaints which alleged that ETNZ had breached the Protocol and the Venue Management Agreement.

They did make a King-Solomon majority ruling under their narrow mandate prescribed in their RoP's, which Graham McKenzie dissented from.

Share this post


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

All of this doesn't really matter unless they agreed to change the protocol!   The host has all types of negotiations and arrangement to make that are all needed to follow the protocol. 

The fault falls squarely on ETNZ for not getting the matter resolved.  They knew that the local authorities had put a restriction on the venue, they knew it wasn't in the protocol, they didn't attempt to change the protocol, etc...

What utter nonsense!! The HARBOURMASTER threw a spanner in the works, and ETNZ have been working on changing his mind. Changing the Protocol requires unanimous agreement of all Competitors, something which ETNZ knew was likely harder to achieve than working on changing the Harbourmaster's mind.

Share this post


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

Now that it affects them, it is important enough to get it resolved.  This is all a little disingenuous, since they did nothing to try and fix it before they got caught trying to violating the protocol.

Your comprehension ability and your predilection for conspiratorial plotting explains why you voted for the most corrupt president your country has ever been cursed with!

Share this post


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

Meaning no offense, but you don’t seem to have many contract administrators, locally

 

What a typically arrogant pile of horseshit!! How do you explain this treachery by Team Luna Rossa Prada Pirelli:

"The statement overnight by the city is quite clear evidence that they were aware that a deal was done and arranged because the ports of Auckland and the harbour master wanted it to be this way. We have no problem with it, we agreed with it, we were represented in that meeting, the Challenger of Record Luna Rossa was represented in that meeting and they agreed at that time,” Dalton told Newstalk ZB.  

Share this post


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

They didn't. The Arb.Panel dismissed the complaints which alleged that ETNZ had breached the Protocol and the Venue Management Agreement.

They did make a King-Solomon majority ruling under their narrow mandate prescribed in their RoP's, which Graham McKenzie dissented from.

Oh ffs. It’s a dick move from the harbour master that everyone apart from TNZ are pissed off about.

the blame so far is harbour master, M&C, Prada, butterworths... the list is fucking endless 

the only people seemingly utterly innocent are TNZ. How the hell is that remotely plausible?  
 

hands up, they fucked up and now it’s entirety everyone else to blame. And no it’s not cheating, it’s just bullshit. 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, JALhazmat said:

Oh ffs. It’s a dick move from the harbour master that everyone apart from TNZ are pissed off about.

the blame so far is harbour master, M&C, Prada, butterworths... the list is fucking endless 

the only people seemingly utterly innocent are TNZ. How the hell is that remotely plausible?  
 

hands up, they fucked up and now it’s entirety everyone else to blame. And no it’s not cheating, it’s just bullshit. 

Luna Rossa were pretty pissed off about the harbour master’s decision, which is why they took it to the arbitration panel, no?

Share this post


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

The HARBOURMASTER threw a spanner in the works, and ETNZ have been working on changing his mind.

I don't recall you being so magnanimous when the SF Coastguard were suggesting limitations that GD didn't like.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I don't recall you being so magnanimous when the SF Coastguard were suggesting limitations that GD didn't like.

SF was a completely different set of circumstances. We were dealing with convicted cheats who'd already attempted to lower the max. wind speed for the Match which they then involved the CG. The regrettable fatality was convenient for their attempt. 

But I think you knew the false equivalency between the two situations. 

Share this post


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

Oh ffs. It’s a dick move from the harbour master that everyone apart from TNZ are pissed off about.

the blame so far is harbour master, M&C, Prada, butterworths... the list is fucking endless 

the only people seemingly utterly innocent are TNZ. How the hell is that remotely plausible?  
 

hands up, they fucked up and now it’s entirety everyone else to blame. And no it’s not cheating, it’s just bullshit. 

The blame lies with the person at the top of the food chain. Always has, always will. Someone associated with ETNZ’s defense fucked up. I don’t think in any way this was a planned attempt to gain an advantage, just a royal fuckup. And like it or not, that falls at the feet of the guy in charge for not making sure his minions had sorted all the details. 
 

It makes no difference to me, since travel to NZ isn’t happening, but I hope it all gets sorted out for the Kiwi fans. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still don’t understand why GD’s fury has been directed at LR instead of at the Port of Auckland, who he now has to re-deal with. There must be a larger context that has him attacking LR instead, perhaps he is after Prada money but is not getting it? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

Still don’t understand why GD’s fury has been directed at LR instead of at the Port of Auckland, who he now has to re-deal with. There must be a larger context that has him attacking LR instead, perhaps he is after Prada money but is not getting it? 

Because probably as far as he knew, the matter was settled and agreed to months ago. Until LR took it arbitration which resulted in the one thing that GD didn't want to happen. Kiwi sailing fans and spectators are suffering due to LRs incompetence.

Share this post


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

 

I’ve sailed a lot with Bill Trinkle , DC’s second in command and he said both cars were evil to sail . They even turned turtle once in front of the SDYC during one of the dog and pony shows . I had never seen this documentary, thanks for posting . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, maxmini said:

I’ve sailed a lot with Bill Trinkle , DC’s second in command and he said both cars were evil to sail . They even turned turtle once in front of the SDYC during one of the dog and pony shows . I had never seen this documentary, thanks for posting . 

I wonder if Dennis Conner reputation was ever damaged which affected future campaigns. I ask from an American perspective and not a NZ perspective. 

Share this post


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

Still don’t understand why GD’s fury has been directed at LR instead of at the Port of Auckland, who he now has to re-deal with. There must be a larger context that has him attacking LR instead, perhaps he is after Prada money but is not getting it? 

Spinbot, GD, money,....update-icon-refresh-symbol-sign-11094115

sad

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Spinbot, GD, money,....

GD’s most important role seems to be about fundraising. With the added role this time of doing it also for ACE. 
 

As to there being a ‘larger context’ behind the ‘fury,’ TE hinted briefly yesterday at there being some money problem at play (not this issue, different), I forget exactly how he put it. If so, then my guess on there being a larger context to explain the outrage is correct. 
 

I am not blaming GD here, I believe he’s being honest when he says he thought he had a deal with LR about the courses. But given the way the Protocol reads, well he has no choice now but to (re) rectify the situation - and has said he will ‘move heaven and earth’ to do that with the Port. 

Share this post


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

GD’s most important role seems to be about fundraising. With the added role this time of doing it also for ACE. 
 

As to there being a ‘larger context’ behind the ‘fury,’ TE hinted briefly yesterday at there being some money problem at play (not this issue, different), I forget exactly how he put it. If so, then my guess on there being a larger context to explain the outrage is correct. 
 

I am not blaming GD here, I believe he’s being honest when he says he thought he had a deal with LR about the courses. But given the way the Protocol reads, well he has no choice now but to (re) rectify the situation - and has said he will ‘move heaven and earth’ to do that with the Port. 

And it’s funny that LR doesn’t seem to be lifting a finger to rectify the situation, instead content to let the worst case scenario of ETNZ play out. You can guarantee LR won’t be CoR next cycle if they lose. Maybe this is LR’s all or nothing campaign, they win or they’re done. 

Share this post


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

And it’s funny that LR doesn’t seem to be lifting a finger to rectify the situation

Again, it’s hard to see why LR is getting blamed, there must be some ‘context’ for why the ‘outrage’ is being directed that direction instead of it being dealt with more politely and civilly. BB (barely 2 weeks on the job) likely has nothing at all to do with any of this, except for now being a spokesman to it. Clickbait for NZ media is all it is, but maybe it helps promotion somehow? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

And it’s funny that LR doesn’t seem to be lifting a finger to rectify the situation, instead content to let the worst case scenario of ETNZ play out. You can guarantee LR won’t be CoR next cycle if they lose. Maybe this is LR’s all or nothing campaign, they win or they’re done. 

Nothing like shooting the messenger and ignoring the real source of the problem.  

LR fans can't get into NZ and will be watching it on TV, they have no sense of urgency to fight with the local authorities on opening up any courses.  LR has a race to prepare for and just ensured that the conditions were be fair for all participants and will followed the protocol.

If the race will not fulfill the expectations of the local fans it is up to the host and the defender to get it corrected.  Something they should have been working on for the last 6 - 7 months.

  • Like 3
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


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

If the race will not fulfill the expectations of the local fans it is up to the host and the defender to get it corrected.  Something they should have been working on for the last 6 - 7 months.

It may be semantics but Host, yes (i.e. ACE),  Defender, no.  The COR - that is LR - is responsible for the CSS and the only reason the Defender is now involved because the arb ruling impacts the Match which the Defender is responsible for.  Some thought I was joking about M&C a few days ago, but if you work backwards the timeline provides a little more background on the bust-up (remember the leak came out of Italy ...).

INEOS deserve a lot of credit IMO for putting forward a sensible and fair solution that would have made this problem go away (as endorsed in the dissenting option in the arb ruling) but LR and AM weren't interested which suggests they have other reasons for not wanting to race on those courses.

Share this post


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

It may be semantics but Host, yes (i.e. ACE),  Defender, no.  The COR - that is LR - is responsible for the CSS and the only reason the Defender is now involved because the arb ruling impacts the Match which the Defender is responsible for.  Some thought I was joking about M&C a few days ago, but if you work backwards the timeline provides a little more background on the bust-up (remember the leak came out of Italy ...).

INEOS deserve a lot of credit IMO for putting forward a sensible and fair solution that would have made this problem go away (as endorsed in the dissenting option in the arb ruling) but LR and AM weren't interested which suggests they have other reasons for not wanting to race on those courses.

Of all the courses, the two that were scratched probably require the greatest amount of local knowledge in relation to wind and current.

Share this post


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

Of all the courses, the two that were scratched probably require the greatest amount of local knowledge in relation to wind and current.

But that's not why the Harbourmaster ruled them out!   

His motivation seems to be a mystery.

Certainly the issue should not be decided on what is best for spectators - much as this spectator wants it to.

I rely on the fact that all the parties -- teams, clubs, authorities and Regatta Director -- agreed on these courses back in February.

Absent some very solid reasons, that's what should obtain!

 

Share this post


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

But that's not why the Harbourmaster ruled them out!   

His motivation seems to be a mystery.

Certainly the issue should not be decided on what is best for spectators - much as this spectator wants it to.

I rely on the fact that all the parties -- teams, clubs, authorities and Regatta Director -- agreed on these courses back in February.

Absent some very solid reasons, that's what should obtain!

 

Maybe his wife has some lovely new clothes?

Share this post


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

Maybe his wife has some lovely new clothes?

This Harbour Master cannot have a wife in the true sense as he has no male genitals or, no balls at least. Perhaps just a soft sausage to act as a pointing straw to pee through.

In any case, he's a cunt and good for fucking off somewhere else where he's not welcome. 

For this reason, and the fact that he cannot police the Auckland harbour speed limit sees my support for this spineless, ball-less cunt of a thing never there. 

The act of a cunt is called a, "Cunt Act".

The Harbour Master committed a cunt act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Harbour master is almost certainly catering to the wishes of Ports of Auckland (& associated neoliberal Corporate profit-at-all-cost types) who likes to move cargo ships to & fro through the shipping channel that the contested courses are in the middle of & doesn't like having to dodge yachts & spectators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They brought ships into the container port between heats of the Volvo.

Truly a mystery act. Perhaps of a cunt.

Share this post


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

Of all the courses, the two that were scratched probably require the greatest amount of local knowledge in relation to wind and current.

True both courses offer a lottery of conditions both tide and wind so LR are right to seek answers and as to the harbour master life goes on Covid or not that piece of water is the only viable access to the port.

Have a look at 3 months of local shipping schedules and overlay the Prada Cup AC race programme.

 

Share this post


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

True both courses offer a lottery of conditions both tide and wind so LR are right to seek answers and as to the harbour master life goes on Covid or not that piece of water is the only viable access to the port.

Have a look at 3 months of local shipping schedules and overlay the Prada Cup AC race programme.

 

FFS, ships can transit before and after. Ferries go around the edges. Have you ever been to Auckland?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Auckland gets 1600 ships per year, that isn’t that much as it averages less than 5 per day.  Where places like Singapore has a ship arrive or leave every 2-3 mins.  It is just a simple question of logistics management.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In general it makes sense that the Harbour Master makes decisions about a harbour... BUT where a big (if smaller than hoped for) event is organised and especially if it involves significant planning , infrastructure work and funding he/she needs to be cognisant of more than just 'the convenience to shipping'. Though I admit i did wonder how those 2 courses in the middle of the fairways would work when the course map was published :lol:. So I hope all possible solutions will be (re)considered before deciding the 'course availability' from now through March.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every major city in the world manages to close its centre for its marathon. Ports for sailing not do much. Ferries being the least amenable because of timetables.

Cowes and the Solent for fastnet, Admiral's cup and round Britain being examples where there is no agreement and it can be edgy.

Double handed round Britain start at Plymouth being an example where it does work. Though thinking about it I'm not sure how much of that is agreement and how much is the marines unilaterally declaring a no go zone as they enforce it. 

Share this post


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

FFS, ships can transit before and after. Ferries go around the edges. Have you ever been to Auckland?

Actually Ngati Poncenby Barfy.
The contenders are within their rights to have access to the course actual for training familiarisation and boat set up.

Courses B & C are situated smack in the middle of the shipping lane.

This Is no weekend event with ACWS Dec 17-20 Prada Cup Jan15-22  AC36 March 6-21.

Did ACE or ACWS ever seek the approval of the Harbourmaster from the get go and if so why the change of position now.

62FEA70F-4A4C-440B-93F0-3BAD17580F07.jpeg.cf7feacb2c68eb0b692616ddccfb98b0.jpeg

 

5EC9E2D7-0D0A-4CAD-8900-F4B70F7D4822.thumb.png.e535aabaa9f64dc53873c31ffa2e2864.png

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ well, the regattas I have attended, and surely you have? The ship stands off, or comes in between heats. The ferries go up the side to the island, there's only a few every hour. 

The question is why the harbour master threw his toys, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Priscilla said:

True both courses offer a lottery of conditions both tide and wind so LR are right to seek answers and as to the harbour master life goes on Covid or not that piece of water is the only viable access to the port.

Have a look at 3 months of local shipping schedules and overlay the Prada Cup AC race programme.

 

There's no lottery of conditions. It's about knowing what to do and when. Locals know what I mean.

 

Share this post


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

Actually Ngati Poncenby Barfy.
The contenders are within their rights to have access to the course actual for training familiarisation and boat set up.

Courses B & C are situated smack in the middle of the shipping lane.

This Is no weekend event with ACWS Dec 17-20 Prada Cup Jan15-22  AC36 March 6-21.

Did ACE or ACWS ever seek the approval of the Harbourmaster from the get go and if so why the change of position now.

62FEA70F-4A4C-440B-93F0-3BAD17580F07.jpeg.cf7feacb2c68eb0b692616ddccfb98b0.jpeg

 

5EC9E2D7-0D0A-4CAD-8900-F4B70F7D4822.thumb.png.e535aabaa9f64dc53873c31ffa2e2864.png

 

 

So, now that they’ve finally turned up, how do the challengers have any less access to the race area than ETNZ?

It could be argued that the Prada Cup gives them more access. 

Share this post


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

So, now that they’ve finally turned up, how do the challengers have any less access to the race area than ETNZ?

It could be argued that the Prada Cup gives them more access. 

They will have more access and until sometime in Nov, exclusive use thereof.

Then, the bat-boat will be released and all the other children will have wished they thought a bit harder about things. 

Share this post


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

^ well, the regattas I have attended, and surely you have? The ship stands off, or comes in between heats. The ferries go up the side to the island, there's only a few every hour. 

The question is why the harbour master threw his toys, yes.

Shipping does not wait for sailors to play their game.  Time is money and if they want to enter harbour they will do asap.  Its not just the ships with immediate access, is also the land based activities that would have to be stopped.  All of which adds up to a lot of dollars.  That is why the shipping will get priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Te Aihe was taking up too much room in the shed, now she's in the way again on the dock too... moved to the other side of the crane this morning.

P1150904.thumb.JPG.94a9bb3821e4ae694c4cd6038bc838c8.JPGP1150907.thumb.JPG.3243fbcbb0c3d79ef975c6198be28d10.JPG

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is what looks like a cradle sitting in the forecourt where Te Aihe was this morning ...??

Share this post


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

Does this mean the role out of B2 is imminent?

Can't wait to see their B2. Rumors of something different but really I don't think anybody would know? They may have something that's visually different to throw the other challengers with something that's hidden? Will they have a more prominent bustle? What foil design will they go with? Exciting times....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ENTZ B2 revealed! Rules committee has yet to render a verdict. They internalized the foils and went for a "stealth" approach to thwart enemy spies 

 

1489731982-us-navy-sea-shadow-stealth-craft.thumb.jpg.95adbddad449bd8ed33d885ff9fb0fbc.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

There's no lottery of conditions. It's about knowing what to do and when. Locals know what I mean.

 

So would Butterballs, therefore what's the real problem.

Share this post


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

ENTZ B2 revealed! Rules committee has yet to render a verdict. They internalized the foils and went for a "stealth" approach to thwart enemy spies 

 

 

Still looks better than "Brittania"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2020 at 6:22 PM, Salty Seacock said:

This Harbour Master cannot have a wife in the true sense as he has no male genitals or, no balls at least. Perhaps just a soft sausage to act as a pointing straw to pee through.

In any case, he's a cunt and good for fucking off somewhere else where he's not welcome. 

For this reason, and the fact that he cannot police the Auckland harbour speed limit sees my support for this spineless, ball-less cunt of a thing never there. 

The act of a cunt is called a, "Cunt Act".

The Harbour Master committed a cunt act.

Here's your Auckland Harbour Master, Andrew Haytonharbourmaster.thumb.jpg.db31ed630cd054e89aee45d7cbbdd683.jpg

Share this post


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

Can't wait to see their B2. Rumors of something different but really I don't think anybody would know? They may have something that's visually different to throw the other challengers with something that's hidden? Will they have a more prominent bustle? What foil design will they go with? Exciting times....

ETNZ can take their time launching B2, now that they've seen the Challengers'. They can launch it towards the end of November, give themselves 4 weeks to break her in and test systems, and then use the AWS + Christmas Cup to gauge themselves against the Challengers, before doing their own thing during the CSS Prada Cup.

Share this post


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

ETNZ can take their time launching B2, now that they've seen the Challengers'. They can launch it towards the end of November, give themselves 4 weeks to break her in and test systems, and then use the AWS + Christmas Cup to gauge themselves against the Challengers, before doing their own thing during the CSS Prada Cup.

Seems right. But it's not like they will be able to change the boat much in that time. And if it is different, time will be very very precious.

Share this post


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

ETNZ can take their time launching B2, now that they've seen the Challengers'. They can launch it towards the end of November, give themselves 4 weeks to break her in and test systems, and then use the AWS + Christmas Cup to gauge themselves against the Challengers, before doing their own thing during the CSS Prada Cup.

If they hold back they will be loading the three challengers into their simulator and getting a good idea of the simulated performance against their boat 2, while the challengers have only ETNZ's boat 1 to compare to.

Share this post


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

Mrs Hayton.

1779D51B-68B8-489A-A086-3954EB9F9F3F.thumb.jpeg.29a437ff69fd15e40b952c31ef9ddb5b.jpeg

I'd hit that. Something Agent-96'ish about her...

Share this post


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

Seems right. But it's not like they will be able to change the boat much in that time. And if it is different, time will be very very precious.

That’s the crux of the situation, is there anything on any of the boats that can be copied. 

Share this post


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

That’s the crux of the situation, is there anything on any of the boats that can be copied. 

Ineos team have made a big thing about throwing the ball wayyyy out there. I wonder if their intention with their mini-keel was to throw it out there with the intention of grinding it back to a size and shape  that works best for them..

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Ineos team have made a big thing about throwing the ball wayyyy out there. I wonder if their intention with their mini-keel was to throw it out there with the intention of grinding it back to a size and shape  that works best for them..

Or removing the thang and revealing

 

BenjiMaddenLibertyspikeshairstyle.jpg

Share this post


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

So would Butterballs, therefore what's the real problem.

If you knew that patch of water you would understand. If you don't, you have no idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

Yes, clever pic choice :) 

I think that was the point of the original joke. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

If you knew that patch of water you would understand. If you don't, you have no idea.

Yeap Butterworth probably has no idea about that patch of water, fucking novice that he is. Maybe give Max a call and send in your CV, I'm sure he's waiting by the phone.

Share this post


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

Yeap Butterworth probably has no idea about that patch of water, fucking novice that he is. Maybe give Max a call and send in your CV, I'm sure he's waiting by the phone.

Butterworth was hired to liaise with the ACE, Auckland City, and other entities involved in running AC36. Bertelli and Max said so...