Paralympics

[bobo the clown]

it was kind of a rhetorical question - but - yes! - that and the new Dept for Work and Pensions "fitness to work" tests that paralympians were protesting about recently...

... as ever, it's all in the detail.

You have to deal with sad cases who are feeling hemmed in & in despair ...... while at my end I'm dealing with lazy-arsed fckwits who will abuse any opportunity to avoid doing some work.

Both exist & both need dealing with.

you're so trusting of tory good intentions! bless!

For the cheats they aren't good intentions & I fail to see why such gits deserve any good intentions.

Or are there no cheats, just unfortunate, mixed up victims ?

[keveh]

Aaaaaaaaanyway

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riR_Syhv ... youtu.be&a" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[General Mannerheim]

cant believe they banned that chinese wheelchair basketball player on doping allogations, turns out he tested positive for WD-40!

[David Lee's Hair]

Well done Alex Zanardi... remember seeing the crash that took his legs, nasty stuff...

[Annoyed Grunt]

Jonnie Peacock just won gold in 100m, beating Pistorius.

[Always hopeful]

Jonnie Peacock just won gold in 100m, beating Pistorius.

What was interesting was to see the replays. Its clear that Peacock's thrust was gained from his "good" leg and that his prosthetic leg didn't seem to offer him anything at all. It sort of discounts the theory that the prothestic limbs offer an advantage, as has been alluded to.

It was also interesting to see Pistorius's reaction to the result in his interview shortly afterwards. He seemed genuinely pleased with what had happened and was taken aback by the crowds' reaction to Peacock. Sort of changed my opinion of him following his "outburst" after him losing the 200m.

[Gary the Enfield]

Jonnie Peacock just won gold in 100m, beating Pistorius.

What was interesting was to see the replays. Its clear that Peacock's thrust was gained from his "good" leg and that his prosthetic leg didn't seem to offer him anything at all. It sort of discounts the theory that the prothestic limbs offer an advantage, as has been alluded to.

It was also interesting to see Pistorius's reaction to the result in his interview shortly afterwards. He seemed genuinely pleased with what had happened and was taken aback by the crowds' reaction to Peacock. Sort of changed my opinion of him following his "outburst" after him losing the 200m.

What I understand is the the single amputee runners have the thrust advantage over 100m. Any further than that and the double amputees gain the advantage. Pistorius wasn't kidding when he said he had no expectation of gold in the 100m as it's not his event.

As for Pistorius his 'outburst' was just the latest in a series of disputes he has with the BPA. He had to be classified to run as both an Olympian and a Paralympian and so his blade length was set on that basis. The Brazilian had a maximum and minimum blade length set and he took full advantage of it. Pistorius was complaining about the situation, not the athlete.

[Gooner Girl]

Was pistorius' choice to run in both Olympics and Paralympics. Presumably he knew that rule before he decided to enter both? In which case I have no sympathy!

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Jonnie Peacock just won gold in 100m, beating Pistorius.

What was interesting was to see the replays. Its clear that Peacock's thrust was gained from his "good" leg and that his prosthetic leg didn't seem to offer him anything at all. It sort of discounts the theory that the prothestic limbs offer an advantage, as has been alluded to.

It was also interesting to see Pistorius's reaction to the result in his interview shortly afterwards. He seemed genuinely pleased with what had happened and was taken aback by the crowds' reaction to Peacock. Sort of changed my opinion of him following his "outburst" after him losing the 200m.

This is not a new insight. Pistorius has always struggled in the first 100m of his 400m event.

And the advantage in later stages of the 400 has not merely been 'alluded to' but, rather, comprehensively demonstrated, in my opinion.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Don't agree with the competing in both Olympics and Paralympics in the same year.

[keveh]

Don't agree with the competing in both Olympics and Paralympics in the same year.

Because?

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Don't agree with the competing in both Olympics and Paralympics in the same year.

Because?

To me the idea of having 2 separate olympics (which is what they are) is that you have a level playing field. A bit like having 2 categories, you are in one or the other. This Pistorious or whatever he's called come across as an egotistical prick to me. But that is an altogether separate thing

[TANGODANCER]

Don't agree with the competing in both Olympics and Paralympics in the same year.

I tend to agree with that. The whole purpose of paralympics is an event for those not capable of competing with normal physical competition. Why spend an absolute fortune doing this if the competitors aren't judged differently?

[keveh]

The reason that Pistorius was part of the Olympics is because he was one of the fastest over 400m in South Africa. So he not only qualifies for the Paralympics for being disabled he qualified for the Olympics for being bloody fast.

Jason Smyth from Irelands Paralympic team only just missed out on qualifying for the Olmypic team by 0.04 seconds.

Saying these athletes should only be allowed to compete in the Paralympics is just putting them in a box, as people usually do.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

The reason that Pistorius was part of the Olympics is because he was one of the fastest over 400m in South Africa. So he not only qualifies for the Paralympics for being disabled he qualified for the Olympics for being bloody fast.

Jason Smyth from Irelands Paralympic team only just missed out on qualifying for the Olmypic team by 0.04 seconds.

Saying these athletes should only be allowed to compete in the Paralympics is just putting them in a box, as people usually do.

Totally devalues it for me. I'll have a crack at the Olympics and then have a go at the 'B competition' after cos thats more medals. That is how I see it. The Olympics is supposed to be the pinnacle and the Paralympics the same for those that can't compete at the other. You're able to compete (meaning competitively compete) at the Olympics or not.

[TANGODANCER]

The reason that Pistorius was part of the Olympics is because he was one of the fastest over 400m in South Africa. So he not only qualifies for the Paralympics for being disabled he qualified for the Olympics for being bloody fast.

Jason Smyth from Irelands Paralympic team only just missed out on qualifying for the Olmypic team by 0.04 seconds.

But so did a lot of un-physically challenged athletes. Jenny Meadows (a real, proven olympic prospect) got left at home because she couldn't prove she'd made the qualifying time.

Saying these athletes should only be allowed to compete in the Paralympics is just putting them in a box, as people usually do.

Surely if they qualify as fit to compete in the olympics, then that's unfair to other challenged athletes? Why have qualifying standards otherwise?

[Prufrock]

It's old ground here, but I'm with Keveh. The paralympics are for people with disabilities. Why that should preclude them automatically from competing against able-bodied people if they can achieve the time is beyond me. If, for example, Pistorius can do the qualifying time, does this suddenly make the man with no legs below the knee 'not disabled'.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

It's old ground here, but I'm with Keveh. The paralympics are for people with disabilities. Why that should preclude them automatically from competing against able-bodied people if they can achieve the time is beyond me. If, for example, Pistorius can do the qualifying time, does this suddenly make the man with no legs below the knee 'not disabled'.

But by having 2 'experiences' is he/she not taking 1 of those experiences away from someone else? By that I mean in terms of medal potential, but more importantly the chance of being there to compete? I understand there are limited spaces for each event?

[Hoboh]

It's old ground here, but I'm with Keveh. The paralympics are for people with disabilities. Why that should preclude them automatically from competing against able-bodied people if they can achieve the time is beyond me. If, for example, Pistorius can do the qualifying time, does this suddenly make the man with no legs below the knee 'not disabled'.

But by having 2 'experiences' is he/she not taking 1 of those experiences away from someone else? By that I mean in terms of medal potential, but more importantly the chance of being there to compete? I understand there are limited spaces for each event?

Don't agree with that! I'm of the opinion its a compitition and the aim is to be in with a shout of winning, not just be there for the 'chance to compete'.
On that basis half our Olympic squad were there 'just to compete' given thier woeful performance. GG seems like a nice kid so why should she not have had the chance to compete?

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

It's old ground here, but I'm with Keveh. The paralympics are for people with disabilities. Why that should preclude them automatically from competing against able-bodied people if they can achieve the time is beyond me. If, for example, Pistorius can do the qualifying time, does this suddenly make the man with no legs below the knee 'not disabled'.

But by having 2 'experiences' is he/she not taking 1 of those experiences away from someone else? By that I mean in terms of medal potential, but more importantly the chance of being there to compete? I understand there are limited spaces for each event?

Don't agree with that! I'm of the opinion its a compitition and the aim is to be in with a shout of winning, not just be there for the 'chance to compete'.
On that basis half our Olympic squad were there 'just to compete' given thier woeful performance. GG seems like a nice kid so why should she not have had the chance to compete?

Why have 2 Olympics then