[King Glorious]

Some years ago in the NBA, the commissioner had to step in and reign in some of the practices of the owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers, Ted Stepien. Even though it was his team, the league stepped in for what was the good of the game. Look at this past offseason in the NFL and the commissioner stepped in on a team matter regarding Brett Favre and the Packers. Again, it was for the good of the game. League commissioners are given certain latitudes to make moves and decisions when they are deemed to be in the overall good of the game, even if it means taking some of the power away from an owner or player. Now, I realize that horse racing is totally different and it's hard to tell someone what to do with a living and breathing animal. Also, we don't have a league commissioner. I wouldn't pretend to know where exactly that line is but I do feel like there is a fine line out there between exercising your own personal rights and doing what's in the best interests of the game. Say Bernardini's owners had wanted to really make sure there was no competition for him and had convinced his brother not to enter Invasor? Is that their right? Absolutely. Would it be in the best interests or for the good of the game? No. I think that once you have horses at that level, you do have some level of obligation to the sport and to the fans that support you.