Sports Books Blog

There’s an interesting argument going on in athletics just now – it’s whether Oscar Pistorius, the disabled South African who goes by the name of “blade runner”. should be able to compete in open competition. The question is: do the artificial “feet” he wears give him an advantage.
It’s a difficult question for the IAAF. My feeling is that if they do allow him to compete in open competition then there will be nothing to stop able bodied athletes from wearing similar equipment and who knows then where it will end.
Anyway even if they do allow him to run he should go into races at the same level as his current times. Not into Grand Prix events with the best in the world. If he wants to compete like an able bodied athlete he should not receive special treatment because meeting promoters think it will draw crowds.
He was last in Sheffield on Sunday and he didn’t look fit. Amazingly he ran the second half of the race much quicker than the first which suggests the “blades” do give him an advantage. He was also disqualified for going out of his lane; so the experiment clearly didn’t go too well.

One other problem the IAAF should clear up is the ludicrous rule which now applies to false starts. Previously an athlete was able to false start twice and then they were disqualified. This led to lengthy delays though it ratcheted up the tension. I suspect TV was behind changing the rule to tighten the time limit.
Now an athlete can false start without penalty but if there is another false start the perpetrator is disqualified. But nothing happens to the athlete who caused the first false start. That’s patently unfair.
Mel Watman, whose All-time Greats of British Athletics we published last year, argues that the original perpetrator should be disqualified as well there is a second false start. That would be more just.
My feeling is that the IAAF should adopt the NCAA practice in the US. Anyone who false starts is disqualified. Doesn’t stop them from having fast times and great sprinters.