Jump to content

The Nationality Rule : The Pros and Cons


Recommended Posts

One place to bring the debate on the nationality rule. 

To get it started, here is one tidbit.  The AC has only been won by helms where English is their first language. Not a very diverse group!

There have only been two finalists in the whole 150 years history of the cup with any other language/origin. Both were Italian. Both won the Challenger series. Both lost in the final for the cup.  Outside of Italy there have been 12 nations that have challenged at one time or another for the Cup...but you only needed Italian or English to scream at the skipper!

Here's hoping we see another language on the podium in our lifetimes :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

PRO is definitly People will get more into it when they see their National Team competing for the AC! Also, folks like Larry Ellison & Ernesto Bertarelli can buy off other Teams.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In years past a Cup campaign was always a one off proposition.  The whole intent was to win (either challenger or defender). Once the last race was sailed, that was the end.  Assets could be held over or stored, but that was usually the end of the programs.

Now there is the need to secure talent in between campaigns because the professional market is open to the highest bidder.  In the past, with stricter nationality rules there was no need to have this continuity because with only one or two teams per Nation the talent was there.  
The Cup has a history of the nationality rules moving around.  But in this modern age of professional sailing, why not limit to a base of National Talent.  So what if Japan doesn’t have the caliber of sailors of other Nations.  When the Italians began their Cup campaigns they were not even close, and look at them now.  Racing doesn’t have to be close and not everyone gets a prize.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Americas Cup was sitting on a shelf for a couple of decades after WW2 and the NYYC decided to resuscitate it by hosting challenges in 12 meters. It started as friendly competition between wealthy private members of YCs and over time evolved into the pinnacle of professional sailing.  

Since sailing is not really a large revenue generating spectator sport it depends on patrons who relish the challenge.   

I sense the AC is at a cross roads with these nationality rules .  

Option #1  Its a competition between strictly national teams.   The event becomes restricted to those few nations with money and sailing talent to put together a team.  Money from outside those countries is excluded. sailors from counties which dont put forward a team are excluded. 

Option #2 Its a competition between teams like F1, where best teams recruit as best designers and helms and crew as possible .   costs are high but a team can be supported by fans of the club/team owner nationality or nationality of the driver.

Option # 3.  Hybrid.   Teams represent their nations/clubs but can recruit a certain percentage of international sailing talent.

Eventually I think that the hybrid model is the most enduring. 

50% of crew could be nationals but a well funded challenge should be able to recruit an international design team and fill gaps in the sailing team with astute hires.  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it is quite clear. If you want to have many competitors - no nationality rule. If you want to have fewer (and increase your chance to win) you have a nationality rule (and adjust it to be optimal for you).

As a Swede - I was a bit sad that Artemis (or formally KSSS) couldn't participate. One reason was the nationality rule, but the big one was that you had to train in your own waters (which basically is impossible in Sweden during winter).

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, arneelof said:

For me it is quite clear. If you want to have many competitors - no nationality rule. If you want to have fewer (and increase your chance to win) you have a nationality rule (and adjust it to be optimal for you).

As a Swede - I was a bit sad that Artemis (or formally KSSS) couldn't participate. One reason was the nationality rule, but the big one was that you had to train in your own waters (which basically is impossible in Sweden during winter).

That is another rule that should not be in the protocol.  The DoG makes no mention about where boats can train.  Boats should be able to train in whatever location they find that is comparable to the location of the cup. 

I think the nationality rule should require a minimum number of the crew from country of challenge (maybe 50%) and leave it at that. 

When Dean got deselected from TNZ, he was entitled to seek a ride elsewhere first Team Japan and then AM USA. He would not have been my first choice for AM but I find it unfair that he would not be able to ply his trade because one employer lets him go.  TNZ are understandably nervous about losing their talent. The UK has an advantage with a deep bench of sailors . But it is discouraging for other teams, especially new teams who want to hire experience.

The 100% nationality rule will also exclude some very talented sailors who do not have a challenger from their country. Its a damn shame if Sling or Outteridge dont get another AC opportunity because an Australian challenge does not manifest itself. 

I love the AC75s but I worry that development costs to have a competitive boat are extraordinary high.   How much does an AC75 cost vs an GP50?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for contributions.  I am torn.  

If the objective is a grand prix professional event for spectators, then a 100% nationality rule will constrain entries. 

If the objective is the original "test" between nations to judge who has the best boat build and best sailors, then we should not only have a nationality sailor rule but a rule that designer and builder are from the nationality of the challenge. This used to be about Australian design vs American design vs British design etc. and god forbid they discover that the winged keel might have been designed in Netherlands :)   .   The yacht America went over to the UK and demonstrated that America design of fast yachts was substantially ahead of British design and build.  Even in the 12 meter era, US boats were designed by US yacht designers and the challengers brought their own design.   Fast forward to now ....and the TNZ defender was designed by a British designer and the British challenger was designed by a Kiwi designer. 

Part of me thinks that the original objective of the cup was a competition between nations, not a competition between sailors....so maybe that is what it should stay .... but part of me thinks that the AC has moved on and the genie will be hard to put back in the bottle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, sailman said:

In years past a Cup campaign was always a one off proposition.  The whole intent was to win (either challenger or defender). Once the last race was sailed, that was the end.  Assets could be held over or stored, but that was usually the end of the programs.

I walked the docks of Newport during a distant past cup cycle. Walked past a team dismantling their boat, taking everything, all hardware was coming off. You could taste the sadness in the silence on board... they were only sailing for room, board and a t-shirt!

5 hours ago, IPLore said:

Option # 3.  Hybrid.   Teams represent their nations/clubs but can recruit a certain percentage of international sailing talent.

#3

Close the loophole:  I know a past US cup sailor who had to move to Switzerland to fulfill eligibility status as a national Swiss sailor for Alinghi....

2 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

Part of me thinks that the original objective of the cup was a competition between nations, not a competition between sailors....so maybe that is what it should stay .... but part of me thinks that the AC has moved on and the genie will be hard to put back in the bottle.

It was what it was and it is what it is now!

Follow the money to find the nationality - simple really!

Broken record on: Strip all the bullshit away and it's always been and always will be a competition between two rich dudes from different countries!

...who agree on their special rules for this go-round!

...who then pay someone else to find and manage the best designers and sailors!

...while they admire the spectacle of their money from their mid sized 200' luxury yacht, cause the 350er is in retrofit...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the only wording related to nationality in the Deed of Gift:

"Any organized yacht Club of a foreign country, incorporated, patented, or licensed by the legislature, admiralty or other executive department, having for its annual regatta an ocean water course on the sea, or on an arm of the sea, or one which combines both, shall always be entitled to the right of sailing a match for this Cup with a yacht or vessel propelled by sails only and constructed in the country to which the challenging Club belongs, against any one yacht or vessel constructed in the country of the Club holding the Cup."

It relates only to the yacht, and says nothing about the nationality of the crew. In fact, many of the big US defenders in the late 19th and early 20th centuries were crewed largely by non-US nationals. Charlie Barr was born in Scotland, and was a Scot for most of his, including while skippering US yachts in the AC.

In a Deed of Gift match without mutual consent, the question is always what "constructed in country" means. Conservatively, it is every aspect of the boat, including design, materials, and construction.

This is why there was such a stink over the origin of the design of Australia 2's keel in 1983.

Limits on crew nationality are a modern construct governed by a mutual consent Protocol, not any requirement of the Deed of Gift.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t get me started... ;) 

This thing is basically bullshit, the crass-commercial arguments for it are far outnumbered by the heavyweight arguments against it. 
 

While it’s cool to see degrees of patriotism, hired hands sailor-crew nationalities should be a choice left entirely to the team syndicates. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, accnick said:

Here is the only wording related to nationality in the Deed of Gift:

"Any organized yacht Club of a foreign country, incorporated, patented, or licensed by the legislature, admiralty or other executive department, having for its annual regatta an ocean water course on the sea, or on an arm of the sea, or one which combines both, shall always be entitled to the right of sailing a match for this Cup with a yacht or vessel propelled by sails only and constructed in the country to which the challenging Club belongs, against any one yacht or vessel constructed in the country of the Club holding the Cup."

It relates only to the yacht, and says nothing about the nationality of the crew. In fact, many of the big US defenders in the late 19th and early 20th centuries were crewed largely by non-US nationals. Charlie Barr was born in Scotland, and was a Scot for most of his, including while skippering US yachts in the AC.

In a Deed of Gift match without mutual consent, the question is always what "constructed in country" means. Conservatively, it is every aspect of the boat, including design, materials, and construction.

This is why there was such a stink over the origin of the design of Australia 2's keel in 1983.

Limits on crew nationality are a modern construct governed by a mutual consent Protocol, not any requirement of the Deed of Gift.

Thanks Nick.

This is fairly well known. The nationality rules are established by the protocol not the Deed.

NZ has proposed a 100% nationality requirement

"A new Crew Nationality Rule will require 100% of the race crew for each competitor to either be a passport holder of the country the team’s yacht club as at 19 March 2021 or to have been physically present in that country (or, acting on behalf of such yacht club in Auckland, the venue of the AC36 Events) for two of the previous three years prior to 18 March 2021. As an exception to this requirement, there will be a discretionary provision allowing a quota of non-nationals on the race crew for competitors from “Emerging Nations”. 

Note that the cut off is 3/19/2021.    So someone who genuinely emigrates to the US or Europe cannot sail for the new home country.

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

As an exception to this requirement, there will be a discretionary provision allowing a quota of non-nationals on the race crew for competitors from “Emerging Nations”. 

Without any definition of emerging nations yet, this rule makes potential new competitors very-very unlikely for AC37. As they say, the one thing you can’t buy is time.
 

On Time: Nowhere is it stated so far if ETNZ and Ineos will be allowed another 6 month Design head start, which IMO was intentionally disastrous to both AM and Ineos in this cycle. For all we know, GD has instructed his team to already begin running sims on the coming new design rules, especially including the new foil rules, given what GD pulled in this past cycle. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kyle Langford can sail for Sweden or Australia.

Australians sailing in Sail GP

Kyle Langford

Ian Jenson

Luke Parkinson

Tom Slingsby

Jason Waterhouse

Sam Newton

Kinley Fowler

Tom Johnson

Nathan Outteridge

Ayden Menzies

Jimmy Spitbull

 

All with GP50 or AC experience .  Jimmy has ability to sail with either Italy or US team.  The rest are out of luck unless Allinghi build their boat in Australia and challenges from an Australian YC.  Which I suppose is not a daft idea.

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

Kyle Langford can sail for Sweden or Australia.

Australians sailing in Sail GP

Kyle Langford

Ian Jenson

Luke Parkinson

Tom Slingsby

Jason Waterhouse

Sam Newton

Kinley Fowler

Tom Johnson

Nathan Outteridge

Ayden Menzies

Jimmy Spitbull

 

All with GP50 or AC experience .  Jimmy has ability to sail with either Italy or US team.  The rest are out of luck unless Allinghi build their boat in Australia and challenges from an Australian YC.  Which I suppose is not a daft idea.

The sailors are essentially f’cked salary-wise, PB included. It may be the best thing for GD and the bean counters but sailor-lock-in is just one of the very worst parts of this rule. It should actually be illegal, if it is not already. 

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

Thanks Nick.

This is fairly well known. The nationality rules are established by the protocol not the Deed.

NZ has proposed a 100% nationality requirement

"A new Crew Nationality Rule will require 100% of the race crew for each competitor to either be a passport holder of the country the team’s yacht club as at 19 March 2021 or to have been physically present in that country (or, acting on behalf of such yacht club in Auckland, the venue of the AC36 Events) for two of the previous three years prior to 18 March 2021. As an exception to this requirement, there will be a discretionary provision allowing a quota of non-nationals on the race crew for competitors from “Emerging Nations”. 

Note that the cut off is 3/19/2021.    So someone who genuinely emigrates to the US or Europe cannot sail for the new home country.

Realistically, we all know why TNZ supports  strong nationality rules. 

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

Realistically, we all know why TNZ supports  strong nationality rules. 

Whilst I am sure GD is okay with the proposed nationality clause, are you all sure that this is not something supported or even proposed by Ineos as part of the mutual consent process?

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

Realistically, we all know why TNZ supports  strong nationality rules. 

Pray tell? :) 
 

IMO it is to lowball sailor salaries, and for parochial fan interest. Both of those are for crass-cash reasons and they don’t belong with the Design intent that is so blatantly f’ing obvious in the DoG.  

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

Whilst I am sure GD is okay with the proposed nationality clause, are you all sure that this is not something supported or even proposed by Ineos as part of the mutual consent process?

The 100% nationality rule came from TNZ. It was a condition of being accepted as CoR.  NYYC/AM also offered (asked) to be CoR and it was quite clear that TNZ was gong to want mutual consent to a nationality rule. There are several key points that are negotiated ahead of accepting a challenge.

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

That is another rule that should not be in the protocol.  The DoG makes no mention about where boats can train.  Boats should be able to train in whatever location they find that is comparable to the location of the cup. 

I think the nationality rule should require a minimum number of the crew from country of challenge (maybe 50%) and leave it at that. 

When Dean got deselected from TNZ, he was entitled to seek a ride elsewhere first Team Japan and then AM USA. He would not have been my first choice for AM but I find it unfair that he would not be able to ply his trade because one employer lets him go.  TNZ are understandably nervous about losing their talent. The UK has an advantage with a deep bench of sailors . But it is discouraging for other teams, especially new teams who want to hire experience.

The 100% nationality rule will also exclude some very talented sailors who do not have a challenger from their country. Its a damn shame if Sling or Outteridge dont get another AC opportunity because an Australian challenge does not manifest itself. 

I love the AC75s but I worry that development costs to have a competitive boat are extraordinary high.   How much does an AC75 cost vs an GP50?  

I think a compromise would be, if a team lets a member go that member should be available to the international market regardless of nationality.  This would effectively prevent a billionaire from buying an existing team but at the same time allow new teams to employ experienced talent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, arneelof said:

For me it is quite clear. If you want to have many competitors - no nationality rule. If you want to have fewer (and increase your chance to win) you have a nationality rule (and adjust it to be optimal for you).

As a Swede - I was a bit sad that Artemis (or formally KSSS) couldn't participate. One reason was the nationality rule, but the big one was that you had to train in your own waters (which basically is impossible in Sweden during winter).

 

12 hours ago, IPLore said:

When Dean got deselected from TNZ, he was entitled to seek a ride elsewhere first Team Japan and then AM USA. He would not have been my first choice for AM but I find it unfair that he would not be able to ply his trade because one employer lets him go.  TNZ are understandably nervous about losing their talent. The UK has an advantage with a deep bench of sailors . But it is discouraging for other teams, especially new teams who want to hire experience.

The 100% nationality rule will also exclude some very talented sailors who do not have a challenger from their country. Its a damn shame if Sling or Outteridge dont get another AC opportunity because an Australian challenge does not manifest itself. 

For me, the two posts above highlight the "downside" of Grant's rules and are much bigger than any upside for the AC as a whole.

I am of the opinion that Grant's implementation of nationality rules has been more about his own desires and interests than anything else.  Part of it was to "discourage" participation by teams he preferred to not have participate (Artemis) the other part was to prevent "poaching" of any members of his team.  

I will have to admit that I have thought about Grant getting payback.  Just think of a ETNZ loss to a hostile team that then implements loose nationality for the sailors (more than 50%) but harsh nationality (90% by birth or being raised in a country) for all of the design team (most ACs are won by the design team) along with harsh nationality (the parent company headquarters) rules for 90% of the funding provided (like it or not, money is a big part of the AC).  Any time someone can propose really nasty a "payback" the target of the "payback" is probably guilty of doing something less than fully sportsmanlike.  

I would not mind a move to push teams to consider home grown sailors first, but I have a real hard time seeing how to do it an appropriate balance for giving sailors not on a "home team" opportunities to participate.  I also resent that the whole push for nationality is mostly coming from a team that choses to ignore their own non-national contributions in the design and funding areas. 

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

The 100% nationality rule came from TNZ. It was a condition of being accepted as CoR.  NYYC/AM also offered (asked) to be CoR and it was quite clear that TNZ was gong to want mutual consent to a nationality rule. There are several key points that are negotiated ahead of accepting a challenge.

Link?

 I missed that sorry.

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

Whilst I am sure GD is okay with the proposed nationality clause, are you all sure that this is not something supported or even proposed by Ineos as part of the mutual consent process?

It's the opposite mate. Think for yourself: Which Team would suffer the most without the 100 % Nationality Rule. The Kiwis! This new National Requirement came from Dalton & ETNZ because he did not want to see the same thing happening that happened to TNZ after the 2000 Defence.

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

It's the opposite mate. Think for yourself: Which Team would suffer the most without the 100 % Nationality Rule. The Kiwis! This new National Requirement came from Dalton & ETNZ because he did not want to see the same thing happening that happened to TNZ after the 2000 Defence.

I don’t really see it that way. I think the design team is more important and there seems to be no restrictions there. To avoid doubt I do think the sailors are important but design team more so. 

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

I don’t really see it that way. I think the design team is more important and there seems to be no restrictions there. To avoid doubt I do think the sailors are important but design team more so. 

I would agree that the design team is more important, always has been. Which makes it even more obvious the nationality rules are an asshole move by Dalts to prevent anyone leaving. This is the only reason, the claim of taking it back to its origins is just a straight out lie. If he had wanted to do this he would have insisted the design team was the part in the nationality rule. He would have also removed any standard, supplied parts or selling of design plans.

So just a shit hole move, depriving others of a chance to get a spot. All because the magic fund raiser had no funds.

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

I would agree that the design team is more important, always has been. Which makes it even more obvious the nationality rules are an asshole move by Dalts to prevent anyone leaving. This is the only reason, the claim of taking it back to its origins is just a straight out lie. If he had wanted to do this he would have insisted the design team was the part in the nationality rule. He would have also removed any standard, supplied parts or selling of design plans.

So just a shit hole move, depriving others of a chance to get a spot. All because the magic fund raiser had no funds.

I wonder what this job restriction does to the oh so praised spirit within TNZ. 

Would key personnel that actually wanted to leave - for money, experience, career reasons -, but is now bound to TNZ, be as happy and motivated as requited? Especially, if they aren't paid by the Kiwi team what they could be paid elsewhere? 

Are these job restrictions even legal, anti-discrimination and all? 

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

I wonder what this job restriction does to the oh so praised spirit within TNZ. 

Would key personnel that actually wanted to leave - for money, experience, career reasons -, but is now bound to TNZ, be as happy and motivated as requited? Especially, if they aren't paid by the Kiwi team what they could be paid elsewhere? 

Are these job restrictions even legal, anti-discrimination and all? 

It’s even harder on the kiwi pro sailors not selected for the team.......or pro sailors from nation without an entry. 

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

I wonder what this job restriction does to the oh so praised spirit within TNZ. 

Would key personnel that actually wanted to leave - for money, experience, career reasons -, but is now bound to TNZ, be as happy and motivated as requited? Especially, if they aren't paid by the Kiwi team what they could be paid elsewhere? 

Are these job restrictions even legal, anti-discrimination and all? 

Not sure that anyone really wanted to leave. The problem was more the uncertainty of whether TNZ was going to have the funds to keep going. When money troubles hit people look for security, often this means a new employer. As long as Dalts finds the money things will be sort of okay.

But there will always be a hesitation on how they were potentially shut out. Plus their friends, from whatever country, not presently working for a team have been shut out. Would certainly put a sour taste in my mouth.

As for legality, don't see why not. A 'pro' sport team having a nationality clause would surely be okay. Not morally a good look, but still legal.

Note I am not a lawyer, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn once.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

It’s even harder on the kiwi pro sailors not selected for the team.......or pro sailors from nation without an entry. 

This applies to anyone not selected for a team in their country. Maybe their should be a rule that states that if you didn’t sail in the last cup you can sail with anyone.  Also if your dropped by a syndicate you come a free agent and able to sail for anyone. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2021 at 11:17 AM, Stingray~ said:

The sailors are essentially f’cked salary-wise, PB included. It may be the best thing for GD and the bean counters but sailor-lock-in is just one of the very worst parts of this rule. It should actually be illegal, if it is not already. 

I’m sure PB and co totally understand why this rule had been created.  Among the mainstream press their hasn’t been much negative comment. The 2003 cup created a lot of bad blood among kiwi sport, Russell and Brad had to be under 24 hour security. It brought a really ugly side to NZ sport which no one wants to see. In many ways this was more distressing than losing the cup. Some things are more important than sailors becoming mega rich. In this country we still have a sense of national unity and its best for all that the country that the nationality rule stays. 

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

I’m sure PB and co totally understand why this rule had been created.  Among the mainstream press their hasn’t been much negative comment. The 2003 cup created a lot of bad blood among kiwi sport, Russell and Brad had to be under 24 hour security. It brought a really ugly side to NZ sport which no one wants to see. In many ways this was more distressing than losing the cup. Some things are more important than sailors becoming mega rich. In this country we still have a sense of national unity and its best for all that the country that the nationality rule stays. 

The rule hasn’t been created yet. It’s proposed for next protocol.
 

 

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

I’m sure PB and co totally understand why this rule had been created.  Among the mainstream press their hasn’t been much negative comment. The 2003 cup created a lot of bad blood among kiwi sport, Russell and Brad had to be under 24 hour security. It brought a really ugly side to NZ sport which no one wants to see. In many ways this was more distressing than losing the cup. Some things are more important than sailors becoming mega rich. In this country we still have a sense of national unity and its best for all that the country that the nationality rule stays. 

Bold: Well then, why the fear that key personnel could be lured away by other teams? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There really is no real down side to a nationality rule. It just means there is an easier pathway for younger talent to get involved with the AC, as there won't be as big of a market for AC sailors as there would be otherwise. We've already seen it happening in SailGP. Young local talent has been passed up for experienced AC sailors who pretty much get the pick of the talent pool to fill their teams. You have guys like Leo Takahashi who is very well capable of helming a Japanese F50, passed up for Nathan Outteridge, guys like Taylor Canfield and Rome Kirby being passed up for Jimmy Spithill, and guys like Dylan Fletcher being passed up for Ben Ainslie. Already the young up and coming SailGP talent has been replaced by AC talent. 

A nationality rule is a step in the right direction to give local talent a chance to come through the ranks.

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

Bold: Well then, why the fear that key personnel could be lured away by other teams? 

Because everyone has a price.

Not suggesting I support the rule, just pointing out that national pride only stretches so far.

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

There really is no real down side to a nationality rule. It just means there is an easier pathway for younger talent to get involved with the AC, as there won't be as big of a market for AC sailors as there would be otherwise. We've already seen it happening in SailGP. Young local talent has been passed up for experienced AC sailors who pretty much get the pick of the talent pool to fill their teams. You have guys like Leo Takahashi who is very well capable of helming a Japanese F50, passed up for Nathan Outteridge, guys like Taylor Canfield and Rome Kirby being passed up for Jimmy Spithill, and guys like Dylan Fletcher being passed up for Ben Ainslie. Already the young up and coming SailGP talent has been replaced by AC talent. 

A nationality rule is a step in the right direction to give local talent a chance to come through the ranks.

Surely the nationality rules make for less teams , less jobs and less opportunities for young talent.

How do the plethora of talented Australian sailors get a gig if they are excluded from participation due to nationality?

Dylan doesn’t get to sail because the UK has a bench of good sailors who can only sail for GB

The Japanese young sailors dont sail in AC because Team Japan won’t find sponsorship without a reasonable chance of winning.

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

Surely the nationality rules make for less teams , less jobs and less opportunities for young talent.

How do the plethora of talented Australian sailors get a gig if they are excluded from participation due to nationality?

Dylan doesn’t get to sail because the UK has a bench of good sailors who can only sail for GB

The Japanese young sailors dont sail in AC because Team Japan won’t find sponsorship without a reasonable chance of winning.

Its sport right? How many talented young footballers miss out on the World Cup squads? How many talented sailors miss out on SailGP spots because AC sailors are better? How many talented young Kiwi's miss out on an All Black jerseys because there's someone better? Thats just sport.

Not everyone can compete at the highest level. You miss out, you train harder, you get better, you come back next time, and the next time, and the next time, until you achieve the goal. You have to hand it to PB, the only "Foreigner" he hired was Spithill, and that was because he had sailed for LR in the past, but other than that, it was a completely Italian team. Same with the Kiwi team. Ashby is the only "Foreigner" and he's been with the team since 2012, other than that, they're a completely Kiwi team. Same with the NZ SailGP team, they're a completely Kiwi team. 

Dylan helmed the GBR SailGP team last season, and was the first helm to break the 50 knot barrier, but now that Jim and Ben wanted in, those guys get replaced by Ben and his AC squad. Before INEOS got involved, they were a completely British team, since then they're now an "International" team.

I'm not saying thats a bad thing, I'm just saying a Nationality rule can be a good thing to keep the selection process in house as opposed to a professional trading process with guys being bought and traded like the NFL and NBA.

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

Its sport right? How many talented young footballers miss out on the World Cup squads? How many talented sailors miss out on SailGP spots because AC sailors are better? How many talented young Kiwi's miss out on an All Black jerseys because there's someone better? Thats just sport.

Not everyone can compete at the highest level. You miss out, you train harder, you get better, you come back next time, and the next time, and the next time, until you achieve the goal. You have to hand it to PB, the only "Foreigner" he hired was Spithill, and that was because he had sailed for LR in the past, but other than that, it was a completely Italian team. Same with the Kiwi team. Ashby is the only "Foreigner" and he's been with the team since 2012, other than that, they're a completely Kiwi team. Same with the NZ SailGP team, they're a completely Kiwi team. 

Dylan helmed the GBR SailGP team last season, and was the first helm to break the 50 knot barrier, but now that Jim and Ben wanted in, those guys get replaced by Ben and his AC squad. Before INEOS got involved, they were a completely British team, since then they're now an "International" team.

I'm not saying thats a bad thing, I'm just saying a Nationality rule can be a good thing to keep the selection process in house as opposed to a professional trading process with guys being bought and traded like the NFL and NBA.

Yes I see your point.   But in rugby and soccer, the teams exist , you just have to be good enough to play.    In AC the teams only exist if there is a sponsor.  So best Australian rugby players get to play for Australian team. Best Australian sailors don’t get to sail in AC

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

Yes I see your point.   But in rugby and soccer, the teams exist , you just have to be good enough to play.    In AC the teams only exist if there is a sponsor.  So best Australian rugby players get to play for Australian team. Best Australian sailors don’t get to sail in AC

Right. With this nat. rule in place, if it will be implemented, the selection is not 100% merit based anymore. 

Why not introduce gender, skin color, eye color, ancestry restrictions, just because? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest beneficiary of the 100% nationality rule will be Jimmy Spithill. The US will likely have to go after him. Who else can they get. It will take at least another cycle to get another American up to speed.

The biggest losers will be all the Aussie sailors .

The Brits and NZ teams have enough depth. The Italians are not far behind . But I think you kill the liklihood of any new teams.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a fan of nationality rules. But then I am not very nationalistic.

I get that for some national teams adds to the 'buy in'. But for me, beyond some initial hook, I tend to end up finding other reasons to root for particular teams. The other sport I follow quite a bit of is cycling, where teams are based in countries, but really represent a sponsor. I end up cheering teams where I like the ethos / characters / tactics / underdogs etc. I find all of that a greater link to a team than proximity of birthplace. 

I also wonder how valuable strong nationality rules are to sponsors (or billionaires in the case of the AC). If I had the luxury of ploughing millions in to a sailing team I'd like to see my brand associated with more universally well regarded traits (professionalism, sportsmanship, high tech etc.) rather than a nation which may not be universally liked (Britain, cough, cough). It's also kind of limiting for backers too. In F1 a sponsor may enter with a lower budget team and then step up and bring the top drivers and engineers in if they like the return they're getting. 

I wouldn't be surprised if SailGP moves away from national teams for the reasons above. Sure it helps creates team identity initially. It's something to get supporter buy in before there was any real backstory or prestige behind the event. But if you want sponsors to pay out for a franchise, they'll want to mould their own identity. 

If the competition were truly open to all nations and therefore all sailors, then I wouldn't mind so much. But with the format we have it seems restrictive to getting to see the bets sailors race the best boats; which is what I really want to see. 

I get the deed of gift 'competition between nations' but as long as challenging clubs aren't from the defender's nation, then I see this as being satisfied. And that largely stops two local clubs handing the trophy off between one another in some backwater and the Cup dying. There didn't seem to be anything stopping Charlie Barr skippering NYYC defenders. I guess with less travel and less connectivity the crew were most often draw from the clubs home nation by circumstance more than design. The insistence of it now seems a bit artificial and it's hard not to view it as protectionist. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would LOVE to watch a friendly sailing competition between nations, but let's face it, that's not the America's Cup

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If they were to have strict nationality rules it would be one thing, but no one is implementing those. New Zealand’s clause for passport holders and members of teams of other nationalities being allowed as long as they were on the team last time or had a passport as of when they announced it shows it’s not a nationality rule rather just a ploy to keep their own people. 
 

I like Mozzy’s idea of making the rule broader, if it’s a design race the design team should follow the nationality rule. And if its a commercial race then let’s make the sponsors and funding have to come from the nation too. Why won’t they? Because ETNZ would be SOL. It’s not a nationality rule; it’s a chain for Pete and Blair. And they deserve better. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, chuso007 said:

I would LOVE to watch a friendly sailing competition between nations, but let's face it, that's not the America's Cup

 

 

LOL! So true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point I'm completely nonplussed by the fact that the American boat had a Kiwi on the helm, or that the Italian boat was driven by an Aussie and I think that most people don't really care either.

To be clear, I'm not saying national rooting interest doesn't impact fan perception and draw in people who otherwise would pay no attention. I think we all watch some Olympic sports once every four years and never in between.

But I think being able to call a team "The Americans" and put a little flag next to their name in all the graphics gets 80% or more of the benefit there is to be had. The number of folks learning that the crews aren't necessarily citizens of the country they sail for and deciding not to watch anymore just seems like a really small percentage.

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

Yes I see your point.   But in rugby and soccer, the teams exist , you just have to be good enough to play.    In AC the teams only exist if there is a sponsor.  So best Australian rugby players get to play for Australian team. Best Australian sailors don’t get to sail in AC

In terms of Australia, they have more than enough talent, ability, and money (potential backers) to get involved. They just don't want to. We don't even know if the Australia SailGP team have managed to pick up a sponsor yet. Why can't these world champions, Olympic gold medalists and Americas Cup champions generate enough interest in those potential backers to put together an AC campaign? They can't say they don't have the money, as there are at least 4 active Supermaxi campaigns operating in Australia.

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

Its sport right? How many talented young footballers miss out on the World Cup squads? How many talented sailors miss out on SailGP spots because AC sailors are better? How many talented young Kiwi's miss out on an All Black jerseys because there's someone better? Thats just sport.

Not everyone can compete at the highest level. You miss out, you train harder, you get better, you come back next time, and the next time, and the next time, until you achieve the goal. You have to hand it to PB, the only "Foreigner" he hired was Spithill, and that was because he had sailed for LR in the past, but other than that, it was a completely Italian team. Same with the Kiwi team. Ashby is the only "Foreigner" and he's been with the team since 2012, other than that, they're a completely Kiwi team. Same with the NZ SailGP team, they're a completely Kiwi team. 

Dylan helmed the GBR SailGP team last season, and was the first helm to break the 50 knot barrier, but now that Jim and Ben wanted in, those guys get replaced by Ben and his AC squad. Before INEOS got involved, they were a completely British team, since then they're now an "International" team.

I'm not saying thats a bad thing, I'm just saying a Nationality rule can be a good thing to keep the selection process in house as opposed to a professional trading process with guys being bought and traded like the NFL and NBA.

C'mon, give me a break! The only Foreigner on the ITUK AC Team who was consistently on the Boat was Luke Parkinson.

As far as SailGP is concerned the British SailGP Team is still a British Team. Of those 8 Team Sailors who will be on the Team for Season 2 6 of them will be Brits.

The only two Teams in that League who are racing with complete Nationals are the Kiwis & the Spanish Team. Every other Team has at least one Foreigner.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mambo Kings said:

The biggest beneficiary of the 100% nationality rule will be Jimmy Spithill. The US will likely have to go after him. Who else can they get. It will take at least another cycle to get another American up to speed.

The biggest losers will be all the Aussie sailors .

The Brits and NZ teams have enough depth. The Italians are not far behind . But I think you kill the liklihood of any new teams.

When holding the cup I doubt the highest priority of the RNZYS is looking after Aussie sailors 

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

Bold: Well then, why the fear that key personnel could be lured away by other teams? 

When your offered 10 million, anyone’s sense of National Unity is going to be tested. When I’m talking about national unity I’m referring to what’s best for the whole nation, not a bunch of sailors.

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

When your offered 10 million, anyone’s sense of National Unity is going to be tested. When I’m talking about national unity I’m referring to what’s best for the whole nation, not a bunch of sailors.

National Unity?

What's best for the nation?

I admire your passion but its a sailboat race.  The sun will rise in the morning.

Wearing masks and getting vaccines and pulling together during the pandemic represents national unity even if Josh Junior sails for another country to get his paycheck.

I favor some kind of nationality association for buzz and excitement but I think a 100% rule will make the cup limited to a couple of teams and rather boring. I would prefer to see 5 or 6 teams next time around and close racing. Mozzy's post summed it up well.

One idea would be this

If helm is national then 1/3 crew also have to be national

If helm is from elsewhere, the 2/3 crew have to be national.

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

C'mon, give me a break! The only Foreigner on the ITUK AC Team who was consistently on the Boat was Luke Parkinson.

As far as SailGP is concerned the British SailGP Team is still a British Team. Of those 8 Team Sailors who will be on the Team for Season 2 6 of them will be Brits.

The only two Teams in that League who are racing with complete Nationals are the Kiwis & the Spanish Team. Every other Team has at least one Foreigner.

Iain Jensen was flight controller.

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

Iain Jensen was flight controller.

Iain Jensen was Flight Controller only for the SailGP Event in Sydney. He wasn't even on the AC75 Boat.

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

Iain Jensen was Flight Controller only for the SailGP Event in Sydney. He wasn't even on the AC75 Boat.

The SailGP Sydney event is the only one they did under INEOS sponsorship, because its the only one that happened in 2020.

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

If they were to have strict nationality rules it would be one thing, but no one is implementing those. New Zealand’s clause for passport holders and members of teams of other nationalities being allowed as long as they were on the team last time or had a passport as of when they announced it shows it’s not a nationality rule rather just a ploy to keep their own people. 
 

I like Mozzy’s idea of making the rule broader, if it’s a design race the design team should follow the nationality rule. And if its a commercial race then let’s make the sponsors and funding have to come from the nation too. Why won’t they? Because ETNZ would be SOL. It’s not a nationality rule; it’s a chain for Pete and Blair. And they deserve better. 

Yes free Pete and Blair... the true victims of the AC... wtf? You make it sound like they have been sold into a life of servitude.

They're multi millionaire professional sailers and Olympic medal holders, let’s not break out the violins and applications to the UN human rights panel eh? 
 

 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Rennmaus said:

Right. With this nat. rule in place, if it will be implemented, the selection is not 100% merit based anymore. 

Why not introduce gender, skin color, eye color, ancestry restrictions, just because? 

The crew should be demographically representative of the country. That would be a nice one and in a sense not much different from the nationality rule.

It all depends on the definition and restriction, if it is only imposing a majority of the crew and shore staff (>50%) are from the country of the syndicate, with much stronger restriction on how to qualify (not having spent 2 months in a hotel in the country) then it makes sense for some kind of geographical return while not impeding the campaign too much. I still want to see the best competing in AC at all levels (design, build, crew) and unfortunately I see the nationality rule as a big hinder.

AC should be attractive to all, sponsors but also be a life goal for many young sailors. And with a handful of teams competing, it might actually lose its appeal for many if the nationality rule is too strong. It's also much more satisfying to win against the best possible competitors.

I think only four would be happy to see NZL smash a team from Lichstenstein which was the only to raise the money to compete with amateur designers and day sailors. I bet that the Lichstenstein team will have greater fun than NZL forr that matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My simple Idea would, be all sailors would have to have been resident in and the nationality of the country of the boat for at least 5 years and the previous cup event..

Except, 10%  percent  foreigners are allowed from any country that has not entered the Cup in the last 10 years..

That includes all the team, designers, builders, Competitors..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Y

 

15 hours ago, dg_sailingfan said:

C'mon, give me a break! The only Foreigner on the ITUK AC Team who was consistently on the Boat was Luke Parkinson.

As far as SailGP is concerned the British SailGP Team is still a British Team. Of those 8 Team Sailors who will be on the Team for Season 2 6 of them will be Brits.

The only two Teams in that League who are racing with complete Nationals are the Kiwis & the Spanish Team. Every other Team has at least one Foreigner.

The only team completely national is Kiwi. The helm on the Spanish team is Australian (Phil Robertson).  The Aussie team will be all Aussie for several races because the afterguard is all Aussie and they have one non-national grinder who will not be on for all races.

We are discussing the nationality rule for AC but sailgp is good comparison because there are 8 national teams with a few non nationals on 7/8 boats.  If AC rules were strictly applied , there would probably only be 3 teams able to pull it together.

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

Yes free Pete and Blair... the true victims of the AC... wtf? You make it sound like they have been sold into a life of servitude.

They're multi millionaire professional sailers and Olympic medal holders, let’s not break out the violins and applications to the UN human rights panel eh? 
 

 

They aren’t victims but don’t pretend like New Zealand wants to make this a competition between nations and are returning to the roots with the nationality rule. It’s just a ploy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its certainly not about returning to the roots because there was never a nationality crew rule. The Deed specified (i) The boat must be built in the nation (ii) The boat must represent a club from the challenging nation. 

The nationality of the crew went though four phases

1. Golden Age. Huge schooners and then the J Class.    Professional Crew were international and national.

2. The Revival and 12 meter era .  Crews were national through choice. Very few sailors were full time professional sailors.

3. The IACC. International pros started showing up (eg Cayard on Italian boat) and then the "great betrayal" when Allingi hired Butterworth and Coutts.  Full time sailing became well compensated.

4. The foiling era. Increasing complex and fast boats requiring a narrow elite of international sailors.  Oracle USA is infamous in San Francisco for so few Americans.  NZ is dominant and proposes a nationality rule.

Possible reasons for Nationality rule

(i) Harking back to the 12 meter era when boats represented countries and Aussies stayed up all night celebrating Aus 2.

(ii) Theory that fans support a team if the entire team is one nationality.  (Altthough jimmy spitbull did not diminish support for LR one iota)

(iii) NZ wants to prevent another incident where entire team gets poached. Moreover avoid salary escalation.

(iv) NZ wants to put other teams at disadvantage where they do not have the same talent pool to choose from as NZ , but they also cannot hire experienced talent from Australia, NZ or UK.

(v) Force nations like USA, France , Spain etc to develop their own young sailors.

 

Its probably (ii)and (iii).

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

Y

 

The only team completely national is Kiwi. The helm on the Spanish team is Australian (Phil Robertson).  The Aussie team will be all Aussie for several races because the afterguard is all Aussie and they have one non-national grinder who will not be on for all races.

We are discussing the nationality rule for AC but sailgp is good comparison because there are 8 national teams with a few non nationals on 7/8 boats.  If AC rules were strictly applied , there would probably only be 3 teams able to pull it together.

Phil Robertson is a kiwi 

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

Y

 

The only team completely national is Kiwi. The helm on the Spanish team is Australian (Phil Robertson).  The Aussie team will be all Aussie for several races because the afterguard is all Aussie and they have one non-national grinder who will not be on for all races.

We are discussing the nationality rule for AC but sailgp is good comparison because there are 8 national teams with a few non nationals on 7/8 boats.  If AC rules were strictly applied , there would probably only be 3 teams able to pull it together.

“Able to pull it together” or be competitive? They’re 2 different things. Most SailGP teams can pull together a 100% National team. The US team certainly can, the UK team can and have in the past, the Aussies, the French and the Kiwi’s. Possibly the Dutch, but they can certainly be put into the “emerging nations” category with the Spanish and the Japanese.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2021 at 10:33 AM, Mambo Kings said:

Its certainly not about returning to the roots because there was never a nationality crew rule. The Deed specified (i) The boat must be built in the nation (ii) The boat must represent a club from the challenging nation. 

The nationality of the crew went though four phases

1. Golden Age. Huge schooners and then the J Class.    Professional Crew were international and national.

2. The Revival and 12 meter era .  Crews were national through choice. Very few sailors were full time professional sailors.

3. The IACC. International pros started showing up (eg Cayard on Italian boat) and then the "great betrayal" when Allingi hired Butterworth and Coutts.  Full time sailing became well compensated.

4. The foiling era. Increasing complex and fast boats requiring a narrow elite of international sailors.  Oracle USA is infamous in San Francisco for so few Americans.  NZ is dominant and proposes a nationality rule.

Possible reasons for Nationality rule

(i) Harking back to the 12 meter era when boats represented countries and Aussies stayed up all night celebrating Aus 2.

(ii) Theory that fans support a team if the entire team is one nationality.  (Altthough jimmy spitbull did not diminish support for LR one iota)

(iii) NZ wants to prevent another incident where entire team gets poached. Moreover avoid salary escalation.

(iv) NZ wants to put other teams at disadvantage where they do not have the same talent pool to choose from as NZ , but they also cannot hire experienced talent from Australia, NZ or UK.

(v) Force nations like USA, France , Spain etc to develop their own young sailors.

 

Its probably (ii)and (iii).

(iii) is really a great motivation to shape the future of our sport!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2021 at 7:33 PM, Mambo Kings said:

Its certainly not about returning to the roots because there was never a nationality crew rule. The Deed specified (i) The boat must be built in the nation (ii) The boat must represent a club from the challenging nation. 

The nationality of the crew went though four phases

1. Golden Age. Huge schooners and then the J Class.    Professional Crew were international and national.

2. The Revival and 12 meter era .  Crews were national through choice. Very few sailors were full time professional sailors.

3. The IACC. International pros started showing up (eg Cayard on Italian boat) and then the "great betrayal" when Allingi hired Butterworth and Coutts.  Full time sailing became well compensated.

4. The foiling era. Increasing complex and fast boats requiring a narrow elite of international sailors.  Oracle USA is infamous in San Francisco for so few Americans.  NZ is dominant and proposes a nationality rule.

Possible reasons for Nationality rule

(i) Harking back to the 12 meter era when boats represented countries and Aussies stayed up all night celebrating Aus 2.

(ii) Theory that fans support a team if the entire team is one nationality.  (Altthough jimmy spitbull did not diminish support for LR one iota)

(iii) NZ wants to prevent another incident where entire team gets poached. Moreover avoid salary escalation.

(iv) NZ wants to put other teams at disadvantage where they do not have the same talent pool to choose from as NZ , but they also cannot hire experienced talent from Australia, NZ or UK.

(v) Force nations like USA, France , Spain etc to develop their own young sailors.

 

Its probably (ii)and (iii).

I think it's (V)!

And yes, Teams should develop their own Sailing Talent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Each and every designer needs to come from an oppressed minority from the county that the boat represents. each boat shall carry not less than 2 openly disclosed homosexuals living with HIV, 1 post op trans, 2 pre ops trans currently recieving hormone treatments and a pregant underserved female chosen at random by national lottery.  Furthermore - the skipper must have an agressive terminal disease and the tactician must be legally blind with a service dog. oh yeah, no electronics or storage powered technology will be allowed due to the electronic radiation concerns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Black Jack said:

Each and every designer needs to come from an oppressed minority from the county that the boat represents. each boat shall carry not less than 2 openly disclosed homosexuals living with HIV, 1 post op trans, 2 pre ops trans currently recieving hormone treatments and a pregant underserved female chosen at random by national lottery.  Furthermore - the skipper must have an agressive terminal disease and the tactician must be legally blind with a service dog. oh yeah, no electronics or storage powered technology will be allowed due to the electronic radiation concerns.

Sounds good.  The US would kick ass.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2021 at 6:31 PM, EYESAILOR said:

Surely the nationality rules make for less teams , less jobs and less opportunities for young talent.

How do the plethora of talented Australian sailors get a gig if they are excluded from participation due to nationality?

Dylan doesn’t get to sail because the UK has a bench of good sailors who can only sail for GB

The Japanese young sailors dont sail in AC because Team Japan won’t find sponsorship without a reasonable chance of winning.

This is reality of professional sport. Giles Scott (probably the2nd best fin sailor at the time missed out on an Olympic spot because he was a POM and behind BA. 

What about all the professional footballers that miss out on World Cups etc? Come from a small footballing nation as a semi pro and you could be in the WC if your country qualifies while some of the top players in the world miss out. That's life.

There are plenty of alternatives outside of the AC for professionals.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a South African supporting Shosholoza in AC32/2007 it was quite weird having a locally built boat crewed 95% by guys many of whom I've known from the local boatpark, only to have some foreigner I'd never heard of helming the boat.

 

While the AC will always be syndicate based, and run like a business. it makes sense to keep the nationality identity in it, but 100% is taking it too far in my mind.

(I think SailGP have probably got it right for season 2, although we now see some Aussies who sailed AC35 for Sweden, SailGP1 for Japan and now SailGP2 for UK)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

To say that a the "Nationality rule" proposed for the next cycle is harmful in any way to existing or potential teams is a fairly absurd claim.

There is a very small group of sailors it would affect, namely those who did not compete in this most recent cycle who's nations don't have an entry.

Those sailors affected are predominantly Australians like Slingsby and Outteridge. They really are the only 2 high profile AC/ SailGP helmsman who would be affected. The rest are already members of existing teams.

Its up to Tom and Nathan to try and convince a backer to put together an Aussie team, otherwise stay with SailGP. Thats as simple as it gets.

I still find it incredibly difficult to believe they weren't head hunted by some of the existing AC teams. Surely their expertise was sought after Bermuda. Were they contracted exclusively to SailGP at that time? Did they just not want to "reside" in the countries of which they challenged? Jimmy moved his family to Sardinia because he wanted to remain in the AC with LR, Perhaps Tom and Nathan decided for personal reasons not to? In which case, perfectly understandable, as long as you understand, the world waits for no one, and now they're on the outside looking in. 

The rule exists to prevent teams being raided and decimated of their talent. The rule isn't the problem. 

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

To say that a the "Nationality rule" proposed for the next cycle is harmful in any way to existing or potential teams is a fairly absurd claim.

There is a very small group of sailors it would affect, namely those who did not compete in this most recent cycle who's nations don't have an entry.

Those sailors affected are predominantly Australians like Slingsby and Outteridge. They really are the only 2 high profile AC/ SailGP helmsman who would be affected. The rest are already members of existing teams.

Its up to Tom and Nathan to try and convince a backer to put together an Aussie team, otherwise stay with SailGP. Thats as simple as it gets.

I still find it incredibly difficult to believe they weren't head hunted by some of the existing AC teams. Surely their expertise was sought after Bermuda. Were they contracted exclusively to SailGP at that time? Did they just not want to "reside" in the countries of which they challenged? Jimmy moved his family to Sardinia because he wanted to remain in the AC with LR, Perhaps Tom and Nathan decided for personal reasons not to? In which case, perfectly understandable, as long as you understand, the world waits for no one, and now they're on the outside looking in. 

The rule exists to prevent teams being raided and decimated of their talent. The rule isn't the problem. 

I think in Nathan's case Artemis was still a viable challenger for a while, so by the time he was freed up, all the driving slots were taken. But eve with that I can't see either of them being given the AM wheel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2021 at 11:32 PM, Forourselves said:

“Able to pull it together” or be competitive? They’re 2 different things. Most SailGP teams can pull together a 100% National team. The US team certainly can, the UK team can and have in the past, the Aussies, the French and the Kiwi’s. Possibly the Dutch, but they can certainly be put into the “emerging nations” category with the Spanish and the Japanese.

I think the really limiting factor for having more boats in the competition is cost and technology, a Nationality rule would only limit it a bit more

 I think pretty much every team in AC 36 had Spaniards in them and there are certainly enough good sailors with and without experience to run a decent program but to be honest, I don't see anyone in Spain putting up the huge amount of money needed for that.

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

 

The rule exists to prevent teams being raided and decimated of their talent. The rule isn't the problem. 

By "prevent teams being 'raided'" you mean preventing sailors from pursuing their professional goals, including establishing a fair market value for their services. In other words, restraint of trade.

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

By "prevent teams being 'raided'" you mean preventing sailors from pursuing their professional goals, including establishing a fair market value for their services. In other words, restraint of trade.

You are using fair market very loosely.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sailman said:

You are using fair market very loosely.  

On the contrary.

Fair market value is commonly assessed by the price someone is willing to pay for goods or services, in the absence of artificial constraints. It is a fundamental economic principle that underlies a lot of economic demand forecasting models, including the one I developed for my Master's thesis in economics (MSc) in the mid 1970s.

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

On the contrary.

Fair market value is commonly assessed by the price someone is willing to pay for goods or services, in the absence of artificial constraints. It is a fundamental economic principle that underlies a lot of economic demand forecasting models, including the one I developed for my Master's thesis in economics (MSc) in the mid 1970s.

If you want to define the market as a niche in a niche in a niche, then sure.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How 'deep' is the nationality rule being proposed?

Does it require a national origin birth cert? Sptihill is an American now, right?

Or can one 'move' to X country for a few years and qualify as a resident by the time the gun goes off?

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

By "prevent teams being 'raided'" you mean preventing sailors from pursuing their professional goals, including establishing a fair market value for their services. In other words, restraint of trade.

There is nothing stopping sailors from "pursuing their professional goals". There is plenty of professional circuits around the world to do just that.

If they want to do the AC, there are pathways, but they have to be willing to take them.

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

On the contrary.

Fair market value is commonly assessed by the price someone is willing to pay for goods or services, in the absence of artificial constraints. It is a fundamental economic principle that underlies a lot of economic demand forecasting models, including the one I developed for my Master's thesis in economics (MSc) in the mid 1970s.

Isn't this exactly what ETNZ is doing by supposedly "shopping the venue around"? 

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

Isn't this exactly what ETNZ is doing by supposedly "shopping the venue around"? 

Yes, it is.

You have to remember that it is not ETNZ that holds the Cup. RNZYS is the trustee holding the Cup. ETNZ can shop it around all they want, but only RNZYS can "sell" it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, accnick said:

Yes, it is.

You have to remember that it is not ETNZ that holds the Cup. RNZYS is the trustee holding the Cup. ETNZ can shop it around all they want, but only RNZYS can "sell" it.

Semantics. RNZYS selects its representative (ETNZ) ETNZ created ACE to manage the event. Together ETNZ and ACE "sell" the event, the same way ACEA and OTUSA "sold" AC34 and 35, which is why GGYC, even though they did not agree, could not stop Oracle Team USA defending the cup in a foreign territory.

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

Semantics. RNZYS selects its representative (ETNZ) ETNZ created ACE to manage the event. Together ETNZ and ACE "sell" the event, the same way ACEA and OTUSA "sold" AC34 and 35, which is why GGYC, even though they did not agree, could not stop Oracle Team USA defending the cup in a foreign territory.

Did ETNZ pay for memberships and get people elected as RNZYS directors? Then they learned well from Larry.  

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

Did ETNZ pay for memberships and get people elected as RNZYS directors? Then they learned well from Larry.  

Nah. RNZYS has a bit more class than that.

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

Isn't this exactly what ETNZ is doing by supposedly "shopping the venue around"? 

So you are happy for TNZ to shop the event around but to limit the ability of sailors to do the very same thing? Or are do you support the limits on the sailors and deride the shopping of the event. Hard to keep up some days.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2021 at 5:32 PM, Forourselves said:

. Most SailGP teams can pull together a 100% National team. The US team certainly can, the UK team can and have in the past, the Aussies, the French and the Kiwi’s. Possibly the Dutch, but they can certainly be put into the “emerging nations” category with the Spanish and the Japanese.

If Spain is going to be defined as an "emerging nation", that will open a lot of doors.

Spain has numerous sailing achievements including Olympic gold medals ( a dozen I can think of), Volvo offshore sailing campaigns and four Americas Cup Campaigns post the 12 meters.

Aussie could  be defined as an emerging nation, they havent put up a team for the AC for 20+ years.  Arguably Switzerland is an emerging nation.  

I think the definition of an EM can be any team that didnt participate in 2020/21 AC.

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

How 'deep' is the nationality rule being proposed?

Does it require a national origin birth cert? Sptihill is an American now, right?

Or can one 'move' to X country for a few years and qualify as a resident by the time the gun goes off?

Either:

1) Be a passport holder of the country the team’s yacht club as at 19 March 2021

2) Physically present in that country for two of the previous three years prior to 18 March 2021.      Note that time spent in NZ as an AC team member counts towards time spent physically present in team country.

FWIW Jimmy Spithill can sail for Australia (passport) , USA (passport) and Italy (Physically present)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites