Ok, I'll backpedal here. "Cheating" was too harsh a word. I don't accuse Oracle of cheating, but I used the term to oppose the notion that Oracle would be right to win "by hook or by crook". The ends don't justify the means.

Of all the video interviews I've seen, I'm most impressed with Tom Slingsby's. He didn't pedal any PR story; he didn't badmouth any other teams - he just said (in paraphrase) 'here is our current elevator, here is a big one for the proposed rule change, and here is an asymmetric one. We'll use whatever elevators the jury decides'. Tom showed real class in that video.

John Kostecki, when asked about the adjustable rudder rake, explained how the system worked, but sidestepped a reply to the question of whether it was a performance or safety control. At least he had the grace not to pitch the corporate line.

I have the utmost admiration for Jimmy Spithill's talent, but I'm disappointed with his assertion that adjusting rudder rake between races is "definitely needed for safety". Clearly, it isn't. Oracle could set the rake on shore for the highest expected wind speed that day and be every bit as safe. The boat just wouldn't be quite as fast early on when the winds are lighter. Therefore, it's a performance control. Jimmy is selling the PR story.

Again, I have great respect for Russell Coutts' ability, but am saddened by his descent into name-calling. It doesn't help his team nor the sport to make personal attacks on the other teams.

Spithill and Coutts appear to be aligning Team Oracle up squarely behind Iain Murray. Certainly they have supported his claims and his actions - despite how outlandish his statements have become. That makes me distrust Oracle's motives, and possibly suspect their involvement. Certainly, Oracle is the principle beneficiary of Murray's subversion of the rules.

I'm going to watch the racing - most definitely - despite these antics.

Regards,
Eric