AC36 CLASS RULE

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,904
2,346
New Zealand
There was no vote. There was the group who would later go on to sign the London Agreement, and there was the rest.

Luna Rossa had rights to veto, as they were Challenger of Record at that time. They waived their right to veto in favor of a "Challenger Committee" and publicly stated they did so in the name of "Goodwill and working together" as they did not want the stigma of litigation continuing on from the Oracle/ Alinghi feud of 2010. Once this happened, the Challenger Committee then conspired against Luna Rossa and formed their own committee of Oracles friends to eliminate the two strongest challengers, and the two challengers who they knew would never agree to their future Framework Agreement.

Subsequently Luna Rossa withdrew and the Qualifier regatta was pulled out from under ETNZ - illegally - (who were heavily reliant on the income gained from that regatta) because the Challenger committee "Didn't want to do it anymore". 

Everyone knows this was the case, it was the reason why 1) Luna Rossa withdrew, and 2) Harvey Schiller was forced to step down as Commissioner of Ac35 before AC35 even began, and 3) ACEA ended up having to financially compensate, or pay out ETNZ because they breached the qualifier agreement contract, and also why they had to keep the whole embarrassment quiet.

Again, Mutual Agreement exists between the Defender and Challenger of Record. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,904
2,346
New Zealand
"Yes but Ernesto and Larry did much better than TNZ" - Sure they did. Alinghi tried to create a fictitious challenger, and Oracle went through 3 Challenger Of Records because of dodgy practices.

 

inebriated

Anarchist
570
41
Australia
There was no vote. There was the group who would later go on to sign the London Agreement, and there was the rest.

Luna Rossa had rights to veto, as they were Challenger of Record at that time. They waived their right to veto in favor of a "Challenger Committee" and publicly stated they did so in the name of "Goodwill and working together" as they did not want the stigma of litigation continuing on from the Oracle/ Alinghi feud of 2010. Once this happened, the Challenger Committee then conspired against Luna Rossa and formed their own committee of Oracles friends to eliminate the two strongest challengers, and the two challengers who they knew would never agree to their future Framework Agreement.

Subsequently Luna Rossa withdrew and the Qualifier regatta was pulled out from under ETNZ - illegally - (who were heavily reliant on the income gained from that regatta) because the Challenger committee "Didn't want to do it anymore". 

Everyone knows this was the case, it was the reason why 1) Luna Rossa withdrew, and 2) Harvey Schiller was forced to step down as Commissioner of Ac35 before AC35 even began, and 3) ACEA ended up having to financially compensate, or pay out ETNZ because they breached the qualifier agreement contract, and also why they had to keep the whole embarrassment quiet.

Again, Mutual Agreement exists between the Defender and Challenger of Record. 
you really think that luna rossa were one of the two strongest challengers?

 

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,904
2,346
New Zealand
you really think that luna rossa were one of the two strongest challengers?
At the time...Of Course they were!! The two strongest at that time were ETNZ and Luna Rossa, why?? Because ETNZ were the first to foil in the Americas Cup, and had one of the two fastest AC72's on the planet, not to mention the history behind them of innovation. Luna Rossa had a tech sharing agreement with ETNZ in San Francisco, and a fully operational and well funded team with what was at that time, the only two boat campaign with an aim of being competitive in AC35. Land Rover BAR were a first time team, Japan and France were the same, first time teams, and Artemis were coming off a disastrous campaign in San Francisco. So YES, Luna Rossa and ETNZ were the two strongest challengers at that time. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

inebriated

Anarchist
570
41
Australia
At the time...Of Course they were!! The two strongest at that time were ETNZ and Luna Rossa, why?? Because ETNZ were the first to foil in the Americas Cup, and had one of the two fastest AC72's on the planet, Luna Rossa had atech sharing agreement and a fully operational and well funded team with what was at that time, the only two boat campaign. Land Rover BAR were a first time team, Japan and France were the same, first time teams, and Artemis were coming off a disastrous campaign in San Francisco. So YES, Luna Rossa and ETNZ were the two strongest challengers at that time. 
ok, fairo.

i wonder how similar they would have come out if they didn't leave to ETNZ

 

nav

Super Anarchist
14,017
551
Yes. That could happen this time too, ETNZ and Prada Steve reserving that same right. But this time, there is not even a majority vote allowed on a Protocol change they might pull.

’COR/D’ can be as wreckless as they want, other Challengers have no say at all. Would you call that fair?
:lol:

Certainly fairer than the last couple of cons...cry me an river

The COR and the Defender have earned the right to make the decisions - and they have seen how badly the 'democratic option' has been abused.

None of that BS this time. Who is it you are so very concerned about anyway?

If only you and the WCM hadn't enabled so much cheating, rule rigging and unsportsmanlike behavior!

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tornado-Cat

Super Anarchist
16,290
1,025
There was no vote. There was the group who would later go on to sign the London Agreement, and there was the rest.

Luna Rossa had rights to veto, as they were Challenger of Record at that time. They waived their right to veto in favor of a "Challenger Committee" and publicly stated they did so in the name of "Goodwill and working together" as they did not want the stigma of litigation continuing on from the Oracle/ Alinghi feud of 2010. Once this happened, the Challenger Committee then conspired against Luna Rossa and formed their own committee of Oracles friends to eliminate the two strongest challengers, and the two challengers who they knew would never agree to their future Framework Agreement.

Subsequently Luna Rossa withdrew and the Qualifier regatta was pulled out from under ETNZ - illegally - (who were heavily reliant on the income gained from that regatta) because the Challenger committee "Didn't want to do it anymore". 

Everyone knows this was the case, it was the reason why 1) Luna Rossa withdrew, and 2) Harvey Schiller was forced to step down as Commissioner of Ac35 before AC35 even began, and 3) ACEA ended up having to financially compensate, or pay out ETNZ because they breached the qualifier agreement contract, and also why they had to keep the whole embarrassment quiet.

Again, Mutual Agreement exists between the Defender and Challenger of Record. 
You are mixing up everything, yes LR had veto rights but they let it go because, that was the general consensus at the time, they mixed up the unimity vote for the rule with the majority for the prot. So, yes, there were 2 votes.

And perhaps because there was a long history of competitor forum. You confuse the Deed rights and the MC use.

 

Tornado-Cat

Super Anarchist
16,290
1,025
"Yes but Ernesto and Larry did much better than TNZ" - Sure they did. Alinghi tried to create a fictitious challenger, and Oracle went through 3 Challenger Of Records because of dodgy practices.
And despite all the fuss around it had less impact on competitors than giving them no right.

 

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,904
2,346
New Zealand
And despite all the fuss around it had less impact on competitors than giving them no right.
Less impact? How do you figure? 3 CoR's withdrew, 3! Every other Cup, there was a CoR that retained Veto rights, and no arguments. Oracle comes along, and suddenly three CoR's have withdrawn, already established Class Rules are being changed mid cycle, event management staff are resigning before the event begins, contracts are being broken and challenging teams are being financially compensated in secret. Oracles shenanigans have had more of an impact (and not in a good way) than any other cup cycle, which is why its a good thing they have been eliminated. Luna Rossa have proved to be a team who are willing to work together. But there needs to be a leader, a person who makes the decisions in the best interests of the challenger group and the Cup. It takes away the opportunity for challengers to create factions inside the challenger group to manipulate the proceedings as was evident in Bermuda.

 

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,904
2,346
New Zealand
You are mixing up everything, yes LR had veto rights but they let it go because, that was the general consensus at the time, they mixed up the unimity vote for the rule with the majority for the prot. So, yes, there were 2 votes.

And perhaps because there was a long history of competitor forum. You confuse the Deed rights and the MC use.
They "Mixed it up" hahahaha what? the only one "mixed up" is you. They PUBLICLY stated their wishes for the challenging group to work together with each other to prevent the situation Oracle went through with Alinghi, which was close to killing the AC off. That was the reason they waived their right to veto, because they thought the challengers would be able to work together in the best interests of the group. They did, those interests just didn't involve Luna Rossa. The Deed makes provision for a Defender and a Challenger of Record. Mutual consent exists between a CoR and a Defender only, not a group of challengers.

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
10,286
2,660
PNW
decisions in the best interests of the challenger group
I think we will see LR doing the right thing, taking on board input on decisions from all Challengers and hopefully by majority vote, again this time. Which is what has been the tradition and is exactly what happened during every multi-Chall Cup LE participated in too, including as CoR in AC32.

TC is right that Challs voted in their own best interests last time, whether or not OR agreed some of those votes.

The idea that teams were under some kind of financial threat from LE to vote they way they did has always been hostile conspiracy theory allegations made to try to explain away and defend ETNZ’s opposition to some of those decisions. Ironic, since much of ETNZ’s opposition was grounded in their own indebtitude and secret deal already-done with another team. They were actually the team guilty of the exact accusation being made.

Speaking of ‘cheating’ the terms of this same relationship were protested in AC34 by AR, ETNZ was found Guilty of cheating, and so GD was forced to walk back from most of the LR-ETNZ signed deal that he’d described at the first AC45 ACWS event, in Cascais, on video. He hated AR for that!

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,904
2,346
New Zealand
I think we will see LR doing the right thing, taking on board input on decisions from all Challengers and hopefully by majority vote, again this time. Which is what has been the tradition and is exactly what happened during every multi-Chall Cup LE participated in too, including as CoR in AC32.

TC is right that Challs voted in their own best interests last time, whether or not OR agreed some of those votes.

The idea that teams were under some kind of financial threat from LE to vote they way they did has always been hostile conspiracy theory allegations made to try to explain away and defend ETNZ’s opposition to some of those decisions. Ironic, since much of ETNZ’s opposition was grounded in their own indebtitude and secret deal already-done with another team. They were actually the team guilty of the exact accusation being made.

Speaking of ‘cheating’ the terms of this same relationship were protested in AC34 by AR, ETNZ was found Guilty of cheating, and so GD was forced to walk back from most of the LR-ETNZ signed deal that he’d described at the first AC45 ACWS event, in Cascais, on video. He hated AR for that!
Link or it didn't happen.

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
10,286
2,660
PNW
Link or it didn't happen.
It’s a fact, ETNZ was found to be cheating. Find it yourself, was pretty big news at the time since it hurt GD’s pocketbook (fundraising) and prompted a hostile, aggressive reaction.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,904
2,346
New Zealand
It’s a fact, ETNZ was found to be cheating. Find it yourself, was pretty big news at the time since it hurt GD’s pocketbook (fundraising) and prompted a hostile, aggressive reaction.
Searched "ETNZ was found to be cheating" Even Google can't seem to find it, plenty on Oracle cheating though.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
10,286
2,660
PNW
Searched "ETNZ was found to be cheating" Even Google can't seem to find it, plenty on Oracle cheating though.
You have to know how to use Google. This one took me 3 seconds to find


VSail.info: A recent development in the America’s Cup was a Jury decision regarding the alliance between Emirates Team New Zealand and Luna Rossa. If I’m not mistaken your team was the first to ask the Jury to rule on that cooperation between the two challengers. I have to admit I’m not aware of the details of that issue or what is at stake. Can you talk about it? Are you satisfied with the Jury’s ruling?

Paul Cayard: Yes, we are satisfied. The Jury ruled in line with our thinking which is that Luna Rossa and Emirates Team New Zealand cannot do what they said they would do. You haven’t read a lot about it because, basically, the ruling went against them and Grant Dalton hasn’t been speaking about that one as much as he’s speaking about the ones that go his way. It’s a big knock against them and they can’t sail the two boats against each other. It’s a big knock against their plans but it’s completely logical and it’s what Oracle Racing and we always believed to be the case and now the Jury confirmed that.

https://www.sail-world.com/Australia/Americas-Cup--Paul-Cayard-on-the-latest-Cup-developments/-92877?source=google

 

Tornado-Cat

Super Anarchist
16,290
1,025
They "Mixed it up" hahahaha what? the only one "mixed up" is you. They PUBLICLY stated their wishes for the challenging group to work together with each other to prevent the situation Oracle went through with Alinghi, which was close to killing the AC off. That was the reason they waived their right to veto, because they thought the challengers would be able to work together in the best interests of the group.
Yes, they thought that would happen with the AC62, they did not understand that only majority was sufficient to change the boat, which was in the interest of most competitors. Pretty stupid move in the AC world.

 

Team_GBR

Super Anarchist
1,025
29
The Medal Race
Stingray

Don't be a complete dickhead. What you are quoting is nothing to do with cheating. ETNZ and Luna Rossa were very public about how they were going to cooperate and before they did anything, there was a ruling that some of their cooperation was not allowed by the rules. They did nothing wrong at all.

To the NZ fanboys

The change of the boat rule was agreed by the majority as stipulated by the protocol. Get over it. It was 100% legal. If you want to believe that teams like Artemis and BAR voted for the change because they were indebted to Oracle, so be it, but the idea is laughable. Just as laughable is the idea that the rule change was to hamstring LR. All the technology and ideas for the 62 would have worked for the 50, as evidenced by ETNZ who picked up the best of LR's technology and continued to develop their boat into a winner. Bertelli simply spat the dummy and in the process, probably lost his best chance ever of winning the AC.

 

Tornado-Cat

Super Anarchist
16,290
1,025
Less impact? How do you figure? 3 CoR's withdrew, 3! Every other Cup, there was a CoR that retained Veto rights, and no arguments. Oracle comes along, and suddenly three CoR's have withdrawn, already established Class Rules are being changed mid cycle, event management staff are resigning before the event begins, contracts are being broken
The CoR changed because they were not real competitors and changes were made at the majority vote, which did not please TNZ, as it can happen in any democracy.

The new AC is a dictatorship: spend $ 100 M and  you have no right whatsoever, and we can change the rules at will.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

nav

Super Anarchist
14,017
551
^ Harpo and Groucho - a couple of disenfranchised idiots firing into the crowd

 
Top