Friday, January 18, 2008

Sour Grapes

 
The connections of Golden LakeGolden Yank, the third place finisher in the Delta Jackpot (GIII), have filed a lawsuit against the Louisiana Racing Commission seeking that the horse be placed either first or second in the race.

From The Daily Racing Form:
The Delta Jackpot was won in a dead-heat by Z Humor and Turf War on Dec. 7, with Golden Yank a neck back between horses in third. Golden Yank’s rider, Gerard Melancon, claimed foul for bumping in the stretch but it was disallowed by the stewards. The horse’s connections appealed the case to the commission but the stewards’ decision was upheld unanimously. The lawsuit seeks a reversal of that decision and asks that Golden Yank be placed either first or second in the Jackpot, alleging he was impeded by both Z Humor and Turf War.
The win was worth $400,000 to both Z Humor and Turf War and $100,000 to Golden Yank. The lawsuit points out that the Jackpot earnings could be important in gaining a spot in the Kentucky Derby field should that race overfill.

It goes without saying, perhaps by the title of the blog post, that I think the lawsuit is ridiculous. Even if the foul claim does have merit, the result of the appeal should stand. It would be a step in the wrong direction if owners and trainers were to have the option to overturn a steward's rulings via a court order. (Here is a replay of the race.)

Consider had the Red Sox sued Major League Baseball over Yankee Chuck Knoblauch's phantom tag of Jose Offerman in Game 4 of the 1999 ALCS, or if the Cardinals had sued over umpire Don Denkinger's "safe" call of Jorge Orta in Game 6 and subsequent home plate calls in Game 7 of the 1985 World Series. The public wouldn't accept a court overturning a ruling on the baseball field (or any other sport), and racing should be no exception.

Blog Archive