Skip to main content

Two Sides of the Game

I am catching up on some news stories here, a couple of which you may find interesting. It shows a bit about the two ends of the spectrum in racing. One a bit odd, and the other giving and simply perfect.

Equidaily has a neat link up. In Australia, there was a spill in the Perth Cup. A trainer of one of the affected finishers said that there was a case overseas, setting a precedent where the jockey who caused interference in a race was sued.

"I'm not saying my owners are going to take any action — that's up to them — but there's a case happening overseas where the owners of a horse who broke a leg in a race incident are taking legal action against the jockey that caused the interference,"

I know nothing about that case, but if true, is that not frightening? I am no lawyer but I remember being a kid at a Toronto Maple Leaf game and getting hit by a puck - butterfingers - and asking who if anyone was responsible. I think someone spoke of "voluntary assumption of risk", where if you go to a hockey game, you are there voluntarily and know that you might get pegged with a puck, so you can't sue. If owners in a race do not know that a jockey or driver might cause some interference costing you dough, I think you might not be cut out for racing.

In other news: The owners of Somebeachsomewhere have donated 1/4 of one percent of his earnings in 2007 to OSAS for adopted horses. Awesome!

"To continue their charitable service of providing for the care and well being of horses in the adoption program, there must be a long term financial commitment from the racing industry," continued MacGrath. "We are, as members of the racing community, indebted to our horses - the athletes of our sport."

How can you disagree with that? I hope others follow this example. Great idea!

Comments