Every once in a while a single athlete controversially rises into the conscience of the mainstream. Too often we see athletes behaving badly or being arrested for one thing or another; sometimes it is their athletic merit alone that brings them to the fore. At the end of August, South African runner Oscar Pistorius once again shook the world of sport with a historic appearance at the IAAF World Championships in Daegu, South Korea. Pistorius made the semi-final in the individual 400-metre event and the final of the 4x400m relay.

The controversy arises from Oscar's use of two prosthetic legs, aptly called "Cheetah" legs. The carbon-fibre prosthesis technology used in the legs has been around since the late '80s; the Cheetah running leg has been around since 1996. Oscar emerged on the Paralympic scene about eight years ago and quickly set new standards and records, moving from disability sport to non-disabled sport as his performances improved. The controversy centres largely around the Cheetah legs and whether they give advantages over a runner without them.

In 2007, Pistorius was banned from athletic competition by the IAAF. It was perceived the Cheetah legs gave him an advantage, particularly in the last part of the 400m event where lactic acid build up was highest. In May 2008, that decision was overturned by the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne after biomechanical researchers from MIT gave evidence that use of the Cheetah legs gave no clear advantage or disadvantage to Oscar.

The decision was too late for him to compete at the 2008 Olympics in China. Then a boating accident left Pistorius in a coma for three days in early 2009, taking him out of contention for the IAAF World Championships in Berlin. With better luck on his side in 2010, Oscar subsequently qualified to compete in South Korea by running an amazing 45.07 400 at a track meet in Italy.

Wave of amputee runners?

Although many fear a rising tide of amputee runners taking over the Olympics, it would be more accurate to say that Oscar Pistorius is one-of-a-kind in the amputee world. He is a congenital amputee; that is, he was born without fibulae and subsequently had his lower legs removed at the age of 11 months. Some experts believe this is an important factor in his development as an athlete as many of his amputee competitors have acquired their amputations later on in life.

Many of the stresses experienced in running are increased dramatically if there is scar tissue or sensitive areas of the residual limb. A leg amputee may be able to run 100 metres but to run endlessly in an Olympic level training regime is something else altogether. It is also interesting to point out Oscar's early rival was Tony Volpentest, a congenital quadrilateral amputee. These points are relevant because Oscar Pistorius gets as much admonishment for being advantaged from his fellow amputee runners are much as he does from the rest of the world.

Oscar's entry into able-bodied sport has always been controversial.

It is natural for people to perceive prosthetic limbs as foreign objects and subsequently treat them as a positive attribute, particularly if the amputee athlete wins the event. Athletes with disabilities have competed against non-disabled athletes for decades. I, myself, competed at the Paralympics and competed locally in non- disabled track meets and powerlifting events. Amputee athletes around the world do this, so do athletes with visual impairments -- but no one seems to say anything in complaint until we start winning. When a perceived "disadvantage" is miraculously turned in to an "advantage," how can this be? It seems an athlete simply cannot be allowed to move from disadvantaged to advantaged on the basis of success, even when the technology in question has been around for years.

In the 1980s, Canadian Arnie Boldt competed in university-level high jump. His Paralympic record has stood since 1981 -- however he jumped higher in non-amputee events that were not recognized by the International Paralympic Committee.

In 1976, an amputee pistol shooter was stopped from competing in the Montreal Olympics because the shooter who came in third place at the trial event complained about his prosthesis. It took three years for the International Shooting Federation to make a decision thus denying the athlete the opportunity to compete.

I, myself, was banned from competing locally by the International Powerlifting Federation from 1998-2001 because my prosthesis was determined as a "foreign piece of equipment."

Controversy in Daegu

The interpretation of the rules says as much about the person interpreting them as it does about the inadequacy of the rules.

To gauge Canadian perception one may read online responses to the Aug. 29 editorial in the Globe and Mail. Needless to say there are countless instant experts out there who have determined that Oscar Pistorius has somehow diluted the purity of sport, that whilst an "emotional response is guaranteed," the reality is he should be with his "own kind."

Yet there are lots of positive responses saying this is an athlete that should be "celebrated" as the G&M editorial states.

As a divisive issue within the world of sport, none breaks the finishing tape more abruptly than Oscar Pistorius.

Controversy still reigns as Oscar was left out of the 4x400m final in Daegu, despite qualifying and setting a new South African record. The IAAF determined that it would be too dangerous for Oscar to run anything but the first leg of the relay and the South African team determined whoever had the slowest time in the heat would be replaced. The South African placed second behind U.S.A. running a slightly slower time than in the heat with Pistorius. The man with carbon fibre legs still receives a silver medal due to being part of the relay team.

Running to an ideal place

For now, the powers that be are forced to admit Pistorius has no clear advantage or disadvantage. All things being equal there is no better place for Pistorius to be.

As a Paralympian and an amputee of some 35 years, I personally celebrate the mere existence of Oscar Pistorius. I love the controversy he has generated. Too often in the world of sport we are faced with the banal and self-interested. The interviews with Pistorius show us what sport is missing, a modicum of modesty and the feeling of honour in being simply present (here's a recent video example).

We should all be celebrating Oscar. He has been a long time in the making.

We should be breaking down the walls that make this man either disadvantaged or with an advantage -- for he can't be both.