In Lingerie’s BC decision pending

  Printer Friendly Page 

In Lingerie’s BC decision pending

Gary Barber and Eclipse Thoroughbred Partners’ In Lingerie came out of her
two-length victory in Sunday’s Grade 1 Spinster in good order, according to
Michael Dilger, assistant to trainer Todd Pletcher.

“She’s fine this morning,” Dilger said of In Lingerie, who gave the Pletcher
barn its meet co-leading third victory, which includes two stakes wins. “They
are going to make a decision today on whether to stay here or go to California
(for the Breeders’ Cup).”

The victory in the Spinster earned In Lingerie a berth in the Breeders’ Cup
Ladies’ Classic to be run November 2 on dirt. In Lingerie has won all three of
her starts on Polytrack. She has won the Grade 2 Black-Eyed Susan on dirt at
Pimlico and placed in two Grade 1s this summer on the dirt at Saratoga.

“There is a plane leaving Louisville Tuesday for California,” Dilger said.
“We already have Love and Pride (Ladies’ Classic) and Turbo Compressor
(Breeders’ Cup Turf) at Santa Anita with (assistant) Michael McCarthy.

Left in In Lingerie’s wake Sunday was defending race champion Aruna, who
finished sixth, beaten 6 3/4 lengths.

“She came back fine and didn’t have any excuses,” said Heather Craig,
assistant to trainer Graham Motion. “She will stay here for a while.”

Ben Colebrook, assistant to trainer Christophe Clement, said that Spinster
runner-up Mystical Star came out of the race fine and that future plans were
undetermined for the filly, who is owned by Cheyenne Stables. Prior to the
Spinster, Mystical Star had won her two starts at Keeneland.

Third-place finisher Upperline also exited the race well, according to Hilary
Pridham, assistant to trainer Mike Stidham. Upperline gave the Stidham barn a
second Grade 1 placing over the weekend, coming on the heels of Willcox Inn’s
runner-up finish to Wise Dan in Saturday’s Shadwell Turf Mile.

Klaravich Stables and William Lawrence’s Balance the Books, last-to-first
winner of Sunday’s Grade 3 Bourbon, was doing well Monday morning, according to
Sean Ryan, assistant to trainer Chad Brown. The victory earned Balance the Books
a spot in the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile Turf to be run November 3.

Bet Horseracing Free Online at TwinSpires.com

---

 

Send this article to a friend

 

Share and Enjoy

This just isnt cricket, is it?

If the girls were under-performing, they should have been ignored, or removed quietly. © AFP

It’s a news report many of us would have read this past Thursday. A report on how the cheerleaders at the ICC World Twenty20 were a “disgraceful eyesore” and that they “showcased Sri Lanka in poor light”. Sri Lanka Cricket waded in and blamed the International Cricket Council for choosing the cheerleaders, while the manager of the cheerleaders was quoted as saying, “to get beautiful girls, you need to pay more” – not something you’d have thought you’d hear around a cricket tournament, right?

It doesn’t need to be reiterated that what really is disgraceful here are not the cheerleaders. But then again, the attitude of cricket’s organisers and officials (or indeed sections of the media) – overwhelmingly male, of course – should come as no surprise.

Why are cheerleaders such a big part of modern-day sport? Why are attractive women, often actors or models, often with no intellectual investment in the sport in question, made to host sports shows? Why do we have the Lingerie Bowl on pay-per-view TV in America at halftime during the Super Bowl?

It’s sad that even today, with all the strides that women have made in sport, it is considered a male preserve – and the audience is seen as predominantly male. How can one question that when, apparently, major money is spent on research to determine audience profiles? And with so much money riding on everything, what does it matter if a few commentators and bloody-minded individuals turn noses up at the goings on?

But – let’s set aside the issue of commodification of women here, because that is a long, tangled debate – what about the complete lack of tact in the way that those in responsible positions have spoken on the issue here?

Let’s assume for a moment here that the cheerleaders at the World T20 are neither attractive (and that this is a matter of vital importance) nor competent. They are there, obviously, for the entertainment of the spectators seated in the front-row seats and for TV viewers who (presumably) find three young girls carrying out choreographed routines for three-four seconds every once in a way vaguely titillating. Much like the role that a low-cut blouse with noodle-straps was meant to play in 2003.

A British newspaper started out by calling the girls a “disgraceful eyesore”. It’s mean-spirited, no doubt, but the newspaper in question was not an official charged with maintaining the dignity of the game. But then, a senior SLC official came out and said, “The cheerleaders are harming the image of Sri Lanka.” And Sudev Abeysekara, the cheerleaders’ manager, told Hindustan Times, “In an event like this you need good looking girls, and to get the beautiful girls who are professional dancers, you have to pay more; the payment is not that great.” (To be honest, the cheerleaders’ routines definitely needed more practice, and their costumes were certainly ridiculous.)

So who’s to blame for the “eyesore”? The ICC, because it – if Abeysekara is to be believed – scrimped on its budgets; throwing in cheergirls because everyone does, but not budgeting the overhead? Or the manager fellow, because, he went with the budget he had without a thought for “Sri Lanka’s image in the rest of the world”, economising with his choice of girls? The ICC hasn’t given a statement, so we don’t know the truth there. Nishantha Ranatunga can’t be blamed for the choice or girls or the budgets, of course, but a lot else – like his choice of equating Sri Lanka’s image with the attractiveness quotient (to Western eyes?) of the country’s women.

What we have at the end of it are a group of girls, possibly qualified dancers or training to be dancers, whose physical attributes have been analysed threadbare in public by gentlemen in positions of respect. The manager has even been quoted as saying, “The girls are not comfortable. The tights they are wearing slip down while dancing and the girls are busy tying them here and there. They are also conscious that parents are watching.”

Now (allow me a moment to be maudlin here) these are people, with feelings and complexes, and families and friends who’d be hurt by this public humiliation.

Don’t do it. Please. Cheerleaders won’t make Chris Gayle hit more sixes than he already does or help Ajantha Mendis and Sunil Narine discover more ways of fooling batsmen. Twenty20 is already a wildly exciting product. It may have none of conventional cricket’s gravitas, but it must still be conducted in a dignified manner. Here, for instance, if the girls were under-performing, it might have been best to ignore them and not create a furore. Or remove them quietly – no one seems to want them anyway.

Dignity, and a dash of sensitivity, must be the basis for all sport, even in today’s market-driven world. Yes, even in Twenty20 cricket.

Share and Enjoy