Jump to content

Stars and Stripes Team USA is gone


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's this type of spite that got the fucktard elected in the first place... 

I just love how so many commentors from countries with still far from controlled Covid outbreaks wrecking their economies seem to think that NZ somehow has a more severe economic issue than their own.

No hurt feelings at all just further confirmation that your primary pleasure in life is talking shit, don't worry about me I've got a life.

Posted Images

3 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

…but if the change opens even a remote possible pathway to a Defender racing against that Defender’s other boat, well.

ENTZ can already race B1 vs B2 (albeit as 2 boat testing) from the scheduled start of the Prada Cup without restriction, so nothing really changes. Challengers can only race AC75 vs AC75 in actual races against other teams.

If ETNZ really want to help out S&S without disrupting the CSS, they could get the S&S sailors to NZ and have them crew Te Aihe vs B2 purely as a training exercise. Might be hard to get around the nationality requirement, but likely easier than getting the non–national hull argument up. But I'll bet ETNZ don't want an AC75 with novice crew anywhere near their B2 for the same reasons the challengers likely don't.

I think the whole thing is Trump style disruption for the sake of creating chaos and something to keep the cup in the NZ papers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can’t seem to find the full article but from here, bold mine, 

https://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=315849&cat=1000&fm=newsarticle+-+Sports%2cnur

 

Stars and Stripes are yet to launch a boat, with the perception left that the challenge exists in name only.

Reports claim they'd gone to the independent arbitration panel to get permission to take over Team New Zealand's first boat Te Aihe for the Prada Cup.

To do that, they'll need to force a rule change that says a boat's hull and other components must be built in a syndicate's country of origin.

They must also convince the other challengers, but Hutchinson's struck the verbal doldrums.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2020 at 3:48 AM, Monkey said:

Why freeze it?  ETNZ confirmed its true. We have every right to mock this hilarious shit show!  (And I’m referring to Stars & Stripes, not ETNZ). 

OK my BAD keep the mocking up.!  As long as you kill the HOPE along the way, at least the Dutch one died a relatively quick death but for some reason this one is like a bad smell. 

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

...but for some reason this one is like a bad smell. 

Check the bottom of your shoe. Seems like you stepped in some Dalton.

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

Can’t seem to find the full article but from here, bold mine, 

https://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=315849&cat=1000&fm=newsarticle+-+Sports%2cnur

 

Stars and Stripes are yet to launch a boat, with the perception left that the challenge exists in name only.

Reports claim they'd gone to the independent arbitration panel to get permission to take over Team New Zealand's first boat Te Aihe for the Prada Cup.

To do that, they'll need to force a rule change that says a boat's hull and other components must be built in a syndicate's country of origin.

They must also convince the other challengers, but Hutchinson's struck the verbal doldrums.

By the protocol the modification of the rule needs unanimous consent:

Once published, the AC75 Class Rule cannot be replaced. For a period of three months after the date of publication it may be amended for any reason by COR/D but thereafter can only be amended by unanimous agreement of Competitors whose entries have been officially accepted

However the D/CoR can change the prot at will, which requires the acceptance of LR or another CoR.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

America's Cup Protocol v7 9.1 "...the yacht of a challenging yacht club be constructed in the country of the challenging yacht club..." Prada Cup Conditions (COR 13) 3.1 "The Protocol and AC75 Class Rule define the eligibility of Competitors, Yachts and Crew." 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys really think etnz wants to spend Time resources and money teaching S&S how to sail and maintain a boat when they have   A regatta to win?

no team ever has enough time money or resource, they won’t be squandering what they have on any defender. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

That scenario assumes they can complete their hull, ship it, and since they have no organization whatsoever, have ETNZ dump thousands of man hours into ‘transferring all the guts.’ 
 

By far the most likely path, if there even is one, is for a Protocol change between ETNZ and LR. Who knows, maybe they will even try to sell it as ‘Force Majeur’ but if the change opens even a remote possible pathway to a Defender racing against that Defender’s other boat, well... This AC cycle will have diverged radically from the clear intent of the DoG, apparently to line NZ pockets. 

Bold: Like at least the last 2 ACs too.
The only difference is that ETNZ initially came along as the moral savior of the DoG, whereas Oracle never claimed to be interested in it (except for AC33, but that was a different animal anyway).

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

You guys really think etnz wants to spend Time resources and money teaching S&S how to sail and maintain a boat when they have   A regatta to win?

no team ever has enough time money or resource, they won’t be squandering what they have on any defender. 

If GD was not responsible for the event in addition to the racing - you'd have a point. Instead we have a misappropriation investigation from very mixed priorities.

So yeah, I don't think it's far-fetched at all.

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

Bold: Like at least the last 2 ACs too.
The only difference is that ETNZ initially came along as the moral savior of the DoG, whereas Oracle never claimed to be interested in it (except for AC33, but that was a different animal anyway).

DoG was a way to race for the prize without going through challenger selection, which LE had not managed to do. Or had mismanged to not do, lol. I think that was a fun side benefit of being the moral savior of the Cup, no? 

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

DoG was a way to race for the prize without going through challenger selection, which LE had not managed to do. Or had mismanged to not do, lol. I think that was a fun side benefit of being the moral savior of the Cup, no? 

OR did propose a multi-Chall Prot for AC33, couldn’t get agreement on it with EB, so they started building DZ and once that effort got past a certain point they said FU, it’s DoG Time! 

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

OR did propose a multi-Chall Prot for AC33, couldn’t get agreement on it with EB, so they started building DZ and once that effort got past a certain point they said FU, it’s DoG Time! 

Unlikely to have gotten a lot of challengers for a class that BOR90 would have fit in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the AP, or a Prot change, provides other teams the ability to buy Te A from GD, then maybe one of them will put an end to the nonsense by outbidding C&B for Te A, then just go and sink it in the deepest water of the Gulf :D 

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

I can virtually guarantee you that if C&B go through with this - their reputations will be trash in the US.

GD’s article title about ‘David vs Goliath’ points at the ‘sell-job’ but the reality is a far more embarrassing situation and TE alluded during his show today, to the embarrassment being privately expressed by seniors at LBYC. They want no part, no association with this nonsense. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

GD’s article title about ‘David vs Goliath’ points at the ‘sell-job’ but the reality is a far more embarrassing situation and TE alluded during his show today, to the embarrassment being privately expressed by seniors at LBYC. They want no part, no association with this nonsense. 

Yeah, somewhere above I linked to an earlier RG article about this that was pure shill for GD and ETNZ. Utterly ridiculous.

And you can't blame LBYC - their name is in the mud along with C&B if this moves forward.

I just have a hunch that this might very well relate to that mysterious $1M Hungarian Goulash that GD seems to be eating. Next up on the menu...crow.

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

I just have a hunch that this might very well relate to that mysterious $1M Hungarian Goulash that GD seems to be eating.

Yes, there are rumors about that but it’s a touch too conspiratorial for me to believe without any evidence. It would be so bad as to basically sink ETNZ’s board and anyone around them, can you imagine??? Lol 

RG is a homeboy, trying to pull weight for ETNZ and so whatever fantasy they are into he will try to promote as the best idea, ever! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

More challengers better at this point, or is it more money for a variety of NZ entities that's the goal?

The other yacht clubs should go to arb that they need not pay more in fees at any point in time than S+S, which I am sure is going to be up to date with entry and event payments?  After all, they had to struggle to pay teams, for r&d, construction...quite a heavy load against the prefab S+S "entry." ;)

I think we need to get the S+S GD ETNZ ACEA emails. Anybody got Wikileaks' number? 

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

More challengers better at this point, or is it more money for a variety of NZ entities that's the goal?

The other yacht clubs should go to arb that they need not pay more in fees at any point in time than S+S, which I am sure is going to be up to date with entry and event payments?  After all, they had to struggle to pay teams, for r&d, construction...quite a heavy load against the prefab S+S "entry." ;)

I think we need to get the S+S GD ETNZ ACEA emails. Anybody got Wikileaks' number? 

Funny!

But I doubt anyone among the real Challs has GD’s apparent money problems, and if it looks like there’s a weakness that S+S might help ETNZ to overcome then the Challs will be happy to take advantage of that weakness by sinking this thing. 

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

Funny!

But I doubt anyone among the real Challs has GD’s apparent money problems, and if it looks like there’s a weakness that S+S might help ETNZ to overcome then the Challs will be happy to take advantage of that weakness by sinking this thing. 

not paying timely would be a nice touch though

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

That is excellent. Yes. Did he use his own email server?

As important: Was that Seagull Hungarian or Ukrainian? The Chinese are the scariest. Okay, maybe after the Portlanders. 

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

I can virtually guarantee you that if C&B go through with this - their reputations will be trash in the US.

A US team defending in Bermuda didn’t appear to trash to many reputations.  While this rises to defending in Bermuda level absurdity I think if this happens C&B will be just fine.  LE and Coutts set the bar pretty low.

WetHog  :ph34r:

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WetHog said:

A US team defending in Bermuda didn’t appear to trash to many reputations.  While this rises to defending in Bermuda level absurdity I think if this happens C&B will be just fine.  LE and Coutts set the bar pretty low.

WetHog  :ph34r:

C&B do have to come up with more than a boat. At a minimum, they need to pay some fees, quarantine, come up with a sailing team. If not then they are Theranos.

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

C&B do have to come up with more than a boat. At a minimum, they need to pay some fees, quarantine, come up with a sailing team. If not then they are Theranos.

They just need black turtlenecks and to speak with a strangely low voice.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

A US team where 3 of the 5 crew  were Aussies, being the helm, tactician and mainsail trimmer none the less.

Defending in Bermuda was just icing on the cake. 

12 minutes ago, WetHog said:

A US team defending in Bermuda didn’t appear to trash to many reputations.  While this rises to defending in Bermuda level absurdity I think if this happens C&B will be just fine.  LE and Coutts set the bar pretty low.

WetHog  :ph34r:

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

Prot:  "constructed in the country of such yacht club, shall be deemed to be satisfied by the lamination or another form of construction of the hull in such country

RG very interpetation:

"The Protocol for the current America's Cup requires only the "hull" of the AC75 to be constructed in the country of origin, and sensibly uses the same definition of a "hull" as used in the AC75 class rule.

The "hull" is a defined term in the AC75 class rule being - "the main body of the yacht including the bottom, sides, transom, deck, cockpit and internal structures".

The definition doesn't say the parts have to be bonded together to comply with CIC requirements. In Stars + Stripes' situation, the quickest option is to construct the required parts in the USA, and fly them to Auckland and assemble the boat, at the Cup venue, and using expertise in Auckland and elsewhere in NZ."

If we want to push it at the same stupid extreme a hull made of pieces of plywoond and glue. I don't know if RG is GD's personal loudspeaker or if he is trying to test an senseless idea.

Back to the prot:

"a Competitor shall arrange in a timely manner for a member of the Measurement Committee to inspect the hull at the place of construction to determine whether the hull has been constructed in accordance with this Article and, if this rule is met, the Measurement Committee shall certify it as per its findings, (“Constructed in the Country Certificate”). Such a certificate by the Measurement Committee shall be final;"

Don't know if the MC will be an accomplice of such nonsense but I hope Team NYYC will bring that upper if necessary.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NeedAClew said:

More challengers better at this point, or is it more money for a variety of NZ entities that's the goal?

More Challengers would be nice but not at the expense of shitting on the DoG.

 

If GD is unhappy about not having enough Challengers he only has his choice* of the over-large, radical & unproven design to blame for that & must suffer the consequences.

Hopefully he'll have the opportunity to make a better choice* next time.

 

*DoG says it should not be Defenders choice!!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/28/2020 at 10:46 AM, smackdaddy said:

I've come to the conclusion, Four, that in a legitimate debate, this is about as good as you can do...

tenor.gif?itemid=4929570

Ah, good old shitdaddy, you never learn do you. Coming to conclusions has never been a strong point of yours. Well, neither has knowing anything about what you’re talking about but that’s never stopped you lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the proposal to lease ETNZ B1 to start training whilst they complete their own boat? I think this is where RGs suggestion of laminating hull and deck sections in Michigan and then sending them for final construction in NZ would satisfy the terms and save time.

It does suggest a rather significant influx of cash for S&S and also that they have a complete sailing team lined up and ready to go that they've managed to keep completely under the radar. These two factors seem almost as unlikely as the whole boat borrowing arrangement...

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, NZK said:

Isn't the proposal to lease ETNZ B1 to start training whilst they complete their own boat? I think this is where RGs suggestion of laminating hull and deck sections in Michigan and then sending them for final construction in NZ would satisfy the terms and save time.

It does suggest a rather significant influx of cash for S&S and also that they have a complete sailing team lined up and ready to go that they've managed to keep completely under the radar. These two factors seem almost as unlikely as the whole boat borrowing arrangement...

 

It sounds bogus. If they had someone giving them the cash to do all that, why the secrecy? Is it Putin? Ernie? Larry? The Jeffery Epstein Estate? Or nobody?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there’s some kind of  massive penalty clause in the HVA for not meeting some minimum number of teams entered, then perhaps ETNZ will be under pressure from ACE to make it cheap and easy? Maybe between those two parties, they’d even *pay* S+S to show up :D 

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

If there’s some kind of  massive penalty clause in the HVA for not meeting some minimum number of teams entered, then perhaps ETNZ will be under pressure from ACE to make it cheap and easy? Maybe between those two parties, they’d even *pay* S+S to show up :D 

I would like to think this level of projected hypotheticals is beneath you.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, rh3000 said:

I would like to think this level of projected hypotheticals is beneath you.

Yes, I’m having a bit of fun doing beat-ups on the S+S fiasco :) 

Got any fun hypotheticals to offer, for why ETNZ is apparently good with any of it? 

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

Yes, I’m having a bit of fun doing beat-ups on the S+S fiasco :) 

Got any fun hypotheticals to offer, for why ETNZ is apparently good with any of it? 

Fucking with the competition?

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

If there’s some kind of  massive penalty clause in the HVA for not meeting some minimum number of teams entered, then perhaps ETNZ will be under pressure from ACE to make it cheap and easy? Maybe between those two parties, they’d even *pay* S+S to show up :D 

But paying them to show up still doesn't mean they would even be able to get off the dock.

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

Building on SR hypothesis, any link with the money that went through Hungrary ? :)

Exactly, and is the Hungarian Nanny pretty hot?

ETNZ’s submission in response to the S+S application could be the funniest of all the teams’ response entries, looking forward to it. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

Yes, I’m having a bit of fun doing beat-ups on the S+S fiasco :) 

Got any fun hypotheticals to offer, for why ETNZ is apparently good with any of it? 

Why not? They’re not breaking any rules by doing it, they’re not responsible for the details as that’s LR’s job. It’s all been done according to the protocol so there’s no reason for them not to.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, NZK said:

Isn't the proposal to lease ETNZ B1 to start training whilst they complete their own boat? I think this is where RGs suggestion of laminating hull and deck sections in Michigan and then sending them for final construction in NZ would satisfy the terms and save time.

That is probably the most likely scenario I've heard, but it still leaves a massive logistical challenge to get the boat plus all the bits to NZ, put it together and get up to speed in 6 months. It also puts the question into the AP's jurisdiction of interpreting the Protocol rather than unilaterally changing it.

This approach doesn't require S&S to claim Te Aihe is a US boat, they'll never sail it against other competitors, plus leaves it available to ENTZ from the start of the CSS when it can be used for 2 boat testing/training. You could almost say this was the plan from the beginning… :ph34r:

But it's still a hideously expensive exercise for very little return.

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

If GD is unhappy about not having enough Challengers he only has his choice* of the over-large, radical & unproven design to blame for that & must suffer the consequences.

Hopefully he'll have the opportunity to make a better choice* next time.

 

*DoG says it should not be Defenders choice!!!

This authorises the Defender to have a say:

Quote

The Club challenging for the Cup and the Club holding the same may, by mutual consent,
make any arrangement satisfactory to both as to the dates, courses, number of trials, rules
and sailing regulations, and any and all other conditions of the match
, in which case also
the ten months' notice may be waived.

 

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

This authorises the Defender to have a say:

 

As do the Challenger and guess what? They aren’t going to MC that change to the Prot’s defn of CIC, I happen to know already. 

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

As do the Challenger and guess what? They aren’t going to MC that change to the Prot’s defn of CIC, I happen to know already. 

They obviously haven’t and aren’t. So the decision has gone to the Arbitration Panel as per the protocol.

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

Why not? They’re not breaking any rules by doing it,

Nor were the Aussies when they bowled underarm, or Andy Hayden (RIP) when he took a dive out of the lineout.  Because they are not breaking any rules it doesn't always work out for them in the end.

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

How dare you slur the reputation of one of the greatest All Blacks!  The penalty WASNT awarded for his dive from the line out.  It was awarded for the push of the hard man Frank Oliver.

Great no sorry greedy without morals more like.
Andy Hayden and his grubby associates took the gold on offer for the 1986 Cavaliers trip to apartheid South Africa after the 1981 tour that tore the country apart.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, trt131 said:

Nor were the Aussies when they bowled underarm, or Andy Hayden (RIP) when he took a dive out of the lineout.  Because they are not breaking any rules it doesn't always work out for them in the end.

They’re also not directly affecting the outcome like the underarm bowl. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy Haden was a bully and a man ahead of his time. But big locks tend to be bullies in rugby. Only fuckwits and Welshmen would claim Haden cost them an underserved victory. Haden brought true professionalism in attitude, training and on- and off-the-field behaviour by players during the amateur era, at a time when rugby union IN NZ amateur in name only.

Andy Haden did a lot for his country and for Auckland, and he deserved every accolade and reward that flowed his way. His funeral will be attended by the royalty of Rugby Union from around the world..

RIP Andy..and thank you for the memories.

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

Time to resurrect the SA challenge. 

Dig out the pink flag.

Hey, I just thought of something...maybe *** ****** is funding S+S! That would be freakin' hilarious!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sailbydate said:

Fucking with the competition?

I remember when I first started posting on this site there was a lot of talk from Kiwi’s about sportsmanship and the like.  How practicing good sportsmanship is important to Kiwi’s. Especially around the time Alinghi had difficulty dropping their main without putting a guy up the rig.  How times change.  
 

WetHog  :ph34r:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, RobG said:

That is probably the most likely scenario I've heard, but it still leaves a massive logistical challenge to get the boat plus all the bits to NZ, put it together and get up to speed in 6 months. It also puts the question into the AP's jurisdiction of interpreting the Protocol rather than unilaterally changing it.

This approach doesn't require S&S to claim Te Aihe is a US boat, they'll never sail it against other competitors, plus leaves it available to ENTZ from the start of the CSS when it can be used for 2 boat testing/training. You could almost say this was the plan from the beginning… :ph34r:

But it's still a hideously expensive exercise for very little return.

I wonder if it has actually been the plan for quite a long time - still not sure about having enough backing from financiers who are happy with the stealth approach or maybe they still need more cash and the current backers don't want their names publicised until they reach a target to actually get the team into NZ...

Anyone fancy doing a roll-call of potential US team members and figuring out which of them have spent the lockdown furiously spinning handles and wearing VR goggles? 

New conspiracy theory: Maybe Nathan O is going to make a cameo for S&S?? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/28/2020 at 10:34 PM, Chapter Four said:

A US team where 3 of the 5 crew  were Aussies, being the helm, tactician and mainsail trimmer none the less.

Defending in Bermuda was just icing on the cake. 

 

ETNZ’s skipper when they won the Cup is an Aussie.  Kiwi’s seemed fine with it. 

WetHog  :ph34r:

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

remember when I first started posting on this site there was a lot of talk from Kiwi’s about sportsmanship and the like.  How practicing good sportsmanship is important to Kiwi’s. 

it is .. and that wont change

but years and years of knuckle dragging trolling tends to change how things are phrased

 

you also should not get sledging confused with bad sportsmanship

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

I remember when I first started posting on this site there was a lot of talk from Kiwi’s about sportsmanship and the like.  How practicing good sportsmanship is important to Kiwi’s. Especially around the time Alinghi had difficulty dropping their main without putting a guy up the rig.  How times change.  
 

WetHog  :ph34r:

How so?

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

Yes, I’m having a bit of fun doing beat-ups on the S+S fiasco :) 

Got any fun hypotheticals to offer, for why ETNZ is apparently good with any of it? 

Who says they are? They've simply and rightly identified that contravening the current interpretation of the rules is not their call - it's in arbitration...

they are bound to whatever the outcome...

I'm still uncertain if this is a purely logical challenge for you, or if you was just continuing with the innuendo for the spite?

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

Who says they are? They've simply and rightly identified that contravening the current interpretation of the rules is not their call - it's in arbitration...

they are bound to whatever the outcome...

I'm still uncertain if this is a purely logical challenge for you, or if you was just continuing with the innuendo for the spite?

Smiling underhanded innuendo is his modus operandi.

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

Who says [ETNZ is apparently good with any of it]? They've simply and rightly identified that contravening the current interpretation of the rules is not their call - it's in arbitration...

they are bound to whatever the outcome...

If S&S is angling to rent/hire/lease/buy Te Aihe for whatever reason, it almost certainly has at least in principle agreement from ENTZ. Of course it will depend on S&S getting it past the AP. It would be idiotic beyond even typical AC bullshit for S&S to be attempting to lease a boat from an unwilling lessor.

As to why ENTZ would risk B1 for what must be relatively small change, then in the absence of definitive information the vacuum will be filled with conjecture.

I think S&S would have been better to have ETNZ to build them a test boat like Te Kahu, then spend some actual time on the water and avoid the AP altogether.

27 minutes ago, barfy said:

Smiling underhanded innuendo is his modus operandi.

Not hoist by your own petard much.

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

If S&S is angling to rent/hire/lease/buy Te Aihe for whatever reason, it almost certainly has at least in principle agreement from ENTZ. Of course it will depend on S&S getting it past the AP. It would be idiotic beyond even typical AC bullshit for S&S to be attempting to lease a boat from an unwilling lessor.

As to why ENTZ would risk B1 for what must be relatively small change, then in the absence of definitive information the vacuum will be filled with conjecture.

I think S&S would have been better to have ETNZ to build them a test boat like Te Kahu, then spend some actual time on the water and avoid the AP altogether.

Not hoist by your own petard much.

Why not buy Ineos B1, or LRs? Failing that why not AM B1?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rh3000 said:

Why not buy Ineos B1, or LRs? Failing that why not AM B1?

There is zero incentive for the other challengers to help S&S other than the small difference it might make to their bottom line. They don't have training boats in Auckland (or so I'm reliably informed) so wouldn't want to relinquish B1 until B2 arrives.  At the very least it makes the CSS much more difficult for the challengers, which can only benefit ETNZ.

On the other hand, Te Aihe is in Auckland and is likely similar to the design package purchased from ETNZ so probably is a better training boat. The other challenger B1s are very different (to the ETNZ B1) and have some pretty obvious issues. The ENTZ B1 may well be near the end of its useful life for the team as a training and development platform, leasing it to S&S may fit well with the team's development and delivery cycle. It also upsets the current CSS schedule in a way that can only benefit ETNZ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why this would work for anyone  but SS is super puzzling. Unless there are secret strings attached to funding for more challengers I don't know why ETNZ would consider this, besides making for a less embarassing challenger slate.

I'm sure you could write in to the contract that SS would have to keep the boat ready to be returned if NZ needed B1 back, which would be a silly show but would keep NZ in races if B2 broke at the wrong time. 

If I were sitting in my high rise and having to write the check for this I'd really be wondering what the result would be like and would it be worth while. It does not seem like the most efficient way to pick up and exotic toy after AC racing is done. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rh3000 said:

Who says they are? They've simply and rightly identified that contravening the current interpretation of the rules is not their call - it's in arbitration...

they are bound to whatever the outcome...

I'm still uncertain if this is a purely logical challenge for you, or if you was just continuing with the innuendo for the spite?

ETNZ could end all speculation and any need for a trip to the Arbitration Panel buy saying their B1 is not available for S+S to use for obvious reasons.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

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

ETNZ could end all speculation and any need for a trip to the Arbitration Panel buy saying their B1 is not available for S+S to use for obvious reasons.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

Why would they wish to end it? the more distractions the challengers have to contend with the better for ETNZ.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Terry Hollis said:

Why would they wish to end it? the more distractions the challengers have to contend with the better for ETNZ.

ETNZ needs the help from distracting the Challengers or they are just doing it to be a dick?  If the former that’s telling but if the latter then they are no better as a defender as Oracle was for AC35.  
 

I just remember reading on here how ETNZ would bring honor and class back to the AC when they won it. So far it looks like ETNZ are just following ORs precedent.

WetHog  :ph34r:

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, JALhazmat said:

But then it all gets tricky telling Taylor that he can’t have a boat to play with after he has been sat in the Solent on the ferry watching ineos sail about. 

Is he really in the UK? 

Where ARE Buckley, Kirby, Slingsby, Johnson (wing trimmer on USA F50) anyway?  Leo is in NZ already...

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

(...)
 

I just remember reading on here how ETNZ would bring honor and class back to the AC when they won it. So far it looks like ETNZ are just following ORs precedent.

WetHog  :ph34r:

As I already wrote, the Poisoned Chalice.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, WetHog said:

ETNZ needs the help from distracting the Challengers or they are just doing it to be a dick?  If the former that’s telling but if the latter then they are no better as a defender as Oracle was for AC35.  
 

I just remember reading on here how ETNZ would bring honor and class back to the AC when they won it. So far it looks like ETNZ are just following ORs precedent.

WetHog  :ph34r:

You are over looking the 1992 event long before Oracle became involved ..  

1992: Defeated by Italy

When Michael Fay came back for one last shot in 1992, the Kiwi challenge once more found itself embroiled in controversy. NZL 20 had established a 4–1 lead over Paul Cayard and the Italian syndicate, Il Moro di Venezia, in the challenger final when a protest over NZL 20’s use of a bowsprit (the pole or spar extending forward from the vessel’s prow) was upheld. Team New Zealand was docked one point and forced to remove the bowsprit. The verdict dealt a serious blow to the team’s morale and detracted from its boat’s performance. New Zealand lost the next four races, and the series.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@NeedAClew Tom Johnson is up in Denmark fucking about on foil boards. He's now involved in the Danish Rockwool team with their GC32 and F50. 

The others are more or less unaccounted for, I think Slingers posted some Moth footage a while back...

Are the USA Sail GP team still funded by the circuit/Larry? Teams are supposed to be finding independent sponsorship incomes but if LE is still bankrolling USA then those boys are under contract with LE and it adds a whole new level of what-the-fuckery to the S&S team (assuming a cross-over of team members)

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

You are over looking the 1992 event long before Oracle became involved ..  

1992: Defeated by Italy

When Michael Fay came back for one last shot in 1992, the Kiwi challenge once more found itself embroiled in controversy. NZL 20 had established a 4–1 lead over Paul Cayard and the Italian syndicate, Il Moro di Venezia, in the challenger final when a protest over NZL 20’s use of a bowsprit (the pole or spar extending forward from the vessel’s prow) was upheld. Team New Zealand was docked one point and forced to remove the bowsprit. The verdict dealt a serious blow to the team’s morale and detracted from its boat’s performance. New Zealand lost the next four races, and the series.

 

So you are saying ETNZ are doing it just to be a dick?  So they are no better than OR.  Which is fine.   It’s just an interesting dynamic to witness some on here flip flop once their team is calling the shots  

WetHog  :ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites