Connect with us

Published

on

Ex-pat Prince Harrys memoir, titled Spare in a likely jab at his father King Charles III, is set to be released on January 10 but if the sneak peeks are any indication, the entire tome appears to be a compilation of unaired grievances and instances of unresolved sibling rivalry.

Harry left the U.K. and his royal duties behind shortly after the May 2019 birth of son Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor the first of his two children with his wife, American actress-turned-Duchess-of-Sussex Meghan Markle (Suits). By mid-February of 2021, the palace had confirmed that Harry and Meghan would not be returning to their Royal roles.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have confirmed to Her Majesty The Queen that they will not be returning as working members of The Royal Family, the February 19, 2021, statement from Buckingham Palace read.

Since then, the quasi-royals have attempted to carve out a life for themselves outside the palace walls and so far, every outing has been another variation on the same theme: everyone at the Palace wanted them gone, with Prince William and Princess Kate chief among them.

From the now-infamous Oprah interview to their multi-episode Netflix special, Harry and Meghan have lobbed a series of accusations against the Royal Family in general from bullying to racism and everything in between and Spare appears to pick up where Netflix left off.

Harry blames William and Kate for his 2005 decision to wear a Nazi uniform to a costume party, saying that they had howled with laughter upon seeing him in the get-up and encouraged him to go for it.

I phoned Willy and Kate, asked what they thought. Nazi uniform, they said, Harry says that he then brought the costume home to try it on before the Native and Colonial themed party. They both howled. Worse than Willys leotard outfit! Way more ridiculous! Which, again, was the point.

In 2017, when Harry and Meghan made their public debut at the Toronto Invictus Games, Markle received criticism for wearing ripped jeans. Harry alleges in Spare that her outfit had been approved by the palace but then complains that someone should have issued a statement in her defense once the backlash began.

A single declaration in defense of Meg would have been enough to make a tremendous difference, he writes.

Harry also claims that Prince William warned him not to propose to Markle, saying things were moving too fast and saying theyd never be able to spend time together as a foursome because shes an American actress, after all. He went on to say that William was the one who nixed plans for them to wed at Westminster Abbey where William and Kate were married and had been opposed to them using St. Pauls as well.

The ex-royal writes about a number of disagreements with his brother particularly where Markle is concerned and says that one such incident nearly resulted in fisticuffs.

William, Harry writes, referred to Markle as abrasive, difficult, and rude comments that Harry says were simply a reflection of the prevailing press narrative and alleges that William punctuated his comments with a physical assault.

It all happened so fast. So very fast. He grabbed me by the collar, ripping my necklace, and he knocked me to the floor.I landed on the dogs bowl, which cracked under my back, the pieces cutting into me. I lay there for a moment, dazed, then got to my feet and told him to get out.

Harry sayshe believed that William wanted him to hit back, claiming that he could see the same judgment-clouding anger in his brother that he had felt for years:I chose not to. What was different here was the level of frustration. I talk about the red mist that I had for so many years, and I saw this red mist in him.

The brothers relationship, Harry writes, changed dramatically over time. In some ways he was my mirror, in some ways he was my opposite. My beloved brother, my archnemesis, how had that happened?

He asked that question after William appeared not to understand Harrys decision to leave his royal duties a decision that Harry felt should require no explanation at all.

I couldnt believe what I was hearing. It was one thing to disagree about who was at fault but for him to claim total ignorance of the reasons Id fled why my wife and I took the drastic step of picking up our child and just running like hell Really? Harry continued.

Harry also takes aim at his father in Spare even the title is a direct jab at King Charles III, who allegedly informed the late Princess Diana that his work was finished once William and Harry (an heir and a spare) were born.

He writes of one instance in which the king had allegedly fed the press a story about William and Kate and their children a story that led a seething William and Harry to confront their father together.

Pa instantly got upset. He began shouting that Willy was paranoid. We both were. Just because we were getting bad press, and he was getting good, that didnt mean his staff was behind it, Harry writes.

And while he said that the confrontation did not lead to changes from their father, he had initially believed that he and William were recovering their earlier closeness. But Harry goes on to allege that even after they promised they would never turn their press houses against each other, William broke his word.

I would far rather get destroyed in the press than play along with this game or this business of trading. And to see my brothers office copy the very same thing that we promised the two of us would never, ever do, Harry says in the Netflix docuseries, that was heartbreaking.

The problem for many of the senior royals, Harry alleges, all centered on the fact that Markle had stolen their spotlight. The issue is when someone whos marrying in, who should be a supporting act, is then stealing the limelight or is doing the job better than the person who is born to do this, that upsets people. It shifts the balance, he claims.

Despite all that, Harry continues to claim that he would like to reconcile with both his father and his brother but royal expert Katie Nicholls doesnt believe that claim holds any water.

The idea that he wants his father and his brother back just seems so incongruous with how he is behaving and what hes saying To paint such an unflattering picture of the royal family and a very unsavory side of his brother and an uncaring side of his father It just does not appear to be the actions of a man trying to reconcile with his estranged family. It really feels like a line has been crossed.

Others have noted that the Palaces default position is to not respond to attacks and allegations a position of which Harry was well aware so he likely knew that he would have free reign to continue to level very public attacks without any fear of reprisal from the people he was attacking.

Harrys claims and blames circulated via social media in the week ahead of the books release, prompting a number of people to respond with the hashtag shutupHarry.

Continue Reading

Sports

Cindric docked points, fined for spinning Dillon

Published

on

By

Cindric docked points, fined for spinning Dillon

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Austin Cindric was docked 50 points and fined $50,000 by NASCAR on Wednesday for intentionally spinning Ty Dillon in last weekend’s Cup Series race at Circuit of the Americas.

Dillon moved Cindric up the track early in the race and Cindric quickly retaliated by hooking Dillon in the right rear, spinning Dillon’s car.

NASCAR has made clear they will not tolerate drivers hooking competitors in the right rear to spin them because of the potential hazards. Bubba Wallace and Chase Elliott have both previously been suspended for similar actions.

The penalty drops Cindric of Team Penske from 11th to 35th in the standings heading into this weekend’s race at Phoenix Raceway.

NASCAR fined Carson Hocevar $50,000 and penalized him 25 points for intentionally wrecking Harrison Burton last year. Hocevar hooked Burton in the right rear while under caution at Nashville Superspeedway.

One of the reasons Cindric was not suspended, per a NASCAR official, is because it happened on a road course with lower speeds and tight confines — and the result didn’t draw a caution flag.

Wallace and Elliott both hooked other drivers on ovals with higher speeds that led to cautions.

In additional penalties announced Wednesday, NASCAR said two members of Kyle Larson‘s pit crew had been suspended two races for a tire coming off his car during last weekend’s Cup race at COTA. Brandon Johnson, the jackman, and front tire changer Blaine Anderson were both suspended.

Continue Reading

Sports

Briscoe wins appeal over spoiler at Daytona 500

Published

on

By

Briscoe wins appeal over spoiler at Daytona 500

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Chase Briscoe and Joe Gibbs Racing won their appeal Wednesday when the National Motorsports Appeals Panel said his Toyota did not have an illegally modified spoiler when he won the Daytona 500 pole.

The victory restores the 100 points and 10 playoff points NASCAR had penalized Briscoe for the spoiler violation. The team also gets its 100 points and 10 playoff points back, and crew chief James Small’s four-race suspension was rescinded, as was the $100,000 fine to the team.

Briscoe is now tied for 14th in the season standings with Carson Hocevar headed into Sunday’s race at Phoenix Raceway. They are one point ahead of Kyle Larson, who is 16th in the season standings.

“The panel believes that the elongation of some of the holes on the number 19 Cup car spoiler base is caused by the process of attaching that specific spoiler base to the rear deck and not modification of the single source part,” the panel wrote.

Joe Gibbs said he was appreciative of the process “NASCAR has in place that allowed us the opportunity to present our explanation of what led to the penalty issued to our No. 19 team.

“We are thankful for the consideration and ruling by the National Motorsports Appeals Panel,” the team owner added. “It is obviously great news for our 19 team and everyone at Joe Gibbs Racing. We look forward to focusing on the remainder of our season starting this weekend in Phoenix.”

Briscoe also thanked the panel and NASCAR on social media “for giving us the option to show our evidence.” He also thanked Joe Gibbs Racing for preparing his car for his debut season with the team.

The appeals panel consisted of former motorsports marketing executive Dixon Johnston, former Speed Channel president Hunter Nickell and former South Boston Speedway general manager Cathy Rice.

Continue Reading

Sports

NASCAR countersues in dispute over charters

Published

on

By

NASCAR countersues in dispute over charters

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — NASCAR’s revenue-sharing charter system is under threat of being disbanded according to a Wednesday counterclaim filed by the stock car series against Michael Jordan-owned 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports that singles out Jordan’s longtime business manager.

The contentiousness began after more than two years of negotiations on new charter agreements — NASCAR’s equivalent of a franchise model — and the 30-page filing contends that Jordan business manager Curtis Polk “willfully” violated antitrust laws by orchestrating anticompetitive collective conduct in connection with the most recent charter agreements.

23XI and Front Row were the only two organizations out of 15 that refused to sign the new agreements, which were presented to the teams last September in a take-it-or-leave-it offer a mere 48 hours before the start of NASCAR’s playoffs.

The charters were fought for by the teams ahead of the 2016 season and twice have been extended. The latest extension is for seven years to match the current media rights deal and guarantee 36 of the 40 spots in each week’s field to the teams that hold them, as well as other financial incentives. 23XI and Front Row refused to sign and sued, alleging NASCAR and the France family that owns the stock car series are a monopoly.

NASCAR already has lost one round in court in which the two teams have been recognized as chartered organizations for the 2025 season as the legal dispute winds through the courts.

What is NASCAR counterclaiming?

In the new counterclaim, Polk is repeatedly singled out as the ringleader against the current charter proposals. NASCAR attorney Christopher Yates went so far as to tell The Associated Press that Polk, who in addition to being Jordan’s business manager is a co-owner of 23XI along with three-time Daytona 500 winner Denny Hamlin, does not understand the NASCAR business model.

“Curtis Polk basically orchestrated and threatened a boycott of one of the qualifying races for a major event and others did not go along with him,” Yates said. “He got other teams to boycott a meeting that was required by the charter. When you have a threatened boycott of qualifying races that are covered by media that’s not a good thing for other race teams, not a good thing when you are trying to collectively grow the sport.”

The qualifying race in question was the 2024 pair of 150-mile duels that set the field for the Daytona 500.

“I don’t think Mr. Polk really understands the sport,” Yates told the AP. “I think he came into it and his view is it should be much more like the NBA or other league sports. But it’s not. No motorsport is like that. He’s done a lot of things that might work in the NBA or might be OK in the NBA but just are not appropriate in NASCAR.”

Who is violating the antitrust act?

NASCAR’s complaint alleges “the undisputed reality is that it is 23XI and FRM, led by 23XI’s owner and sports agent Curtis Polk, that willfully violated the antitrust laws by orchestrating anticompetitive collective conduct in connection with the terms of the 2025 Charter Agreements.”

“It is truly ironic that in trying to blow-up the Charter system, 23XI and FRM have sought to weaponize the antitrust laws to achieve their goals,” the counterclaim says, alleging Polk’s threats are “attempting to misuse the legal system as a last resort to secure new terms.”

Bob Jenkins, an entrepreneur, owns Front Row Motorsports and joined 23XI in the lawsuit when he declined to sign the 2025 charter agreement last September.

NASCAR’s counterclaim asks for an injunction eliminating guaranteed starting spots for charter teams. NASCAR wants the four combined charters held by 23XI and Front Row before the lawsuit to be returned to NASCAR, and it wants to dissolve the two charters each team purchased ahead of the 2025 season for their own individual expansion.

“There’s a misperception out there that somehow 23IX and Front Row might achieve something that other teams can take advantage of, and that’s just not right,” Yates told the AP. “This is not going to be a renegotiation. NASCAR has no intent of renegotiating the terms of the charter. Front Row and 23XI are threatening the charter system and its continuation, and NASCAR is fine without the charter system.

“The charter system was created at the request of the teams. That was before 23XI and Curtis Polk’s time, I don’t think they understand that history. But if they succeed with their lawsuit and the charter system goes away, that’s OK.”

What do 23XI and Front Row want?

Yates told the AP he’s asked Jeffrey Kessler, the attorney representing 23XI and Front Row, what is it the two teams want and cannot get a straight answer.

“The mere fact that the lawsuit calls the system into question, I really think 23XI and Front Row are being pretty selfish in terms of what they are trying to do, and I don’t think they are taking into account the 32 teams that have signed the charters and think it is a good deal for them,” Yates said. “Do some of them think they should have gotten more? I’m sure. Does NASCAR think it should have gotten more? Absolutely. But NASCAR does not see the charter system as necessary.”

Jordan has said he’s suing NASCAR on behalf of all the teams so that even the smallest ones can receive equal footing in terms of benefits as a participant in the top motorsports league in the United States.

Among the improvements in the 2025 charters is a more equitable revenue share, but missing is the demand that teams wanted the charters to become permanent. NASCAR at its discretion can claw back charters from underperforming teams or eliminate the system completely. Yates said NASCAR has no intention of renegotiating the charters signed in September by 13 organizations, nor did he see a scenario in which NASCAR settles the lawsuit.

“Polk and 23XI’s other owners openly professed that they wanted to change NASCAR’s economic model by demanding more money for the teams from NASCAR media revenues, instead of teams competing against each other,” Yates said. “However, 23XI and FRM did not merely reject the terms of the 2025 Charters. Rather, those teams embarked on a strategy to threaten, coerce, and extort NASCAR into meeting their demands for better contract and financial terms.”

Continue Reading

Trending