by Mandy Wiener
Oscar had previously been invited to participate in the Helsinki Grand Prix but was unable to do so because of school commitments. In 2007, he finally felt that his qualifying times were good enough for him to be competing at such a high level internationally. Ironically, it so happened that in March 2007, the IAAF met in Mombasa in Kenya to adopt a rule that would for all intents and purposes impede his participation.
Rule 144-2 prohibited the use of ‘any technical devices designed to improve performance’ during a race. In short, it prevented the use of any device that would see one athlete benefit from technology over another. Some believed that the rule was adopted to target Oscar specifically and stop him from competing in events, but in June the IAAF issued a press release stating that the rule was not to be interpreted as concerning his sporting participation, at least until proper testing could be done on his prostheses. This meant that, despite the swirling controversy and negative press, Oscar could compete and did so in the 400 metres event at the Rome Golden Gala in July 2007. He came second in a time of 46.90 seconds – but more crucially, he had made history. It was the first time, at the Olympic stadium in Rome no less, that a disabled athlete had competed alongside able-bodied competitors at international level.
Of course, this meant that the media scrutiny and the criticism from naysayers would be ramped up. This was amplified by the British media who bombarded the runner with questions about the IAAF decision and whether his Cheetahs – his artificial blades – improperly benefited him on the track. Why should he want to take part in the Olympic Games when the Paralympics had been designed for people with just his kind of disability? Did he consider the Paralympic Games inferior?
‘I believe the two games are not mutually exclusive. It is not because I am able to compete in the Olympics that I will not compete in the Paralympics. To me the Olympics are just another sporting avenue and like most other athletes I am eager to explore every possibility and to be present and competitive in all the top sporting arenas. I do not consider the Paralympics to be inferior, merely different, and it remains incontestable that the Olympics are the ultimate sporting event. I am not a Paralympic athlete, nor am I an Olympic athlete. I am simply an athlete and a sprinter,’ Oscar explains in his book.
Oscar was becoming increasingly well known for his resilience and perseverance in his dogged attempt to compete. This was largely attributed to his attitude to life in general, as he sets out in his autobiography. ‘If God were to ask me if I wanted my legs back, I would really have to think carefully about my answer. I do not feel remotely as if I have been short-changed by life. Had I been born with normal legs I would not be the man I am today. My less-than-ordinary life has helped my potential to shine through. I am not sure that I would have had the same motivation and determination to improve myself and become an athlete.’
With the 2007 racing season over, Oscar returned home to South Africa with a shadow hanging heavily over his career and his achievements. The IAAF had taken the decision to carry out tests in the November of that year to prove definitively whether or not his prostheses constituted a technical advantage. The tests would be conducted at the German Sport University Cologne, supervised by the renowned Professor of Biomechanics, Dr Gert-Peter Brüggemann. The IAAF had already begun studying Oscar’s blades at the Golden Gala in Rome when high-resolution cameras were installed along the length of the track to measure his stride. Technicians at the University of Rome subsequently found that his stride was not longer than that of other athletes, but they did discover that Oscar’s performance could be measured differently to other athletes. While most able-bodied athletes reach the peak of their race in the first 70 metres, he starts slowly and peaks at around 200 metres to 300 metres.
So it was that Oscar subjected himself to two days of tests in Germany that saw his performance being measured alongside five other able-bodied athletes who had run similar 400 metres times to him. ‘The tests themselves were conducted in a circus-like atmosphere. I was at the centre of a throng made up of doctors, scientists, technicians and then the cameramen who were filming the procedure for the IAAF; the pressure on me was intense. This was the first time ever that the IAAF (or anyone else for that matter) had dedicated time and resources to researching the question of prosthetics.’
A month later a leaked copy of Professor Brüggemann’s report was published by German newspaper Die Welt, days before Oscar had been sent a copy. The tests had found that over a distance of 400 metres, his prosthetic limbs gave him an unfair advantage, effectively banning him from competing in able-bodied competition. Professor Brüggemann found that the carbon-fibre prostheses constituted a mechanical advantage because the energy restored from the track to the athlete is over three times higher with a prosthetic limb. He also found that Oscar was able to run at the same speed as able-bodied athletes while expending 25 per cent less energy and this explained why he was so much faster towards the end of a 400 metres race.
Oscar had until 10 January to comment on the Brüggemann report – which didn’t leave him much time. Together with Peet van Zyl, he discussed the findings with experts around the world, specifically the University of Miami’s Professor Robert Gailey. Oscar’s backers didn’t disagree with the research and tests conducted in Cologne but did take issue with the interpretation of the data. In short, they argued that the analysis could not only be conducted on the final phase of a 400 metres race, but rather that each phase of the race should be studied. They also insisted that both the positive and negative implications of prosthetic limbs must be considered and not merely the benefits. As a result, Oscar responded to the IAAF by the deadline of 10 January, arguing that the tests were biased and were limited in scope and that the conclusions should be rejected. The IAAF responded by ratifying its ban, effectively barring Oscar from competing in able-bodied competition. His only choice was to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, Switzerland.
Oscar thus needed to put together a team of experts to run their own tests that would challenge those conducted in Germany. This team included Professor Hugh Herr from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, himself a double amputee; Professor Rodger Kram from the University of Colorado; and Professor Peter Weyand from Rice University in Houston. Legally, Oscar was assisted by law firm Dewey & LeBoeuf, which had contacted him offering its services. It was agreed that the tests would be conducted in Houston in February, days after Oscar attended the Laureus Awards in St Petersburg in Russia.
‘It was soon clear that the Houston results would differ from those charted in Cologne,’ said Oscar in his book. ‘This was a huge relief to me, as the IAAF had relied heavily on these specific tests results to demonstrate my technical advantage. Over a period of ten days I participated in many different tests; at times I thought that I was repeating the same experiment endlessly, but in reality there were slight but significant variations both in the focus and in what was required of me. My acceleration was studied in detail; my oxygen consumption was measured at different speeds at different points during the race, as was the conduct and handling of my individual prostheses. I learnt much over this period, and left Houston feeling resolved and confident that the process would prove that the tests in Cologne had been inconclusive.’
By March, Oscar’s team had reached the conclusion that there was no way that his prostheses gave him a technical advantage over other athletes. ‘When one considers all the hard work and emotional turmoil, all the controversy and speculation, it was immensely gratifying finally to be able to repudiate my critics and show that my achievements were mine alone and dependent on my commitment, training and talent and not my prosthetic limbs,’ he reflected in his book.
As Oscar waited for the Court of Arbitration hearing scheduled for late April, he concentrated on life at home, his training schedule, a new love interest and a new house – in Silver Woods in Pretoria. The new girlfriend was Jenna Edkins, who Oscar describes in his book as ‘a delightful, sweet-natured, beautiful’ 18-y
ear-old with blonde hair and ‘sparkling eyes’. The new house was in an upmarket, green area of the capital in a secure housing estate, which Oscar found went a long way towards helping him feel ‘more stable and rooted’ in life. ‘After my mother’s passing and my years in boarding school I found that I was yearning for a space of my own that I could make my home. In truth the house is much larger than I need, but I wanted it to be somewhere I would be able to grow into and where all of my family and friends would be welcome to spend time or just drop in,’ Oscar says in his book.
He had a ‘substantial’ wooden table made up for entertaining and fitted the house with several television screens, all with the intention that the airy, open-plan house would be a homely, hospitable spot for entertaining. Oscar wanted the house to be a venue where he, his family and his friends could ‘make the most of being together and celebrate life’. His two dogs, Silo an American pit bull and Enzo, a bull terrier named after Enzo Ferrari, shared the house with him.
At the end of April, Oscar and his team flew to Lausanne for the hearings at the joint International Olympic Committee and the Court of Arbitration for Sport headquarters. His fate on the athletic track would be decided by a room full of officious lawyers – unforeseen preparation for what would come later in life on a far more intensive level when his fate would again be determined by the law. Oscar admits he found the pace intense and was ‘absolutely gripped’ by the proceedings, which he found ‘fascinating’. The judges’ mandate was only to examine the issue objectively because Oscar was not being accused of any wrongdoing as such. ‘It was rather unusual to see everybody come together and debate and dissect the matter intelligently and dispassionately, without the adversarial climate that is often created when you have two opposing teams and a person in the dock who has allegedly committed some misdemeanour,’ he wrote in his memoir. ‘I also found the hearings psychologically very demanding. Not only was this my last chance, but my battle, which had started as a personal quest born out of personal frustration, had developed into a symbolic fight against discrimination. I felt that I had come to represent all people like me, both today and in the future, who play sport or anything else for that matter and who want to be treated as equals.’
The court returned a verdict in May, while Oscar was in Milan, waiting in the offices of his lawyers. It ruled to overturn the ban, having found that it was not possible to conclude that the prosthetic limbs gave him a technical advantage over other athletes. This was because at no time was it conclusively proven that the advantages of competing with the prostheses outweighed the disadvantages of competing with those same limbs.
Even the IAAF seemed pleased with the outcome of the appeal court, which effectively was a loss for them. A picture of Oscar racing around a track on his J-shaped blades was posted on the association’s website and a statement was released by the IAAF’s president Lamine Diack. ‘Oscar will be welcomed wherever he competes this summer. He is an inspirational man, and we look forward to admiring his achievements in the future.’
By this point, however, there were just four months to go until the Olympics in Beijing and attention was now firmly fixed on whether he would qualify to compete. ‘It’s still going to be difficult. I’ve missed lots of races,’ Oscar was quoted in The Washington Post. ‘Now that the ban’s been lifted, my focus is back on athletics. I’m psyched about that.’
To qualify for South Africa’s Olympics team, the 21-year-old still needed to shave half a second off his personal best time in the 400 metres, from 46.56 seconds to 45.95 seconds. There was the possibility that South African officials could name him as a member of the country’s 400 metres relay unit, but the national team was unlikely to be good enough to qualify for Beijing.
South African athletic officials went so far as to waive the requirement that Olympics-bound athletes compete in the national championships in March. They planned to accept any qualifying time from a sanctioned event, anywhere in the world. Oscar had several races already scheduled in Europe before South Africa had to announce its Olympic team in July. ‘The young man is a fighter,’ said Leonard Chuene, then president of Athletics South Africa. ‘Let’s give him opportunity and support, and I believe very strongly he will make it.’
Despite running a personal best 46.25 in the 400 metres at the Spitzen Leichtathletik meeting in Lucerne, Oscar failed to meet the Olympic ‘A’ standard qualifying time by 0.70 seconds. His ability to train had clearly been derailed by the ongoing scientific testing and court proceedings and he was forced to be realistic. Instead, his focus shifted to the Paralympics in Beijing where he wowed, overcoming disappointment by winning the sprint triple – the 100 metres, 200 metres and 400 metres races.
Oscar had tasted Paralympic Gold again and with the door open to him to compete in the able-bodied Olympics, his gaze was set on London in 2012. By this stage, his star had also been elevated and he had been launched as a global superstar. ‘The fastest man with no legs’, as he was endearingly labelled, was named in Time magazine’s list of 100 most influential people, listed third in the ‘Heroes and Pioneers’ category. He became the face of international fashion brands such as Thierry Mugler, Oakley and Nike. He also developed an appetite for the fast life, driving luxury sports cars and indulging his passion for firearms.
But cracks also began to appear in the golden boy’s public profile, and he occasionally made the headlines for the wrong reasons. And yet, despite this, the shine never quite tarnished – no one wanted to face up to the athlete’s less inspirational qualities.
He realised the boat was filling with water. All he had heard was the splintering sound of the crash and knew he had to keep calm. He lifted his hand to his face and felt blood. He could also feel that much of his face was smashed in from the nose down.
As paramedics rushed to the scene of the accident at the Vaal River, so too did Oscar Pistorius’s cousins. The group had been enjoying a Saturday out on the water on 21 February 2009. Some wanted to return to shore and Oscar suggested they travel with his cousin in another boat. The athlete and a friend, John, wanted to take a slow sunset cruise.
Oscar testified in his murder trial about the events leading up to the accident.
‘We were on the water, I guess about just before six o’ clock. We met some of my family and friends at another place on the water and on returning, there were a couple of people on my boat and some of them were in a rush to get back to the house to cook dinner and so my cousin was in another boat and I suggested that they go with him, as we were just taking a leisurely cruise up the river and it was just my friend John and I in the boat and at a point we were just chatting, sitting and chatting and at a point he stood up to, I think to light a cigarette or to make a phone call and at that point he shouted and I looked forward and I could not see anything.
‘The Vaal river runs from east to west, and we were heading back west, so the sun was setting in front of us and I could only see the sun on the water, and a couple of seconds later, I just remember the sounds of the propeller, the boat, and I hit the steering wheel and the propeller went into the air. I remember the sound of the engine.’
The accident changed Oscar’s life – he ‘thought it was all over’. He was airlifted to Milpark Hospital in Johannesburg where he spent five days in intensive care, three of which were in a medically induced coma. He suffered serious head and facial injuries, a broken jaw, a smashed eye socket and broken ribs as a result of the impact.
While Oscar didn’t go into detail about the crash in his autobiography, he did acknowledge that he needed to be more responsible. ‘I love racing, speedboats, cars and bikes. My love of racing is something I need to keep in check; I can’t afford the risk of getting hurt and disrupting my training. I guess I learnt that the hard way, with 180 stitches and several broken bones from a massive accident in 2009, when my speedboat hit a submerged pier. But, truth be told, I’ve been breaking bones all my life.’
Reports following the crash suggested that all was not
as innocent as it seemed. Initially, it was reported that the boat had hit a submerged tree stump but then it was revealed that he had actually crashed into a jetty.
Bottles of alcohol had reportedly been found on the recovered boat and eyewitnesses told us that members of Oscar’s party were ‘rat-faced’ drunk. At the time, a witness also told The Times newspaper that the runner had been at the Stonehaven River Pub before the accident ‘watching rugby and having a few drinks’. Oscar’s manager Peet van Zyl confirmed that he had been at the pub but denied the drinking. Oscar also denied being drunk during the incident when he testified in his murder trial years later.
Police confirmed that they were investigating the possibility that the consumption of alcohol had played a role in the accident and were considering a case of negligent driving.
Oscar’s blood alcohol was not tested following the crash. The blood alcohol limit for operators of water-borne vessels is 0.05 grams alcohol per 100 milliltres blood – the same as for motorists. Two weeks after the incident the National Prosecuting Authority took a decision not to prosecute Oscar. ‘There are not sufficient grounds,’ then National Prosecuting Authority spokesperson Tlali Tlali confirmed.
However, after Oscar testified about the incident in court, the same eyewitness who had told us about the incident in 2009 came forward to the Daily Maverick and Eyewitness News alleging that the athlete had lied about the incident during his testimony. Michael Aitken, a property owner on the Vaal and MD of a telecommunications company, was on the scene of the accident, and took issue with Oscar’s claim that the accident had happened at sunset because the setting sun was in his eyes.
‘It’s such an absolute fib. He says this thing scarred him. It would scar you if you crash into a stationary object in the middle of the night while tearing down the river in party mode.’
