FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Pistorius pisses it all away

Pistorius pisses it all away

Started by Mozart12 REPLIES506 VIEWS· 03 Sept 2012, 13:36
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
03 Sept 2012, 13:36
#1
03 Sept 2012, 13:36#1

 The coverage was a testament to Pistorius and his immense role in handicapped sport. Nothing but admiration and praise. And then after losing a fabulous race, he accuses the young kid from Brazil of cheating. You could hear the bubble burst. He will never regain that sense of greatness.

 

The ironical thing was it was the perfect moment for him to solidify his position at the head of the sport. A simple comment appreciating another great young runner without legs would have brought the house down....glory for himself.

 

Always sad to see these moments of monumental smallness.

BL
bluebokPro3,977 posts
03 Sept 2012, 13:49
#2
03 Sept 2012, 13:49#2

Moz that was my first thought too! Although, if the kid did in fact cheat, then it is a fair comment....if not, I agree, I will never look at him the same way again.

CA
carpetmuncherPro1,667 posts
03 Sept 2012, 14:15
#3
03 Sept 2012, 14:15#3

i was shocked when i heard oscar making such comments in the first place. just shows that some people just love to be in the spotlight all the time.....very sad moment for me really

MD
Monkey D LuffyPro6,277 posts
03 Sept 2012, 17:26
#4
03 Sept 2012, 17:26#4

yeah i know exactly what u mean, its like some of these bloggers on this forum i ferquently visit where they always accuse McCaw of cheating, they really need to show a bit of class and acknolwedge a great player when they see one,,,,,,,,,wait a minute, this isnt allblacks.com, o_O



LMAO, :P 

just messing with u boys, ;)
 

AJ
Arthur JohnPro1,748 posts
03 Sept 2012, 19:10
#5
03 Sept 2012, 19:10#5

 Another case of the mouth reacting faster than the brain.

Sad to hear his comments....

sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,301 posts
03 Sept 2012, 22:23
#6
03 Sept 2012, 22:23#6

He just taking the piss with these accusations

BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
04 Sept 2012, 17:40
#7
04 Sept 2012, 17:40#7

Fact is Oscar should never have been allowed to run at the olympics. Its only a matter of time that technology wins a guy like him a gold.

But fo reasons of sentimentlity he was allowed to run. Now they are quibling about length  of leg etc. Well let them quible about that in the paraolympics if they must but contain it there.

Ex Sport 24:

London - Oscar Pistorius was not beaten because his opponent's blades were longer, a professor of sports engineering told Reuters on Monday.

The South African, dubbed the "Blade Runner", was upset by Brazil's Alan Oliveira in the final of the Paralympic men's 200m and prompted controversy when he used a post-race interview to question the legitimacy of his defeat. 

Pistorius suggested that his opponent's prosthetics had artificially lengthened his stride, giving him an unfair advantage.

According to Professor Steve Haake of Sheffield Hallam University, however, stride length and the size of his prosthetics were not the deciding factors in the result.

"The practical outcome of larger blades is a greater stride length, assuming you turn over your legs at the same rate," Haake told Reuters in a telephone interview. "But to do that, the mass of the legs needs to be smaller. It is called the conservation of angular momentum.

"Imagine the experiment when you spin someone round on an office chair with their arms outstretched. If they bring their arms in, they speed up. It is the same effect with athletes' prosthetics. When the mass is closer to the centre they are easier to spin.

"Just making the legs longer, therefore, doesn't necessarily make Oliveira quicker... In any case, if you look at Oliveira, he actually took more strides, which means a shorter stride length. It was that that won him the race."

Haake also questioned whether Pistorius, who runs against able-bodied athletes and competed in last month's Olympics, had damaged his argument that his prosthetics do not give him an advantage.

"I think he was saying the rules are wrong, that having the scope to lengthen the legs is not fair," Haake said.

"In doing this he has opened a can of worms. If he is saying, 'If you lengthen your legs you are at an advantage', then he blows his argument out of the water that he gains no advantage over able-bodied athletes by using prosthetics.

"He is in a difficult place and can't have it both ways."

Professor Andy Miah, of the University of the West of Scotland, is another who questions whether Pistorius is treading on awkward philosophical ground.

"It would be a mistake to say that Oscar has been beaten at his own game, but critics have drawn parallels to his concern about Oliveira with arguments against Oscar's participation within the Olympic Games," he said on his personal website (www.andymiah.net).

"The IPC (International Paralympic Committee) have said that Oliveira's legs are within the rules, but here we have another debate about what the rules should be in the first place...

"The big question emerging from the race last night is whether the Paralympic rules within the T43 200m race need to be tighter.

"It's normal that a past winner should face young challengers and that they should eventually dethrone the champion. However, this looks like an unusual win and the concerns have been raised by other Paralympians about athletes adjusting their blade dimensions.

"If Oliveira's prosthetic legs are bigger and better and legal, then Pistorius really ought to get some. If his body height precludes this and the only reason why Oliveira has longer blades is that he is taller, then Pistorius has been beaten by a more biologically privileged athlete."

Who can doubt tha ttechnology will improve? These guys will run the 100m in 8 seconds one day!!! Sorry keep them out of able bodied sport.

Beeno foreseeing endless problems with this. Act now. Admit it was a sentimental mistake allowing Oscar to compete. Some clear thinking is necessary.

 

sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,301 posts
18 Oct 2012, 22:23
#8
18 Oct 2012, 22:23#8

 ???

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Oct 2012, 23:16
#9
18 Oct 2012, 23:16#9

Last I looked his name was Oscar Pistorius. Unfortunate maybe, but a fact. What would you have liked me to call him?

sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,301 posts
18 Oct 2012, 23:21
#10
18 Oct 2012, 23:21#10

 a bit like someone who is called Spies?  "Spies piessing it all away"..

Merely the pot calling the kettle black or people who live in glass houses should not throw stones etc, etc

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Oct 2012, 01:04
#11
19 Oct 2012, 01:04#11

 Well you sure had to dig deep to find an offensive word.....and frankly "pissing it away"  wouldn't offend  many. But if it offends you I apologize.

sharkbok
sharkbokCaptain23,301 posts
19 Oct 2012, 01:16
#12
19 Oct 2012, 01:16#12

 It is the same principle, a parody by playing on someones name with a swear word. Your application of the humour is parody but also Satire

However some people may find that your application of the humour in worse taste because the subject being are ridiculed is a cripple which requires particular sensitivity. Would you agree?  

 

 

 

 

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
19 Oct 2012, 01:59
#13
19 Oct 2012, 01:59#13

There are swear words and swear words. And if you read my comments which started this string, they were in fact balanced. But you're right, some may find it offensive. Point is SB, we are probably better off keeping the swear words out of these name parodies. For example I have coined Destroyli for Rudolph and Whineke for Meyer. They are  effective, because they allude to their failings.

 

In any case, I agreed with bongani and still do, but I'm not looking for nuclear winter. Let's move on.

— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news