My heart sinks whenever I hear or see something like this, which appeared in the middle of an article in the Oct. 14 issue of the Los Angeles Times:

“Port of Los Angeles Executive Director Gene Seroka said that ‘we are faced with an unfortunate issue of delayed implementation’ that was inherited from past port management.”

He was referring to the revelation that the port had failed to complete 11 of 52 pollution- and traffic-reduction measures that it had agreed to years ago. But what was disheartening was his shameless use of the old I-blame-my-predecessor ploy.

If you’re in business, you’ve seen this weasely tactic used a lot, and if you’re in government, perhaps even more often. It’s just too tempting, when some gaffe or failure has been unmasked, to blame the guy who came before you, to point your finger at the woman or man who’s ridden off into the sunset and may now be over the horizon and unable to mount a defense.

Is there a honeymoon period when it’s OK to say you inherited a problem from past management? Yes, and in my opinion it is six months. Maybe up to a year in certain circumstances. So how long has it been since the previous port director, Geraldine Knatz, announced her retirement? It was October 2013, two years ago. The statute of limitations on the I-blame-my-predecessor tactic has run out. Honeymoon’s over.

I got in touch with Knatz, who’s now at USC, and asked her why she didn’t implement the changes. She said she was in the middle of it; the pollution and traffic mitigation measures were included in an amendment to the lease with the China Shipping terminal, and yes, this is a bit involved. But the point is, that amendment was being negotiated but unfinished when Knatz left. She sent me a meeting notice for Oct. 3, 2013, titled “China Shipping Mitigation Measure Status” to show the topic was ongoing at the time of her departure. She doesn’t know what happened after that. And she shouldn’t be expected to know.

The new administration may have dropped the ball or may not have grasped the import or may simply have not gotten around to it yet. But the right thing to say is, “Hey, we dropped the ball,” or “You know, I just didn’t realize the import.” The wrong thing to say, after all this time, is: “Blame my predecessor.”

• • •

Another thing that makes my heart sink: Sports reporters who can’t stop gushing about the transcendental brilliance of the Los Angeles Dodgers’ executives.

In fact, it’s that word – brilliant – that gets employed so routinely and so embarrassingly. “With money and cutting-edge brilliance, Dodgers playing a game others can’t,” read the headline of a Yahoo Sports article last July. The article breathlessly reported that what makes the Dodgers so amazingly great is “the behind-the-scenes activities; the think tank filled with brilliant minds…”

Sorry to ask an impertinent question, but if they’re so brilliant, why do they keep making dunderheaded decisions?

Start with the fact that the Guggenheim guys way overpaid to buy the team, and then had to recoup that money by creating a TV channel so pricey that cable companies refused to buy it. Most of us have gone two years without seeing many games on TV with no relief in sight. Brilliant, no?

And I hate to criticize player moves because luck and health play too big a role in the outcome. But still, the team’s top brass has made some bizarre moves. For example, the Dodgers spent years developing a terrific leadoff hitter in Dee Gordon but traded him away – and paid much of his salary while he played for the other team. This year, Gordon became the first player to lead the National League in both batting average and stolen bases since Jackie Robinson in 1949. And the Dodgers’ plan for replacing him as a leadoff hitter? They apparently hadn’t thought that far.

I imagine sports reporters haven’t been exposed to much mathematical sophistication, and they’re wowed by the Dodgers’ fondness for using advanced sabermetrics to assess players. As a result, the reporters apparently have confused complexity for brilliance, modeling for wisdom.

Maybe, just maybe, since the Dodgers quickly exited the playoffs yet again this year, sports reporters will stop the gushing. But alas, they probably won’t.

Charles Crumpley is editor of the Business Journal. He can be reached at [email protected].