CNN reports on how former Olympian Michael Johnson believes that double-amputee runner Oscar Pistorius shouldn’t have been considered “qualified” for the London Olympics:
Johnson, the former U.S. Olympic speed demon who now provides commentary for BBC, appears to be making a smooth transition from his days as Nike’s “world’s fastest man” to world’s biggest mouth this summer.
Coming on the heels of curious statements about the descendants of slaves being athletically superior, Johnson is now saying it’s “unfair” if Oscar Pistorius, aka Blade Runner, competes against able-bodied runners when it’s not clear whether he has an advantage, according to the Telegraph in London.
…
Pistorius was born without fibula bones and had his legs amputated below his knees before he turned 1. He still played several sports, including water polo, tennis and wrestling. After injuring his knee in a rugby match, Pistorius began running competitively in 2004 with the aid of the Flex-Foot Cheetah made by the Icelandic company, Össur.
Johnson says it isn’t personal against his friend, but rather a matter of following the rules. “‘It’s not about him as an individual; it is about the rules you will make and put in place for the sport which will apply to anyone, and not just Oscar.”
What do you think? Should Pistorius be allowed to compete in the Olympics this summer against runners without prosthetics?
AP Photo
No he should compete in the paralympics. Swimming recently banned specialized body suits and struck some records because of the unfair advantage they provided.
Lets have the Olympics be the unaided competition and turn the paralympics into studies of fluid, simple mechanical, aids.
I think this is an unwinnable situation. Ok, he’s faster than some athletes and slower than others with the blades. What happens if he comes back in four years with better blades and he’s the fastest in the pack. Is he disqualified? Does he take a handicap? How much, just enough to put him in line with the front athletes, or in the middle or at the back? Aren’t there issues with specifically screening disabled athletes to ensure they’re not *too* good? The reasons all these questions come up is that he’s actually in a different sport, he’s literally in… Read more »
I guess if it is shown that people wearing blades are faster than current “able bodied” sprinters this might actually be good news. Sprinters will no longer need to consider doping, just have their legs cut off and use technology instead!
I believe Oscar went through extensive tests and it was shown the blades do not give him an advantage whatsoever. Also look at his times with able bodied runners, while they are respectable, they are not consistently in the top tier. His best run was at one of the meets, I think IAAF, he took part in the relayed and South Africa received a silver. Also he did not meet the Olympic qualifying time as he finished 4th but was selected as part of the South African Men’s Relay team. Natalie du Toit competes in able bodied swimming with one… Read more »
No MJ’s comments were very informed. This ain’t just about Oscar, this is about the future of competition, the role of technology in athletics and precedents.
I’d say the concern is warranted, albeit slightly un-PC. Those prosthetics could easily be made to surpass the capabilities of a human leg, and after the initial training of getting used to using them is done, therefore it becomes a somewhat unfair advantage.
And anyway, the Paralympics exists for competitors such as Oscar, why unnecessarily ignore them?