posted May 27, 2008

He is probably trying out the latest improved version of his BLADES as we write.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 27, 2008

Swimsuits and bikes do not replace the human body, they are total red herring in this discusssion.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 1, 2008

It's one thing to be opposed to the discrimination of disabled people, which I would like to think most of us agree with. That's why the Paralympics were invented.

It's sheer lunacy to allow someone with a disability to enter the regular Olympics WITH APARATUS THAT DIRECTLY AFFECTS HIS OR HER PERFORMANCE IN THE EVENT. It's completely unfair.

There's a middle-distance runner in the Paralympics who has won gold for the last three events running I think, and his 'disability' is that he has a withered hand. If HE can't get into the regular Olympics, and his affliction has absolutely no bearing on his credentials, I fail to see how a man with springy, metal artificial legs with wind-resistence can be allowed to take part in the sprints.

It's political correctness gone mad. These Olympics are quickly shaping up to be some of the worst yet.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 2, 2008

Until we have a way of telling if an athlete with blades - or for that matter any other mechanical aid - has no advantage, then it is pretty obvious to me that they should not be allowed to compete.

Whilst I understand - and appluad - the thinking behind the Paraolympics (spelling??) the event does leave me with disatisfaction simply because, as far as I can see, we cannot tell whose disability is the most disabling. It follows that we cannot tell whether a winner has won merely because of some mechanical advantage. Whilst this is inevitable in the Paraolympics, do we really want to introduce it into the 'Olympics-proper'?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 3, 2008

With regards to the bikes thing, All track bikes are built to certain specs. The superman pose that boardman had success with on the lotus was outlawed.
Pistorius' case is a landmark ruling. From a personal point of view, i think he should be allowed to run. Lets face it, no-one is going to cut their legs off to run a better 400m time are they? I understand the arguments for and against, and this is my opinion.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 3, 2008

Here's a point. Imagine if OP, or more likely another athlete, breaks the world record by an enormous margin using the bladed. Would he then be banned and the record annulled? The only sensible answer would be yes, but then he would have a pretty good case to seek damages against the IAAF

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 3, 2008

this is a total joke - PC gone nuts. Can you imagine if further down the line another blade runner actually gets some decent kit and gets Gold! It will turn athletics into a joke and a freak show!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 3, 2008

sandcastle jim
while agreeing completely with your standpoint on this, I must say that your use of the term 'freak show' is rather innappropriate.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 8, 2008

Situation now resolved , Pistorius failed to make the qualifying time. Shame !!

add comment | complain about this comment