Jump to content

2018 Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race: The Race Committee has lodged a protest against Wild Oats XI


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In loving memory of Clark and Daw We welcome this evening Mr Richard the skipper of the winning power boat. Hello Brian. Mr Richard, may we call you Dick? Sure Brian, most

If Matt Allen as President of AS has any balls he should put Harburg/Bradford and Oatley/Richards in a room and read them the riot act. Harburg for not protesting but having a cry on national TV and O

Ok I am now caught up on this thread. Yes I went live - first actually - with the news direct from Shipwright Arms where WOXI were having lunch in one room, and BJ in the other. Was the best place to

Posted Images

1 minute ago, thetruth said:

Who instigates a Rule 69 if it is found they did turn it off? RC again or an individual boat (would be a big queue lining up if it were a boat!) 

You could if you wanted to by simply sending World Sailing and RO a letter. RC will then determine (probably with advice of someone independent) if a hearing should be convened and if so the matter is then determined by the IJ. You don't have to appear or anything.

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

Any news?  They've been in there an hour.

 

There is absolutely no way that the jury will rush this. They know that we are watching and come to think of it, the rest of the sailing world is watching too.

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

No such thing as an interested party in the 2017-2020 RRS.  The term has been replaced by "Conflict of Interest."  It's irrelevant anyway.  RRS  60.2(a) gives the RC an explicit right to protest except for certain conditions, none of which apply here.

Re interested party conversation.

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

You could if you wanted to by simply sending World Sailing and RO a letter. RC will then determine (probably with advice of someone independent) if a hearing should be convened and if so the matter is then determined by the IJ. You don't have to appear or anything.

PC is the only way for a 69 hearing to progress.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MR would be panicking internally I would think!

SO as the owner probably isn't as enamoured with MR or the whole WO program financially as what the old man Bob was (with his prodigal son in MR) 

his reputation and career in sailing going forward probably rest on this as well as the whole program continuiing

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, dash34 said:

That statement makes the assumption that they knew about it not working during the race.  I haven't seen anything posted on here that establishes that as fact.  PC's work with facts, not speculation.  That's why we have SA.

Of couse they knew. Richo admits as much in his post finish interview when he says something like " It doesn't matter because they aren't compulsory " I forget the exact words.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fast boat, dedicated committed owners with deep pockets, doing a lot for sailings profile. shame it comes down to a shitfight two years running through being slack on crossing the T's and dotting the I's. [or crossing   Comanche and checking the a.I.s ]  ABC just confirmed protest not upheld.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get it. 

-- RC opened the protest based in information they said they'd gained independently
-- RC had standing, as the organizing authority
-- BJ not a party to the proceeding

...so why is "BJ didn't file a protest" a factor?  What am I missing (other than the obvious assumption that deep pockets are in play)

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sledracr said:

I don't get it. 

-- RC opened the protest based in information they said they'd gained independently
-- RC had standing, as the organizing authority
-- BJ not a party to the proceeding

...so why is "BJ didn't file a protest" a factor?  What am I missing (other than the obvious assumption that deep pockets are in play)

 

Need to wait to see the full findings from the PC.

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

Protest dismissed. Sanity has prevailed. 

 

Eat a dick all you haters.

 

To the crew of Black Jack - You lost. Go home.

ABC reported that the protest was invalid not dismissed.  That suggests the issue was never tested.

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

I don't get it. 

-- RC opened the protest based in information they said they'd gained independently
-- RC had standing, as the organizing authority
-- BJ not a party to the proceeding

...so why is "BJ didn't file a protest" a factor?  What am I missing (other than the obvious assumption that deep pockets are in play)

I'm with you on this one.  BJ is not material, just supplied information, as I expect did others.  I would love to read the formal protest announcement when it's posted.

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

I don't get it. 

-- RC opened the protest based in information they said they'd gained independently
-- RC had standing, as the organizing authority
-- BJ not a party to the proceeding

...so why is "BJ didn't file a protest" a factor?  What am I missing (other than the obvious assumption that deep pockets are in play)

 

60.3

A protest committee may(a)protest a boat, but not as a result of information arising from a request for redress or an invalid protest, or from a report from a person  with  a conflict  of  interest...

the representative of BJ that transmitted the information to the RC is an interested party....

so that information can not form the basis for an RC protest

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

Protest dismissed. Sanity has prevailed. 

 

Eat a dick all you haters.

 

To the crew of Black Jack - You lost. Go home.

You do realize the RC didn’t say they didn’t cheat, just that Black Jack didn’t protest. 

Enjoy being a fan of a boat that cheats to win. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that's it.  Yet another nail in the coffin of our fine and lovely self-policed sport, practiced and managed for centuries by people of honesty and integrity.

What next?  Mandatory on-board umpires?

Fuck it, I'm taking up croquet.
 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reflex Sailor said:

RC should have been braver.  Terrible day for sailing as a sport.

I suspect the RC argued all right. The first thing a PC does is establish if the protest is valid. This normally takes a few minutes. This hearing took over an hour to decide that the protest was not valid. That's a lot of time considering.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Psychopathy Checklist

  1. Superficial charm and glibness
  2. Inflated sense of self-worth
  3. Constant need for stimulation
  4. Lying pathologically
  5. Conning others; being manipulative
  6. Lack of remorse or guilt
  7. Shallow emotions
  8. Callousness; lack of empathy
  9. Using others (a parasitic lifestyle)......
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

Not hard to tell, but in the end it does not matter what the reason was.  It was not working and the RC was not advised.

 

17 minutes ago, savoir said:

Of couse they knew. Richo admits as much in his post finish interview when he says something like " It doesn't matter because they aren't compulsory " I forget the exact words.

So, now we have information that MR says it was on during the race, and that they didn't know it was off.  Hmmmm.  The other boats were definitely aware of it being off during the race, but apparently said nothing to WOXI or the RC.  Hmmmm.  If they had, WOXI could have been informed of the problem during a sked.  There is shit to sling around for everyone on this matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dash34 said:

 

So, now we have information that MR says it was on, and that they didn't know it was off.  Hmmmm.

Obviously the RC don't watch TV. Post race apparently AIS was not compulsory according to Richo's take on the Sailing Instructions.

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

Obviously the RC don't watch TV. Post race apparently AIS was not compulsory according to Richo's take on the Sailing Instructions.

So what.  He was wrong, but it is possible he only just found out about it being off when the interview happened.  Came up with something to say to the media, even though it was shit.  Not the first time someone has done that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, us7070 said:

60.3

A protest committee may(a)protest a boat, but not as a result of information arising from a request for redress or an invalid protest, or from a report from a person  with  a conflict  of  interest...

the representative of BJ that transmitted the information to the RC is an interested party....

so that information can not form the basis for an RC protest

Here it is

The rules are the rules the PC are correct. Let's put the pitchforks down and stop with the internet outrage. Oats were faster no amount of AIS would have put BJ ahead. Races are won on the water not in a protest room and calm down with the emotional crap on here, you dont need to be outraged all the time show some balance.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Liquid Assett NZ said:

Here it is

The rules are the rules the PC are correct. Let's put the pitchforks down and stop with the internet outrage. Oats were faster no amount of AIS would have put BJ ahead. Races are won on the water not in a protest room and calm down with the emotional crap on here, you dont need to be outraged all the time show some balance.

 

That’s like saying my biggest spinnaker didn’t measure but hey, it doesn’t matter because I didn’t use it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tornado_ALIVE said:

Perhaps BJ didn’t want to win that way so hence no protest but didn’t want the cheating swept under the carpet.

So just whine like a bitch on TV and hope the RC protests and gives you the win in the end? Class act by Bradford & Harburg.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Liquid Assett NZ said:

Here it is

The rules are the rules the PC are correct. Let's put the pitchforks down and stop with the internet outrage. Oats were faster no amount of AIS would have put BJ ahead. Races are won on the water not in a protest room and calm down with the emotional crap on here, you dont need to be outraged all the time show some balance.

So essentially you're saying you can get away with a fundamental breakage of a primary NOR or SI regulation, if nobody else bleats about it? 

How about that 'accidental' nudge into gear while the engine is charging batteries on that calm night when nobody is near? How about stacking all the spare water in the top windward bunks?  How about....?

Oh hell, I'm out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Liquid Assett NZ said:

Here it is

The rules are the rules the PC are correct. Let's put the pitchforks down and stop with the internet outrage. Oats were faster no amount of AIS would have put BJ ahead. Races are won on the water not in a protest room and calm down with the emotional crap on here, you dont need to be outraged all the time show some balance.

 

Well said Sir ...... but am afraid that almost all are totally unhinged on this site so asking for balance is a useless request .......

Link to post
Share on other sites

RRS.

60.2 A race committee may (a) protest a boat, but not as a result of information arising from a request for redress or an invalid protest, or from a report from a person with a conflict of interest other than the representative of the boat herself; (b) request redress for a boat; or (c) report to the protest committee requesting action under rule 69.2(b).
60.3 A protest committee may (a) protest a boat, but not as a result of information arising from a request for redress or an invalid protest, or from a report from a person with a conflict of interest other than the representative of the boat herself. However, it may protest a boat (1) if it learns of an incident involving her that may have resulted in injury or serious damage, or (2) if during the hearing of a valid protest it learns that the boat, although not a party to the hearing, was involved in the incident and may have broken a rule;

Looks right.

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

So essentially you're saying you can get away with a fundamental breakage of a primary NOR or SI regulation, if nobody else bleats about it? 

How about that 'accidental' nudge into gear while the engine is charging baterries on that calm night when nobody is near? How about stacking all the spare water in the top windward bunks?  How about..../

Oh hell, I'm out.

P_Wop thats three times you have said you are out, but back you come each time.  Either in or out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gorn FRANTIC!! said:

So just whine like a bitch and hope the RC protests and gives you the win in the end? Class act by Bradford & Harburg.

Only good thing from this. If you don't protest as policeman in a self policed sport, don't expect the prosecutor to be the policeman.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tornado_ALIVE said:

Or just let cheats get away with it. Shows where your values lie :-p

I'm just interested in hearing Harburg's(sp?) reasoning as to how they were greatly disadvantaged by not being able to see them on AIS. Did no one one board hand him a pair of binoculars for the duration of the race and point him towards Oats?

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

Hoping for a 2-3 day postponement.

Aussies having at it over S2H is freaking cool.

Seriously, all we got Stateside is...uh...nothing.   Nothing.

Great show.  Carry on.

I guess picking on Trump would be unfair .........:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gorn FRANTIC!! said:

I'm just interested in hearing Harburg's(sp?) reasoning as to how they were greatly disadvantaged by not being able to see them on AIS. Did no one one board hand him a pair of binoculars for the duration of the race and point him towards Oats?

If you don’t understand yourself, then you don’t understand racing.  If it wasn’t an advantage to WO, then why do it as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not surprised that they found invalid. MR was always going to go in there and say that he thought it was turned on. BJ should have called them out on the course and said that they didn't have it on. Then JBW and all the other boats would have heard. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Gorn FRANTIC!! said:

I'm just interested in hearing Harburg's(sp?) reasoning as to how they were greatly disadvantaged by not being able to see them on AIS. Did no one one board hand him a pair of binoculars for the duration of the race and point him towards Oats?

Which brand of binoculars display in real time COG and SOG and from say 10 mile way and at night? Fuck me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Will this decision now mean more protests?

Nope, no boat has notified WO of their intention to protest which must be done as soon as they became aware of the issue.  I am not talking about protest time limits

Link to post
Share on other sites