It was impossible not to hear the accolades given the late David Stern when the longtime and former NBA commissioner passed away recently. Rarely if ever had a non-player or coach received such glowing praise at the end of their life. What was so impressive in listening to the long list of former players and associates speak of Stern was the respect he garnered from all levels. That one man could have the command of billionaire owners while at the same time being able to get the respect and admiration of the players is astounding. It obviously spoke loudly of Stern’s ability to deal with people. In the long run, the NBA found footing throughout the world and saw its players and owners prosper collectively in the process. Harness racing has forever been grappling with the concept of a commissioner and rightly so. The unavoidable consequences that arise but have no singular source to resolve, tend to drag down an industry as opposed to propel it in an upward direction. In fairness, the harness racing collective is not a “league” and though racetracks exist throughout North America, the thread running through them has never been enough to command one voice. Yet there is much reason to believe that the industry suffers from a wide range of issues that a commissioner could command and solve. Perhaps first and foremost, in the absence of a commissioner the sport has factions that do what’s in their own self -interest locally with little concern for the so-called “greater good.” It’s safe to say that like many sports leagues harness racing has some locations that can do well on their own and don’t need help in taking a direction from a singular entity. Yet looking at Stern as the shining example, it’s clear that what he brought to the table was a sense of unity and an urgency to improve and guide the image of the sport from North America around the world. A commissioner doesn’t have to be the only voice in the room, but with a leader a sport has the ability and capacity to grow as long as all teams follow the same set of rules. What harness racing has lacked over the years is a plan that would help grow the image of the sport throughout North America. In order to do so a leader would have to create a set of guidelines for all horsemen and racetracks to follow. It behooves me to see a multitude of simulcast signals that just don’t match up with each other. While some tracks have advanced their video feeds, others look as if they were created 30 years ago. Imagine watching any sporting event in black and white? Hall of Famer Charles Barkley noted in his comments about Stern how quickly the commissioner would call him out if the commentary Stern heard from Barkley didn’t fit or agree with the message Stern wished viewers to have. It was a clear example to me of the command and control a commissioner could have over the sport’s most important products. Professional football clearly monitors every movement on the field and its broadcasts and images are carefully crafted to put the sport in the best light. What has harness racing done over the last 50 years as a collective to put the sport in the best light? One could argue the Breeders Crown or the Hambletonian, but those are just events that happen on one day annually. If we expect to be racing from January through December, perhaps some guidelines that provide uniformity to all signals would help create a more dynamic image for the sport. Racing dates, overlaps in simulcast signals and conflicts in stakes races continue to plague the industry to some degree. Coordination tends to be difficult or near impossible without one person to make a clear ruling. We have gone for years and no matter how hard we try conflicts persist. The issue for our sport is not that a commissioner wouldn’t be a positive as a whole, it’s that any person filling that position would have to have ultimate power over some people who essentially aren’t looking for direction or wouldn’t follow it. Here lies the tipping point of an industry that could prosper with the proper direction. As it stands today we have racetrack owners with one position, owners and breeders with another. We have drivers and trainers who see things through a different prism, and lastly and not least, gamblers who face obstacles not of their own creation when attempting to bet and watch on two of our sports’ races that happen to be going off simultaneously. Then there’s the thought process that says during these times, when compromise has become a “four letter word,” who really wants someone to come in and tell them to accept the “other” opinion? Sure we’d like to get rules that look that same in all locales. We’d like to get the product as a whole to look more competitive on a race-per-race basis. We’d like to give gamblers more opportunities to make money so they are encouraged to return often. What’s obvious from the Stern example is that the late-commissioner had the talent and will to lead and that many around him had to drop their egos in order to see all parties benefit. Ideally I see the right commissioner as essential to lead this sport. Realistically, having listened to horsemen, track owners and some gamblers, I truly wonder whether any will take satisfaction with a decision that doesn’t agree with their own personal objectives. Commissioners who succeed create brand images for their leagues that the general public far and wide can relate to. Collectively this sport has struggled to achieve a brand or a positive image that all participants can be proud of. We have the people and the athletes that work hard each day to succeed on their own. If individual efforts were channeled in the right direction, there’s no telling what our brand would look like. I vote for a commissioner.