America's Cup Shambles...latest

I dont see what it has to do with US Courts. Alinghi have the right to hold the race where they choose. If the yanks havnt got the 'bottle' to turn up without 'fixing it' as usual 'f**k them they LOSE!
 
Viking said:
I dont see what it has to do with US Courts. Alinghi have the right to hold the race where they choose. If the yanks havnt got the 'bottle' to turn up without 'fixing it' as usual 'f**k them they LOSE!
Click to expand...

Not so. The deed of gift states that during the "winter" months the venue must be in the southern hemisphere. At the last hearing, with the consent of both teams, the judge changed this to allow Valencia and only Valencia in the northern hemisphere. The date had previously been fixed as February.

Yet for some reason Ernesto thought he could hold it in the Emirates.

The US courts have jurisdiction because that's where the deed of gift was written all those years ago.
It really is not BMW that are fixing this, it's Ernesto.
 
Viking said:
I dont see what it has to do with US Courts. Alinghi have the right to hold the race where they choose. If the yanks havnt got the 'bottle' to turn up without 'fixing it' as usual 'f**k them they LOSE!
Click to expand...

Alinghi can choose either a Deed compliant venue or come to mutual consent. They don't have mutual consent and as the race date is February, the UAE isn't deed compliant as it's not summer there (being in the Northern Hemisphere).

Alinghi also had the ridiculous "must not exceed" means "must exactly equal" claim thrown out.

As the deed is governed by the state of New York law that's who decides the legal disputes.

The other motions are even more crucial to ensuring fairness.
 
This **** puts sailing in to more disrepute than F1, it is time the sailing community demonstrated their voice in all this. These two Billionaires should settle the trophy on the water, then be politely banned from the sport!
 
Fairness certainly does exist...

in the American Version of English.

Most often, US Citizens hear this word frequently near an election day. It is almost ALWAYS used by members of one of our political parties. It of course refers to the idea that people you likely don't know - will be taking money from your pocket and spending it. They plan on spending your money on "something" that they think will soon get them more votes (most likely) and incessantly repeat the word "fairness" to anyone - especially those from the media - within listening range. The operative theory being that the more times that one repeats an "adjective" - the more true it must be. By repeated mouthings of the word "fairness" - you are supposed to feel better or more noble about having your money squandered in some obscure fashion.

While I might like to keep the money in pocket, it is (after all) only "fair" that someone I don't know can snatch the fruits of my labor, squander it, and tell me how noble and beneficial it is. Fairness, you see..

Almost always, this idea of US Fairness is accompanied by an endless and mostly unseen horde of lawyers figuring out angles so that the "Faired Person" doesn't really realize just how badly they have been suckered.

Dr. Johnson would have immediately latched on this concept - as that it would also be explained to him of the financial benefit of becoming a consulting wordsmith to a horde of busy lawyers.

Of course we have an US definition of fairness... It's just closely associated with lawyers and their concept of billing.

-jr
 
Last edited:
I am disgusted with Ellison's role in this whole affair. He seems to have decided that as he can't win the cup fair and square on the water he will buy it through his lawyers.

AFAIK there is nothing wrong or unfair about using the Emirates as a venue at the time proposed, if Oracle are opposing it it has nothing to do with fairness.

It is only in the last few years that AmCup has come out of the doldrums and become a serious sporting contest. What was done for the 32nd cup, and what Alinghi had been proposing for the 33rd were undoubtedly in the best interests of the competition and the sport as a whole.

Ellison has single-handedly put the whole cause back to the bad old days of the 80s
 
Americas Cup always had an aura of the Pinnacle of yachting Competition. Over the last years - it has taken on the mantle of an expensive "boxing match" of words and legalities.
On one hand Oracle is right that once measured - boat cannot be increased or changed .... that's reasonable. But the venue, yes the Deed did state Southern Hemisphere and later had Valencia added ... Valencia !! That's funny as it's more north than RaK ... which at that time of year RaK is not so bad !! Bit windy though - but isn't that what is needed ??

Personally - there's something else behind this ... and us minions not being the super-leagues of these people will only find out after the fact probably !!

The whole Americas Cup is a joke now ... IMHO bring back proper boats, bring back proper rules, bring back proper racing ... and keep it out of money grabbing lawyers and courts ! Isn't it about time it was given over to International Panel instead of US ?? Let's be honest - we call it Americas Cup based on the longevity of their winning it repeatedly originally.
 
"we call it Americas Cup based on the longevity of their winning it repeatedly originally."

Err, no actually. We call it the America's cup because America was name of the schooner that first won the race (a lap of the IOW).

The Brit boats sailed what they thought was the course (outside of Bem Ledge), whereas the Septics went inside the ledge.

Thus, the cup has always been mired in controversy.
 
Last edited:
bedouin said:
I am disgusted with Ellison's role in this whole affair. He seems to have decided that as he can't win the cup fair and square on the water he will buy it through his lawyers.

AFAIK there is nothing wrong or unfair about using the Emirates as a venue at the time proposed, if Oracle are opposing it it has nothing to do with fairness.

It is only in the last few years that AmCup has come out of the doldrums and become a serious sporting contest. What was done for the 32nd cup, and what Alinghi had been proposing for the 33rd were undoubtedly in the best interests of the competition and the sport as a whole.

Ellison has single-handedly put the whole cause back to the bad old days of the 80s
Click to expand...

I'm no fan of Ellison, but I don't see him as the arch villan in all of this.

Ernesto won the last cup, and immidiately organised a challenge by a sham yacht club so that he had control over the challenger of reccord. He then released the rules for the next cup, which were very obviously biased in the defender's favour. Chiefly the bizare rule that the challenger series would be run in the existing boats but the cup itself would happen in a new type of boat. Meaning massive costs for the challengers who would have to develop two types of boat, whilst the defender could use all its resources on one boat.

Ellison brought togther a consortium of other challengers and wrote to Ernersto, which basically said "hey Ernesto, what was wrong with the last set of rules? The ones that produced the best cup in memory?"

Ernesto said no.

So Larry challenged the legitimacy of his challenger of record.
Won, and became challenger of record.

So Larry and co say "Ok, so how about a cup with the same rules as last time, but in your new class of boat?"

Ernesto said no.

So Larry and co challenged in a daft boat, in an attempt to get Ernesto to negotiate, but he called their bluff.

So a challenge in multis.

Larry and Co said "lets get this over with asap"

Ernesto said no, we need 2 years to build a multi.

So Larry went to court, and got the court to set a date. As this date was in February 2010, and this would normally require a southern hemisphere venue the court also stated that Valencia could be the venue, or any mutually agreed venue.

Meanwhile the boats were launched, and the Alinghi boat turned out to have powered winches.

It then emerges that Ernesto has done a deal with ISAF (who run the racing rules) and they were going to change some rules, but wouldn't tell Larry which ones.
They also noticed that the BMW boat had overhanging rudders, so (in a change from the accepted norm) tried to get the rudders to be included in the waterline length measured.

Court said no, conventions will apply.

Now Ernesto says the venue is in the Emirates. Why? Well experts agree that the Swiss boat will likely be quicker in very light conditions but will lose this advantage in medium to strong conditions. The average wind speed in the chosen venue in February is under 3 knots.
In Valencia it is significantly more.

There was also no infostructure in place, no hangars, no team bases, no cranes, no nothing.
In clear contrast to the well established Valencia.

Every action by the defender since they crossed the line to win the last cup has been unfair.

When you hear comments by sailors speaking out aginst the actions of Ellison, they are not thinking of the fairness of the competition, but the fact that whilst there is no cup, they are not getting paid.
 
Twister_Ken said:
Forced by whom?
Click to expand...
Without agreement between Alinghi and Oracle the latest date will/has been set up the court to be Feb 2010.

In order to comply with the deed of gift that means that the race will have to held in the Southern hemisphere because there there is no other way to comply with the DoG (as interpreted by the court).
 
bedouin said:
Without agreement between Alinghi and Oracle the latest date will/has been set up the court to be Feb 2010.

In order to comply with the deed of gift that means that the race will have to held in the Southern hemisphere because there there is no other way to comply with the DoG (as interpreted by the court).
Click to expand...

Except that the court has mandated that Valencia is acceptable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

Frogmogman
My next boat.
2 3
Replies
40
Views
1K
fredrussell
F
R
Brokers.
Replies
6
Views
474
Irish Rover
Irish Rover

Share this page

Top