IAAF have opened a big can of worms here

It’s ironic that the reason given for the postponement of the International Association of Athletics Federations’ controversial new gender rules is that they want to avoid uncertainty during an ongoing legal process.

Considering the rules they’re trying to enforce, the IAAF seems oblivious that it is about to unleash a downpour of uncertainty and confusion from deep within Pandora’s Box.

“A contested application to stay the implementation of the DSD (differences of sexual development) regulations would have caused additional delay and created new uncertainty for athletes seeking to compete in the women’s category,” the global body said in a statement this week, after revealing it would hold off on the implementation of the new rules until an appeal was heard at the Court of Arbitration for Sport in March.

And that’s all good and well, but if uncertainty is a factor the IAAF wants to avoid, their sense of reality is about to catch a vicious slap.

The new rules state that hyperandrogenic athletes will need to reduce their natural testosterone levels via medication or surgery, or they will not be allowed to compete internationally against women over distances ranging from 400m to the mile (1.609km). Alternatively, they can compete in a new DSD category.

To compete against women, they’ll also have to show they’ve restricted their natural testosterone production to “acceptable” levels for six months in order to

Wesley Bo on

be cleared. And then what? Aside from the apparent attempt to target African middle-distance runners who have dominated the discipline in recent years, or the alleged human rights abuses associated with the rule, the process going forward is going to be pretty complicated.

Does every woman competing over these distances have to be tested, or only if their opponents don’t like the way they look or how fast they run? At what point will the IAAF deem it OK to point fingers at specific athletes or, will they simply march girls and women around the world through testing rooms to check if they each fit what the athletics federation finds acceptable in terms of femininity?

If athletes are flagged, how often will they be tested and monitored to check they’re staying within the required limits. And who will pay for it? Must athletes test themselves daily in case someone comes knocking on the door?

And if their testosterone levels climb a click too high, are they suspended from competing or shunned to participate indefinitely in a sideshow category?

The IAAF wants people to believe they’re putting the athletes first, that they’re thinking of all the women who have to prepare for the 2019 athletics season.

All this while Semenya and some of her peers wait for a verdict about whether or not they’re enough of a woman to be called a woman.

There’s not much thought going into their uncertainty, and the potential confusion and allegations that could emerge from this new gender rule could have a damaging effect for many years to come.

Maybe the IAAF should forget about fighting athletes in court during the off-season and think about the long-term effects of their actions.

For an organisation that claims to care about the treatment of its athletes, it seems to have a selective approach, causing more uncertainty than it prevents.