Blade Runner

An article in last weekend’s Sunday Star-Times has led me to spending a few hours delving into the debate occurring over a 20 y.o. South African named Oscar Pistorius, the self-titled fastest man with no legs.

Probably not many in Aotearoa have heard, or care, about Oscar – but bear with me as it is an interesting story that touches on many things including dare I suggest our ingrained prejudices. You see, Oscar is a man with an Olympic dream – no, not the Special Olympics (been there, done that) – the real deal, the one in Beijing next year. And he’ll possibly get there too, that is if he is allowed.

Ah yes, the big IF. This story is doing the media rounds (again) as the IAAF have done a bit of a U-turn and announced he MAY be allowed to compete at the Olympics pending further research on whether he may have an unfair advantage. Yes, you read right. A bloke with no legs – amputated below the knee before his first birthday thanks to being born with no fibulae (that’s the bone from the knee to the ankle) – is suspected of having an unfair advantage thanks to pins made of carbon fibre rather than us normal blokes having to make do with blood and tissue.

Fuck me, what is the world coming to? I guess Mark Inglis had an advantage climbing Mt Everest over able-bodied people because he couldn’t get frostbite in his toes. Here we have a gifted young athlete – he can do the 400m (his specialist event) in less than 47 seconds – not allowing his disability get in the way of his dreams and what do people do? Question whether his racing pegs are so technologically superior that it gives him a leg up (yes, poor pun I know) over his competition.

Well, that’s easy to stamp out (oops, another one) straight away. If artificial limbs are so superior over normal bone and muscle, you’d be able to strap them onto some legless Fat Freddy who sits in front of his TV all day and turn him into a world-class athlete. But that’s not the case, is it? No, those leading the charge questioning what advantage hi-tech prosthetics give Oscar are probably the same insecure wankers who wanted Casey Martin out of the PGA Tour and Muttiah Muralitharan banned from playing cricket.

Yes, there are previous instances of people with disabilities or congenital defects succeeding in “able-bodied” sport and when they get to a certain level and are able to foot it (I’m on a roll here) with so-called elite athletes, the knockers come out and always suggest their success and achievements are down to some “special” reason or unfair advantage. Bollocks. Could it be that these are extraordinary people who have achieved despite not having the “normal” body that we associate with sportspeople?

And then I cast my mind back to 1982 – the Brisbane Commonwealth Games and the late Neroli Fairhall. You may not think so, but I’d bet my house if Neroli was shooting her bow and arrow in 2007 rather than 1982 there’d be people out there saying she has an unfair advantage sitting on her arse while her competitors have to stand.

So all power to Oscar – I hope he knocks another few-tenths of a second off his time to qualify and he’s allowed to go to Beijing. And to those who think this might turn out to be some sort of freak show, I’ve got news for you – sport already is. Anyone tuning into the rugby test last weekend had the CEO of the Australian Rugby Union telling us after the game what great “theatre” it was. Sport these days is about entertainment and money, not about “pure” competition. And I’d bet you if Oscar makes the final of the 400m next year at Beijing the global TV audience would increase a thousand-fold, if not more. Visa and Coca-Cola would be well pleased.

So, if Eddie the Eagle and Eric the Eel are allowed their 15 sec of fame, not to mention the unknown number who pump their bodies full of steroids, then perhaps Oscar should have the right to perform on the same stage.