Gladwell's Line- A rough week for the Cup at 60 Centre Street

by Richard Gladwell on 28 Oct 2009 Justice Shirley Kornreich's decisions, handed down from the Bench of the New York Supreme Court at 60 Centre Street, New York, should have surprised no-one.

Like the other Decisions that have emanated from the Bench of that Court, all are consistent with the literal meaning of the words contained within the Four Corners of the of the Deed of Gift, for what was the premier trophy in sailing.

The words 'America's Cup' have now become a general byline for long run litigation in sport, that benefits no-one.

How long will it take the parties to realise that continued obstinacy is an exercise in self-destruction?

The Auld Mug has had a colourful history. But the events of this week with the lodging of an action for Breach of Fiduciary Duty against the current Trustee of the America's Cup, Societe Nautique de Geneve plus Kornreich's Decision today on the Venue, represent a new low point in Cup annals.

For its part, the sailing world has reacted with muted shock and bewilderment at this week's turn of events.

The Decisions from Centre Street are consistent with the thinking of anyone who has a modicum of understanding of sailing administration, sailing rules, how sailing regattas are put together.

Such practical knowledge is essential to grasp what can and can't be done in terms of the Deed of Gift, as it was drafted by sailors and is a simple document describing how the Matches for the America's Cup should be run.

In the late 19th century, as now, the intent of donors was clear - that the America's Cup should be a regatta staged between yacht clubs of different nations on terms agreed between the Defender, the current holder of the Cup, and the first Challenger who met the requirements of the Deed of Gift.

Such a Club should have an annual regatta on the open sea, and if it won the Match would be able to Defend the America's Cup on its home waters, ten months after receiving the next Challenge.

If the two Clubs couldn't agree on the conditions for the Match, then the Deed of Gift specifies a basic regatta of three races, and states the courses to be used.

The Match is so simple in its format that the course could be laid with just a single Committee Boat, three marks, and two mark laying boats.

Most club racing conducted around the world in thousands of clubs every weekend, is way more complex than this.

Measurement is equally basic, needing just a plumbline, a marker pen, and a 90ft measuring tape.

So far, so good.

Now get the egos, visionaries and lawyers involved.

One of the problems with visionaries is that sometimes they can see too much. Their other problem is that they need to be able to lead and take people with them, not prescribe. It's about leadership.

At some stage before July 2007, all sailing logic and race management process seems to have flown out the door. The meaning of words in a 122 year old, two page document, were bent every which way, so that some new interpretation of how things could be done emerged.

Quite why it was necessary to change what was essentially a successful format, in a good venue has never been explained. And, why it was necessary for the Defender to assume many of the rights of the Challenger is still a mystery.

For many years there has been the catch-cry that the Deed of Gift needs reform to run what used to be one of the most prestigious competitions in sailing. Always the answer was the same 'if you want to change it, first win the America's Cup.'

None of those who have been vociferous in the call for reform have ever won the America's Cup, and have had the opportunity to put their fine thoughts into reality. And so the Cup has stayed the same.

By and large, the game doesn't need to change - provided organisers have a basic understanding of the Deed of Gift, and run a regatta that is consistent with the Deed of Gift. No tricks, no distortions and with constrained vision.

The flaw in the Deed of Gift for the America's Cup has alway been in its transition process between Cups. To work effectively this requires a competitive relationship between the Challenger and the Defender not a conniving one.

The transition process worked reasonably well, in its various forms (save for the 1988 Mismatch, bred out of the frustration with the Defender trying to maximise the game) until the America's Cup was won by Societe Nautique de Geneve, a landlocked club which did not conduct its regular racing on the sea.

At that point the phrase 'bidding the venue', of necessity, re-entered the America's Cup lexicon, and the current issues were perhaps inevitable.

Before the 32nd America's Cup there is no way that a Club who won the America's Cup would have been allowed by its membership, or country, to hold a Defence away from its home or national waters.

As with the Olympics, bidding the venue invites money and egos to come into play and inevitably the power games, and behind the scenes action begin. With Valencia some delicate footsteps on thin political ice were enough to carry the day for a great regatta. Ras al-Khaimah proved to be an Emirate too far.

Where to from here?

It's time to back up the truck. Accept the America's Cup for the simple, basic game it can be, and run it that way.

Accept Valencia as the venue. Take the date of 8 February 2010 that has been set.

If the regatta can't be financed by a combination of sponsorship, TV rights and modest event fees, then charge the competitors an entry fee that does cover the costs of the competition - the same as happens in every other regatta in the world. The time for brinkmanship has long gone. Everyone is tired of it.

Accept the ISAF appointed International Jury and Race Officials. Give them the power to act, independently, and trust them to get on and do what they do best.

Forget the blamestorming. Right now, a bit of forgiveness will go a long way.

And give the sailing world the Match they deserve - between two great teams, sailing two of the most spectacular, most powerful and technologically advanced yachts in history.

It won't fix the damage that has been done, but it might ease some of the pain.

Now is the time to move on.