|
|
|
|
By Cyd
Zeigler jr. Every day at the gym I find the sports page – usually USA Today – and flip through it as I plod through my sets of . . . whatever. On Monday, it started out as usual: three sets of barbell curls; oh, Stanford beat Oregon State – very good. Three sets of shrugs; the Niners will be announcing their new head coach by the weekend – interesting. Three sets of dumbbell curls; oh, Anne Rogers Clark wore a pale yellow and blue flowered gown to judge Best in Show in 1978. What? Somehow, some editor at USA Today had decided that the fashion police at a dog show 25 years ago merited front page trumpeting in their sports section. And, what’s more, the paper was declaring that dog breeding was a sport, that the Westminster dog show was Game 7 of the NBA Finals, and that Anne Rogers Clark was Her Airness, Michael Jordan. Yes, it was true – the sports section had been officially raided by the lifestyle section from three pullouts back. How could anyone make such a blunder? How could someone at any publication put coverage of a dog show on the front page of a sports section? Unless Christopher Guest is the new sports editor at USA Today, I figured there had to be a mistake. But no, it went on. Clark, a 74-year-old great-great-great-grandmother to some of the world’s finest dogs, was being described as a sports hero: “Clark is the biggest superstar the sport has ever known. Standing 6-2, she towers over show rings. She's so famous in canine circles that she's simply referred to by a single name, Annie.” Sport? Are you kidding me? Since when is showing dogs a sport? What kind of athleticism does it take to breed a dog? Maybe there are certain techniques in combing the hair of a Pekingese, but that’s stretching it. Surely it was a misprint and “Annie” was some cute new way to refer to “MJ” who had, the day before, captured much of the spotlight of the NBA All-Star game. Further reading of the article describes the incredible lengths to which judges must go to maintain their integrity – years of secrecy, hiding themselves from any influence of the media or other competitions. These are deeper lengths than John Gruden puts himself through getting up at 4 a.m. to break down the Falcons’ defense. I can hear the rumblings of the next great sports movement, starting in the living room of some retired dog lover, to make dog shows an Olympic sport. There’s precedent, surely. There are many other judged sports in the Olympics – gymnastics, diving and figure skating jumping to mind; why not simply judge the appearance of a dog? There is an animal-based sport in the Olympics – medals are handed out for equestrian every four years. I can see it now – the podium, at the center ring, with flashes going throughout the stands, the Star-Spangled banner playing, and a voice over the loudspeaker announcing: “and the gold medal goes to 74-year-old Anne Rogers Clark for her Pomeranian, ‘Mango Chutney On Fire Long’.” The commentary over the television: “Wow, Bob, the United States really has a long way to come back in this match. And it looks like – why yes, they’re putting in 6-foot-2 Anne Rogers Clark. She’s their go-to gal and if anyone can turn the tide of this match-up, it’s this old lady from Delaware.” If they’re going to have a gold medal handed out for equestrian, why not toss the dogs a bone, too? Olympic medals were once given out for music composition – this couldn’t be very far from that. Why not? I’ll tell you why not – because showing dogs isn’t a sport, and dog shows aren’t athletic competitions. It’s cute and all to watch some odd-looking dog whose face you can’t even see try to walk without tripping over its own fur – but, it’s not a sport. It’s not even a game. They put the daily bridge match breakdown in the lifestyle section for a reason – because that’s where stuff like dogs and movies and card games belong. Besides, I’m a "cat person," anyway.
|