NIJINSKY STILL THE KING.

The failure of 2-5 favourite Camelot to win yetsrday's St Leger and so complete horse racing's 'Triple Crown' shows just how difficult a task this is.

 

Not since the great Nijinsky in 1970 has any horse succeeded in winning the 3 great classics of 2000 Guineas, Derby and St Leger and proved itself to be the best of its generation over distances from 1 mile to nearly 2. Indeed, Nijinsky is the only winner of this prestigious honour since Bahram triumphed in 1935 and these 2 horses are the only successes since the end of the First World War.

 

Camelot came remarkably close to adding his name to the roll of honour but missed out narrowly to a long shot, Encke, eventually being beaten by only ¾ length. Such is the margin between immortality and failure.

WHAT IS THE ECB UP TO ?

Apparently, the ECB has delayed announcing its squad for the forthcoming Test series in India amid a certain amount of speculation. It's being said that one reason for the delay may be that there are negotiations being conducted with Kevin Pietersen over his recent actions with a view to him being included in the squad.

 

Excuse me, as they say, but since when does a selectorial body have to hold 'negotiations' with those whom it is considering for selection ? If this is, indeed, the reason why the ECB's announcement has been delayed it serves only to show how weak they are as a ruling body. Pietersen may be a potentially match-winning batsman but he is also a loose cannon and a liability; he would not be the first and won't be the last such to be discarded by his national side and he won't actually be missed.

 

The trouble is that the 'win at all costs' mentality is currently holding sway at the ECB and they seem prepared to do almost anything in order to get this man back in the team, for good or ill. That it will ultimately be 'for ill' has escaped them in their desperate rush for fleeting glory.  

MURRAY A WINNER AT LAST !

After years of angst and near misses, Andy Murray has finally done it ! In New York last night, he won the US Open Tennis Championship to became the first British player to win a Grand Slam title since Fred Perry won the same event in 1936.

 

It seems that the match was far from easy. Murray won a lengthy first set on the tie break, 12-10, and took the secon 7-5. Djokovic then stormed back to win the next 2 6-2 6-3 and set up a dramatic decider in which Murray finally triumphed 6-2, the match lasting almost 5 hours.

 

Murray has certainly enjoyed the most successful year any British player has enjoyed since the far-off days of Perry, this victory being the icing on the cake of a year which has seen him reach the Wimbledon final and win the Olympic title. Those who doubted that he had the mental strength to ever win a Grand Slam title, including me, have been silenced. Now that this particular dragon has been slain, what price Murray to win the end-of-season 'Tour Finals' and to add a second Grand Slam title in Australia in January ? One can only wonder what the media coverage will be like at Wimbledon next June.

 

The only slight sour note is the continuing nationalistic element in Murray's progress as his Scottishness rather than his Britishness is repeatedly emphasised by the likes of Alex Salmond. Murray himself has, of course, alienated some in the past by his insistence that he is Scottish and not British, though such remarks no longer seem to be part of his own public vocabulary; nonetheless, he might be well advised to work harder on his image if he really wants to win the hearts of the Nation.

ROBSON BEATEN BUT GLORY STILL BECKONS.

Laura Robson's exciting run at the US Open Tennis championships finally acme to an end last night with defeat at the hands of the defending champion, Sam Stosur of Australia.

 

Everything started well for Robson as she gained an early break of serve but thereafter she seemed a little 'out of sorts'. The usually uneering accuracy of her groundstrokes was missing and she looked a little weary. In the end, despite some very spirited resistance which saw Stosur miss out on 8 match points, the Australian won in straight sets, 6-4 6-4.



 

Even though our girl lost, she will have gained massively from her experiences in this event and goes home knowing that she has 2 major scalps to her name. In the cold light of day she will also know that Stosur, the world number 7, could also have been beaten but for the emotionally draining victories she had already achieved.

 

If her support team and coach get it right from now on, there really is no reason why Laura cannot be in the world's top 50 within 6 months and perhaps seeded for next year's US Open. Another 12 months from then and she could be a serious challenger for the title.   

PISTORIUS BEATEN BY RUNNER WITH DODGY LEGS

Amazingly and within a couple of hours of me writing about the tecnological issues that arise from the 'Paralympics', a tecnological controversy has arisen.

 

Oscar Pistorius didn't win a gold medal he'd been expecting and immediately blamed his defeat on a bit of jiggery-pokery by one of his fellow competitors. The other man, it was claimed, had 'legs' that were too long. This was not, of course, a reference to any actual legs but to the artificial legs used by the gold medal winner, Alan Oliveira.

 

Pistorius is now reported to be calling for 'tougher regulations on the length of running blades' and has claimed that 'we are not running in a fair race here'. Presumably, Pistorius would like to see everyone using exactly the same equipment even though this would deny the inherent height, weight and build differences that we all have. One wonders if anyone has measured Usain Bolt's legs to see if they're within legal limits.

 

This type of nonsense shows exactly why these 'Paralympic Games' are farcical and nothing but an insult to many of those who take part.

 

 

PARALYMPIC DISABILITY IS A MATTER OF DEGREE.

As the so-called 'Paralympics' continue to their ultimate conclusion, world records seem to be accruing at a rate of knots. That's a perfectly normal, non-disabled knot, by the way.

 

Great for the competitors concerned but how much of the apparent improvement is down to them and how much is down to advances in their assorted medical and para-medical treatments ? Are 'Para-olympians' even subject to the same rules about the use of drugs as are proper Olympians ?

 

The 'Blade Runner', Oscar Pistorius, uses artificial 'legs' which are only possible as a result of technological advance; any records he sets are at least partly a result of the technology he has access to and which renders comparison with past performances impossible. There is every possibility that future advances will make his performances irrelevant; indeed, there must be a strong chance that future advances will make 'disabled athletes' able to outperform 'normal' athletes'. Where will we be then ?

 

I won't deny that 'normal' athletes have also benefited from advances in technology but the advances are much smaller. Improved tracks, equipment and training techniques have undoubtedly helped some to go further than was previously thought possible but this is hardly comparable with the already achieved and potential advances for 'disabled' athletes.

 

There are some events in which able-bodied competitors could equally take part; for instance, events where competitors are in wheelchairs could be entered by anyone. Such events could be competed for on an equal footing and might, of themselves, justify inclusion in the Olympic Games. Other events, in which competitors are classified according to the severity of their disability, or rely on artificaal limbs and the like simply have no place in an olympics of any sort.

 

Why can't people see this ?