AC 45 World Championship Cheating??

[tomas]

Doug and Ad Hoc...

You two guys are entertaining.
Oil and water mix better.

 

[nota]

2 kilo really all this bs over 2 kilo

tempest in a teacup

the stupid is strong in this snafu

lets embarrass mega buck sponsors
over a piddle

any one really think 2 kilo will make any difference ?

 

[Corley]

It would confer some advantage with that positioning, not much though. The main point is that it's supposed to be a one design class and the additional correction weight was placed in a non prescribed part of the boat. That would mean the boat would fall outside the measurement requirements.

 

[SteveMellet]

It would confer some advantage with that positioning, not much though. The main point is that it's supposed to be a one design class and the additional correction weight was placed in a non prescribed part of the boat. That would mean the boat would fall outside the measurement requirements.

And not be eligible to compete in the event.

Earl, in this thread, mentioned that the Protocol basically rolls the AC45 events in as part of the AC - you had to compete in the 45's to be eligible for the AC.
Could this imply that ISAF could disqualify Team OR from the AC ? I am asking not to provoke OR supporters, but to get a better understanding, so please don't take this question as an attack on your team. I'm asking, could ISAF rule that OR has failed to meet the entrance requirement of the AC, according to the Protocol if the Protocol required teams to do the AC45 circuit, since they voluntarily withdrew from a large portion of the AC45 events ? Or would some other fine be imposed (perhaps not by ISAF, but the AC events management body - was there a fine for not attending one or more AC45 events, if a team did not attend an AC45 event ? And could this be retroactively imposed on OR for withdrawing their entries from those events ? If according the the event Protocol, you had to do a certain number of AC45 events to qualify for the AC, have OR complied with this requirement, after withdrawing from so many events ?) I am asking out of interest, I would sincerely hope that this can be resolved without damage to the AC event as a whole. I would hate to have OR removed from this event, and the final be between two boats whom we already know the outcome of.
One thing is for sure, books will be written about this AC, lawyers and authors are rubbing their hands..

 

[motorbike]

any one really think 2 kilo will make any difference ?

Its 2.5 kg about x number of metres from the CG, its also 2.5 kg not in the aft end of these boats which are a tad heavy in the rear. Its also not meant to be there in a one design and it may simply be the lead they forgot about removing.

Your argument is to reduce the infraction to absurdity, but you havent noticed that OR have admitted not complying and there is an IJ investigation. This will get uglier!

 

[SteveMellet]

Is there a date set for the IJ hearing's findings to be made public, or do they first refer their findings to ISAF for a decision on the penalty and who takes it. Does ISAF or the IJ decide the penalty ? Will this be sorted out before the AC Finals ? Sorry for all the questions, if someone knows this stuff it is much easier to ask it here than for me to spend the rest of the week reading about it..

 

[nota]

A CREW MAN MOVED 1'' ON THE RAIL
would have a far greater effect on fore-aft trim
then 2 kilos

really this kind of BS is not doing the sport any good
I see no point in investigations or calling this BS cheating

mostlikely some gofer did it out of lazyness or error
hardly a plot to cheat

more like a plot to get back at the corprats involved ?

and if the boats needed repairs why not just add material reinforcements
to the unbroken boats weak points ?
why add lead at all to cat ?

 

[Doug Lord]

The report of the jury is the only opinion that matters now-it's in their hands.

 

[motorbike]

and if the boats needed repairs why not just add material reinforcements
to the unbroken boats weak points ?
why add lead at all to cat ?

You have answered your own question. Lets see how it plays out

 

[Doug Lord]

From Scuttlebutt- Interview with Russell Coutts:
http://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2...Newsletter&utm_term=Weighing in on WeightGate

 

[SteveMellet]

From XS Sailing :

COULD ORACLE BE DISQUALIFIED FROM THE AMERICA'S CUP ?

"The international jury is investigating and could punish Oracle with a fine, forfeiture of races or disqualification from the America’s Cup.

Any punishment would be another smudge on an already troubled regatta."

 

[michael pierzga]

I suspect that forfeiture of the races is what will happen. The guilty crews will suffer a financial penalty. These crews, teams, work for a salary plus a perfomance bonus. No results, no bonus.

Disqaulification from the Americas cup would be a draconian penalty. It would be bad for the sport and just wont happen

 

[SteveMellet]

Michael, While I agree with you on this, I am a little skeptical about RC's last sentence in the Scuttlebutt interview Doug linked to. I would prefer it if the IJ had determined this fact, rather than the team itself, as the team has vested interests in ensuring that non-sailing team members of a lower order will carry the blame, regardless of who actually decided it would be a good idea to modify the boats, so when they do hang the scapegoats out to dry I will have a tough time believing them, unless some management level team members are outed, which won't happen based on RC's comments.
I'm not really sure how Team OR will retain it's integrity after all this, although a small 'error', it has large implications in a sport which is self-governing and relies on honesty between all involved.
I think that is why ISAF takes infringements like this very seriously, if they don't impose a very harsh penalty, they will just be endorsing this type of behaviour.

 

[michael pierzga]

Well...In my opinion the entire sailing team is guilty. In formula one they dont penalize the pit crew for racing with an illegal car.

I dont know the hierarchy of the team..whether the big guys at the top, the CEO or whatever they call themselves, are liable .

Too much punishment is counterproductive.

 

[CutOnce]

Doug,

I applaud your enthusiasm for the endless postings. But, again, posting articles from others, which are simply hearsay with “some facts” (though independently unproven), since they even admit “what really happened?” is not going to solve anything. Unless you think posters on BDForum have sufficient weight to affect the outcome of a race or a rule or a court's proceedings and judgement on the AC?..i think not, that is somewhat delusion, don’t you think??

All it shall do, is raise the usual stakes of my dog is bigger than your dog arguments. Since everyone will pipe up with their own opinions and “quotes” from others to support their own assertions. Regrettably whilst your intentions are genuine, it all becomes subverted for polemic attack by others for their own agenda. Thus why post these; it just brings out the deadwood and meaningless arguments over nothing at all.

He does it because it succeeds brilliantly in his own frame of reference.

This speculative thread is now three pages long and growing. Doug is incredibly successful at initiating discussions, germinating conflict and catalysing other people to engage on subjects he is interested in. Doug is without a doubt a defacto Huffington Post of the boating world, aggregating content and generating endless commentary.

As builders, technologists, Engineers, Naval Architects and amateur designers many people here might expect a primarily polite technical objective forum for open discussion of a wide range of boat design issues. I'm not saying my personal expectations are right. It is the majority of forum members and web site owner that have directed and permitted the conversations to go where they are today.

--
CutOnce