The AC 37 has started, news and rumours

[Dolphin65]

Can someone explain why the stakeholders (UK & NZ) are trying to convince the world that the Isle of Wight Challenge would be the classical and best way to play the match? They should also explain why we have been playing multi challengers series for decades! 

We say this is "arrampicarsi sugli specchi" (climbing a mirror)

I am now understanding why so many people over this board is hating Ben Ainsle, the whining boy who was crying because he was left out of a press conference!

Now he is knocking out all the potential challengers from the show, so he can be the only dummy on the stage. What a loser.

 

[jaysper]

Can someone explain why the stakeholders (UK & NZ) are trying to convince the world that the Isle of Wight Challenge would be the classical and best way to play the match? They should also explain why we have been playing multi challengers series for decades! 

We say this is "arrampicarsi sugli specchi" (climbing a mirror)

I am now understanding why so many people over this board is hating Ben Ainsle, the whining boy who was crying because he was left out of a press conference!

Now he is knocking out all the potential challengers from the show, so he can be the only dummy on the stage. What a loser.

I'm not sure it's actually Ben's doing.

This will be at the whim of Ratcliffe and Dalton.

Ben may (or may not) agree with this - who the fuck knows.

However unless Ben has found a spare $100 Million down the back of his couch that he doesn't really need, then he will do exactly what the fuck Ratcliffe tells him to.

 

[accnick]

I was also asking myself if they can actually implement a retroactive clause in a Protocol. As far as I know you can't be took to a court for something that wasn't illegal when you did it.
But not sure about the AC, and, in case, is the NYSC the court to appeal to?
Help of the serious guys/girls here is very welcome.

This is not a matter of law.

The Defender and Challenger might agree to all kinds of things that might preclude or constrain a potential participant, as long as they don't violate the Deed of Gift.

The point was that no one in their right mind would be spending money on development of any kind right now without knowing what the rules of the game are going to be.

 

[Paddywackery]

I'm not sure it's actually Ben's doing.

This will be at the whim of Ratcliffe and Dalton.

Ben may (or may not) agree with this - who the fuck knows.

However unless Ben has found a spare $100 Million down the back of his couch that he doesn't really need, then he will do exactly what the fuck Ratcliffe tells him to.

And unless ETNZ can find a similar trouser full of cash, they will also do what JR tells them. Simples. And the normal AC with challengers and all the pomp and circumstance will follow thereafter. 

 

[Dolphin65]

So in the end it's only a matter of a Rat!

A bitter end for the AC 

 

[Paddywackery]

So in the end it's only a matter of a Rat!

A bitter end for the AC 

Not exactly, an interruption I would suggest. And this is far from a done deal.

 

[Tornado-Cat]

If I get it right the hip pocket challenge was only invented after the 1988 DoG challenge. 

Before that the NYYC didn’t pick a Challenger of Record. They issued the date of the next AC and put out rules for the CSS. Kind of like a Notice of Race for the AC. 
 

Thanks, if you are right that answers my question

 

[Tornado-Cat]

1) Unless I am misunderstanding you, the hip pocket challenger has been challenged successfully in court before. More specifically, in 2010. The Deed does not open the challenge to "any" YC, but rather has some requirements the YC has to meet. The YC SNEV chose as challenger after the 2007 AC did not meet the Deed requirements so GGYC challenged the selection of the CoR, and NY courts agreed and ruled the challenge void, which opened the way for GGYC to challenge and led to the DoG match.

2) I'm certainly not aware of any defender picking a challenger in order to eliminate other YCs and make their own private race, but I'd be surprised if that didn't happen given how many 1v1 matches there have been. In other words, can a defender have a favorite challenger? Sure. I imagine that happened many times. 

1) Yes, the "any" inludes prerequisites

2) This is what I am wondering, and could explain why no YC ever challenged in court the notion of hip pocket as they were invited to the party and respected the "any YC"

IMO, what they did is completely Deed legal if they are only two at the party as both want to race AC38 with the AC75.

However there are two litigious points:

1) If they make their own private party, excluding others, like the NYYC, thank to the notion of hip pocket

2) If they invite other YCs and at the condition that they accept the AC38 protocol, or any kind of binding, prior to the end of AC37.

 

[Rennmaus]

...
However there are two litigious points:

1) If they make their own private party, excluding others, like the NYYC, thank to the notion of hip pocket

2) If they invite other YCs and at the condition that they accept the AC38 protocol, or any kind of binding, prior to the end of AC37.

No. 1 is perfectly Deed legal, I'm afraid.
No. 2 certainly not.

 

[Tornado-Cat]

No. 1 is perfectly Deed legal, I'm afraid.
No. 2 certainly not.

No 1, perhaps, but if the notion of hip pocket for a private party is legal, then the 2 YCs can keep the cup forever, and it goes again the words of the Deed: "friendy competition between coutries" and "any YC".

 

[Rennmaus]

No 1, perhaps, but if the notion of hip pocket for a private party is legal, then the 2 YCs can keep the cup forever, and it goes again the words of the Deed: "friendy competition between coutries" and "any YC".

That was already discussed yesterday or the day before. Mutual consent 1:1 matches have been the norm for ages. A multi challenger AC is nothing that the DoG mandates. Nobody has a right for a multi chall AC.
There were several reasons why ping-pong cups cannot happen for a longer time. One is that the trust must not lead to a bizarre outcome (the actual legal term is different but I've forgotten it). There were other, even better arguments in the discussion.

 

[Indio]

FWIW, this is a copy of the Commodore's letter.  Not as dramatic as hopped-up Granny Herald would have it but certainly a thumbs down on a one-on-one match in Cowes. Interestingly enough, a thumbs-up on the AC 75 Class.












March 20, 2021, for immediate release. 
 

New York Yacht Club Congratulates Emirates Team
New Zealand on Winning the 36th America's Cup​

.... The Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron and the Royal Yacht Squadron hold the future of our sport’s premier trophy in the palm of their collective hands....

As part of the New York Yacht Club's return to this great competition after two decades away, we spent significant time developing a draft Protocol that would blend the history, tradition and idiosyncrasies that makes the America's Cup so special with the commercial tools and non-partisan governance required to succeed in the world of modern sport. When our challenger, New York Yacht Club American Magic, was eliminated from the competition, we shared this Protocol with every competitor in the 36th America's Cup and a number of key Cup stakeholders. It was very well received by nearly everyone who read it. We are encouraged to see that, according to the press release from Emirates Team New Zealand, the Protocol for the 37th America's Cup will incorporate at least some of the tenets of our vision, including stronger nationality rules, a commitment to multiple cycles in the same boat, a more powerful event authority and cost-reduction measures.

However, a Deed of Gift match off the Isle of Wight, as reported by the New Zealand Herald to be under consideration, would be a huge step in the wrong direction. The two previous Deed of Gift matches, in 1988 and 2010, were distinct low points in the history of the America's Cup. Regardless of the conditions, the New York Yacht Club will not support a Deed of Gift match or an America's Cup competition that, due to the schedule and rules for competition, is effectively open to only the Defender and Challenger of Record.....

Sincerely,

Christopher J. Culver, Commodore
New York Yacht Club 

LOL!! Now what will these dumbass muppets who've been losing their rags over a never-event going to complain about now?? Only RNZYS can decide on any AC37 Challenge, and the I-of-W wet-dream is just that.

They'll go back to arguing about the condition of entry requirements :lol:

 

[chesirecat]

True or speculations? It looks like high numbers here

PB mentioned it a year or so ago.

 

[1eyedkiwi]

Dunno, all I know is as a Kiwi I would prefer no ETNZ to this current behaviour.

Remember that we actually don't know what the 'current behaviour' is yet.  Nothing has been decided.

I still maintain that it is simply a negotiating tactic to make sure the NZ Govt and Auckland City Council realise that if they want the AC in Auckland they will need to pay a lot.  We will also see a new sponsor step in to fill Emirates shoes - or maybe they will front up again.  ETNZ are a great brand to be associated with.  Surely it can't be that hard for GD to find a replacement or 2 in the next few months if he needs to.

I don't think we will see a DoG match in the UK.  The actual press issued refers to draft protocol for the AC37 that clearly is talking about a multi-challenger event not a single DoG regatta.   So if they go to the UK it will just be exhibition races - like Alinghi and Oracle did post-2003.  I think ETNZ would do it even if it was on the basis that Ineos was paying for ETNZ to compete - transport, wages etc - that way ETNZ would be able to pay salaries for the team through until after the event while they sign up full sponsors for AC37.

The only known 'behaviour' that you can have an issue with is with them trying to bind challengers to maintaining the class for AC38.  Any lawyer will tell you that it is in breach of the DoG.  I'm confused why they would even try it - why not just make it voluntary like OR tried.  Having said all that, it appears all current challengers like the class - and let's be honest... the winner of the AC37 will most likely be one of the four that competed at the AC36 - so maybe who cares and on the grand scheme of things its not the worst thing to do - it's not like it was before AC35 when we actually didn't know how the AC50 boats would sail.  This time we know that the AC75s are great boats and all the teams loved them.

 

[amc]

You have #4 wrong.  The proposed rules have a carve-out to allow the teams from AC36 to remain the same. Jimmy can race for LR.  Deano can rave for AM.  

Interesting also that the NYYC support and in fact proposed a strict nationality clause. 

 

[nroose]

In Bermuda when all the teams except NZ agreed to continue using the AC45 before the event was over, was this somehow in breach of the deed?

I had forgotten about this. Certainly this makes at least one of the new rules ironic!

 

[Blitzkrieg9]

Interesting also that the NYYC support and in fact proposed a strict nationality clause. 

I was SHOCKED to read that. SHOCKED.  I thought USA would fight this hard. 

 

[CheekyMonkey]

Not to insist too much, but just a small reminder:
Don't you miss the Italians? 

No disrespect to the Italians, but I was speaking mainly from the viewpoint of a Defender's backers who find themselves left out in the cold by the actions of the Cup holder.

In fact, AC36 made me quite a Bruni fan, and I have no doubt PB is not pleased, well beyond the general distaste many are feeling, and rightfully so.

There are no saints in the AC game.  It's cut throat and that's part of what makes it unique, and attractive.

However, there still must be certain principles to be a respected, and despite whatever rosy picture may be painted, or defensed by devotees, there is a distinct stench coming from what is being proposed.

Regardless of the legalese, and how that may or may not be decided, adhering to the letter of the law (in this case the DoG) can still violate the spirit of the law.

 

[weta27]

Wow, 13 pages, a frenzy of outraged indignation over something that hasn't even been decided yet?

This must set some new kind of SA record??!

(... probably not :wacko: )

 

[jaysper]

Wow, 13 pages, a frenzy of outraged indignation over something that hasn't even been decided yet?

This must set some new kind of SA record??!

(... probably not :wacko: )

To be fair Weta, they are ALREADY well and truly on record stating:

1. That the Isle of Wight is a possibility (a bit of a dick move, but I don't much are about this).

2. That they are trying to set the class of boat in stone for the next TWO cups (which I am rather apoplectic about).