I don't think you would call this a construction risk... it is a...

I don't think you would call this a construction risk... it is a modification from the quoted plan. Could involve an extra 50m+(?) of tunnel work - so its not an execution failure by the MDJK team

Yes, but on the other hand, they say it is a significant zone of fractured rock. As such, it is possible that the fractured zone is so wide that they may not be able to deviate around it with this current tunnel, and therefore may have to restart the tunnel in a different location.

Armchair critic perhaps, but I'm shocked they did not pre-drill the proposed tunnel route to locate these geological anomalies. If they can test for it now with a diamond drill (as they say they can) then surely they should also have been able to drill test the route prior to tunnel commencement. Fingers crossed their geotechnical report is worth the paper it is written on.

Oh, and vote NO to the manifestly inadequate 25c takeover proposal.