Just when we thought Italian soccer was the most mind-numbingly boring spectacle in sports, along comes the interminable death spiral of the Phoenix Coyotes.
To be fair, the outcome of the courtroom saga involving owner Jerry Moyes, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and BlackBerry billionaire Jim Balsillie could have a huge impact on the National Hockey League. After all, the outcome of next week's mediation could begin the process of restoring one of this country's prodigal NHL franchises back to Canada, if not to its ancestral home in Winnipeg.
Of course, this isn't the first time legal proceedings have featured so prominently in the world of sports. Judging by the cases on this list, the results in the courtroom have often been more important than the results on the field of play.
10. Pistorius v. IAAF
Despite having both lower legs amputated as a child, South African runner Oscar Pistorius dreamed of one day competing in the Olympic Games. That dream was dashed in early 2008 when the International Association of Athletics Federations ruled him ineligible, claiming his carbon-fibre prosthetics gave him an unfair advantage over able-bodied competitors. Pistorius appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which overturned the decision just in time for the Beijing Games. Unfortunately, the athlete known as Blade Runner fell seven-tenths of a second short of the Olympic qualifying time in the 400 metres.
9. USFL v. NFL
Perhaps the only thing more tragic than Donald Trump's hairdo is the "victory" he and his fellow United States Football League owners won in their lawsuit against the rival National Football League in 1986. A six-person jury agreed with the upstart league's charge that the NFL had illegally monopolized broadcast rights and stadium venues, but awarded them only $1 in damages ... significantly less than the $567 million they had sought. Under antitrust law, the award was tripled to $3 -- plus 76 cents interest! -- but that wasn't enough to save the USFL, which immediately ceased operations.
8. Van v. VANOC
A group of 15 female ski jumpers, led by world champion Lindsey Van, is suing the Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee for the right to compete in the 2010 Olympics. The plaintiffs have said the International Olympic Committee's 2006 decision to exclude women's ski jumping -- while conducting three separate men's events -- violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. They are now awaiting a decision from the B.C. Supreme Court.
7. Martin v. PGA Tour
Casey Martin, a former college teammate of Tiger Woods at Stanford, sued the PGA Tour in 1998 for the right to use a golf cart in competition, due to a degenerative disability in his right leg. Ignoring the objections of most pros, who insisted the fatigue associated with walking 18 holes is a fundamental part of the game, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Martin in 2001. Despite his court victory, Martin didn't last long on the PGA Tour, losing his card after one season and eventually signing on as head coach of the University of Oregon's golf team.
6. Renee Richards v. USTA
In 1975, 40-year-old Richard Raskind underwent sex reassignment surgery, changed his name to Renee Richards and began playing on the women's tennis tour. Not thrilled by the prospect of a 6-foot-2 former man playing in their marquee event, the United States Tennis Association adopted a "women-born-women" policy and refused to allow Richards to enter the 1976 U.S. Open. Richards fought the ban all the way to the New York Supreme Court, which ruled in her favour in 1977, calling the ban "grossly unfair and discriminatory." She entered the singles draw in 1977 Open but was beaten in the first round.
5. R. v. Alan Eagleson
The sad saga of former NHL Players Association boss Alan Eagleson came to a close on Jan. 7, 1998, when he pleaded guilty to bilking the players he represented out of hundreds of thousands of dollars of Canada Cup revenues. Although he only served six months of an 18-month sentence, Eagleson's reputation was shattered -- the scandal cost him his Order of Canada, his place in the Hall of Fame and made him one of the most reviled figures in hockey history.
4. Davis v. NFL
Al Davis, the "managing general partner" of the Oakland Raiders, long ago set the standard when it comes to litigious franchise owners. In 1980, when the NFL filed an injunction blocking him from moving the Raiders to Los Angeles, Davis sued the league and won. When things didn't work out in L.A., he sued the NFL again, alleging the league didn't do enough to support the team's quest for a new stadium. Not content to torment the NFL with just his own lawsuits, Davis also appeared as a witness for the USFL in its 1986 suit against the league.
3. Brewer v. NHL
As big as Eagleson's conviction was, it would likely never have happened without former Toronto Maple Leafs defenceman Carl Brewer, who was the driving force behind a long legal battle to reclaim misallocated pension money from the league. The Supreme Court issued the final ruling on the case in 1994, siding with Brewer and six other ex-players, including Gordie Howe and Bobby Hull. The NHL eventually agreed to cough up $40 million.
2. Clay v. United States
World heavyweight champion Muhammad Ali, who was born Cassius Clay, waged a four-year battle with the U.S. government over his refusal to be inducted into the army during the Vietnam War. Ali was convicted in 1967 after his claim of conscientious objector status was rejected by the draft board. An appeal court upheld the conviction, but the champ was finally vindicated in 1971 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in his favour, noting the board hadn't given any reasons for denying his initial claim. In the interim, Ali was stripped of his title belt, which he wouldn't win back until 1974 when he knocked out George Foreman in Zaire.
1. Flood v. Kuhn
St. Louis Cardinals outfielder Curt Flood was traded to the Philadelphia Phillies after the 1969 season, but there was one little problem -- he didn't want to go. Instead, he took Major League Baseball and Commissioner Bowie Kuhn to court, challenging the reserve clause, which had long restricted the rights of players to negotiate with other teams. Although the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately upheld the reserve clause and baseball's long-standing antitrust exemption, the case set the stage for an arbitrator's ruling which nullified the reserve clause and launched the era of free agency.
Disagree with our picks? E-mail yours to topten@sunmedia.ca.
