 Hello and welcome to the NewsClick studios here in New Delhi. I'm joined by Prabhu Prakash today to talk about two important and quite sort of prominent news stories of the day from the world of sport but linked to far more than just what happens on the pitch. The first story we're talking about is, of course, as you can see from the screen behind us, Caster Semenya and her sort of reaction to the 163 page detailed judgment on her case that has come out yesterday. Prabhu, so many things, gender identity issues, of course, race plays a part in this particular story because Semenya has said many times that she's felt singled out in terms of the direction of these kind of studies. She's come out and said today that, in fact, she's been treated as a human guinea pig in terms of the different hormonal treatments and hormonal adjustments that she's had to go through, including a two-year period where she was asked to take oral contraceptives as a means of reducing her testosterone, naturally occurring testosterone levels. So, of course, her case has been rejected and now, together with the South African Federation, they will appeal that in the Swiss court, tribunal, the Supreme Court equivalent. So that case will carry on and it's a case that's been going on for already almost a decade, throughout her career. What do you make of these developments? What do you make of the sort of mental or, and even otherwise, physical struggle that she's had to go through this process? Let's sort of look at it a little more objectively. That before we talk about the human being involved, in this case, Castor Semenya and Yuzia have said, she's been going through this 10 years of, shall we say, various arguments back and forth and being the human, now the human guinea pig for even treatments for the last two years, quote-unquote treatment, because she's not suffering from anything that needs to be treated, except the sports thinks it's a condition that needs to be treated. There is no other reason for doing it. I think the important issue is that what do we regard as a basic marker of gender and basic marker of gender if it is multiple, not one, then we have a whole lot of complexities that come in. And in this case, what has happened is that this whole issue of what is a gender marker has been not brought to the hormonal level. Till now, it is about genetics. That are you female or you male? And of course, there are very few cases where you have ambiguity even there. In the genetic level, you could still have ambiguity because there are some outliers that still take place in this particular case. But in, shall we say, almost universally, as I said to the few exceptions aside, it is genetically you can determine whether it's male or female. Now if you also bring in hormonal levels, what is a female hormone, what's a male hormone, now you're creating ambiguities of different kinds. And I don't think the sports should have gone into what is gender as defined by multiple markers. So they have said it is unfair. Now let's look at it another way. Shall we say in certain sports, if your male hormones is above a certain level, then also they should be reduced in order for other men to complete level playing field. Should we also say that muscle size also should be restricted. Now, how many ways should we then look at what is quote-unquote level playing field. We have the fundamental level playing field, men do not compete against women. That is supposed to be the only level playing field we have introduced. And in sports where body weight matters, boxing, then your weight further characterization through weight. But beyond that, if you want to do it through testosterone, I'm afraid it should not be then restricted to only women. And why only one particular, shall we say, range of running that you have considered, not for others. Then I think you're opening really a much more complex question. And as I said, I think this is completely a territory which sports should not enter. It is biology, it is science, it is really not the purview of the sports to do it. And I do believe that if the reverse had been the case, that it had come from, say, a country which has, shall we say, less pigment, and I think the answers would have been quite different. And I think that is, in essence, her entire argument. It's beyond, it's about a lot of it has to do with the singling out of it. While when you look at male sport, the Superman gene, as it were, is celebrated and sort of idolized and looked at as the paragon of physicality and all of that. But when you have, like you said, whether you call it an outlier or somebody with a similar super woman gene, I guess, in this case, that dominates her field, you find a way to sort of keep that in control. I know the whole issue for me is that what she has raised, would it have occurred if raised did not enter the equation? I think that answer is relatively clear, that it would certainly, the decision would have been different because, let's face it, sports is a place where the, shall we say, those who run sports, those who are involved in sports also have, in their lifetimes, not changed too much in the way they have looked at, shall we say, gender stereotypes, and the kind of acquisitions which have been made against various sports bodies. So I think that's been an ongoing problem that has been there in any case in sports. Particularly men have been in position of power vis-a-vis women. So I think that's definitely something that we have seen. But I'm saying that when you're looking at bringing it to the realm of science, because ultimately it's a medical testimony, it's been a biologist testimony, geneticist testimony, all of it which seem to have been taken into account, there the issue is really that can we actually have, in science, gender being decided on a hormonal basis, or on a genetic basis, or a mixture of the two. And as you said, the super-ban gene, why is it treated differently? And in this particular case, there's literally only one parameter on which the entire thing is based. And the other side of it is that the IWF, the International Athletics Federation, which is on the other side of this case, is also making an argument for equality and level playing field, saying that look at the number of women athletes who are having to, I suppose, I don't know what the argument is, that they cannot beat them in here, I guess. Yeah, but as you said, that sports is about differentiation. Sports is about who can beat another person, celebrating the one who can beat others. Now, if you want to have level playing field, give medals to everybody. In children, there are some Nordic countries who actually don't give medals to the first, second, and third. So there are ways of looking at it, and yes, I do think that you could consider that the competitive sports should not be there at all. So you could even consider that should we have sports of this kind at all or not. But as long as you have it, can you really talk about level playing field when the whole argument is to see who's the best, what is person who's the best is what you are seeing when you have a race. So I think that's not really the issue of a level playing field, but an unfair advantage. And that's why we have taken out so many things which used to be used by athletes to provide the edge. Let's face it, even today, cheating in sports is a very, very, shall we say, elite industry. And in any of the Olympics villages, there are whole sorts of stories about how and what comes in and what the athletes get or don't get. And the superior scientific, quote, unquote, scientific methods also give an edge to different athletes. But there it's a cheating industry which you're trying to beat. But this is not the case. This is a natural occurring in the human body. And if there are dissimilar levels, can you then do what is the Procastian solution? Chop off somebody's head or feet if they're too tall or somebody's stretch somebody to fit the bed. And this I'm afraid is what this particular judgment is. So I think this is a judgment which history below show was wrong. And it will be overthrown. But unfortunately, Caster Semenya is going to pay the price just like Dutty Chand may pay the price. Like other athletes pay the price, they are going to be sacrificed in this particular case. So Dutty Chand's case, the Indian sprinter, which also took a long time to get through at the court of arbitration for sport, and an amazing story in how she managed to put that case together, build a scientific team, managed to find support, and then present a case. And Cass ruled in her favor. So essentially it's the same story, testosterone levels naturally occurring. What makes the two stories different? Well, this is an interesting case because as we know testosterone would mean that your muscle mass would increase. That is why men have a different kind of muscle mass than women have. It's not that the amount of muscle is less. It's also the size and women tend to have a different structure of the muscle than men tend to have. And it's mainly because of the testosterone level, that's what it is argued. You can see bodybuilders just grow muscle and with testosterone supplements without actually adding to strength. But in certain cases, this muscle mass is supposed to provide extra power. Now, if that happens, what would have thought? The spritz should also be affected. So we are not clear why this has been restricted to the distance that Cass does the mania runs, the middle distances as it were, 800 to 260, longer spritz. It's difficult to understand because if it was testosterone and muscle which was in question, then I thought the shorter spritz should also have been included. But somehow, this has been more targeted to Cass the mania's case. It appears that Dutty Chen is not that much of a threat to shall be said to other sprinters. But she was seen to be a threat and therefore this specific ruling, which also substantiated what she has been saying, that she has been the target, not testosterone. And again, the point that you brought out about race also comes into the picture because I mean, if we look at it realistically, the spritz are dominated by black athletes. Yes, that has been the case. That has been the truth. You leave them out of it. But in these distances, you find that after Semenya, the rest of them are different races. A large number of them are from different parts of the world. So it is definitely also the race card is a prominent part of the whole conversation. So it's a bizarre sort of… And it's also interesting that if you come to higher distances, again the Ethiopians, Kenyans dominate. So that's also the other part of it. There also, this seems to be an area where shall we say certain pigments still play an important role. And maybe in others, they've sort of been not there. Of course, a large part of it, as we know, is because for a large number of people, whether it is football, whether it is sports, this is a way of upward mobility. And unfortunately, the world does not provide many opportunities for upward mobility to a whole bunch of people except sports. And that is why we see a lot of this case coming up. But yes, it's interesting that the fact that this range of sprints have been affected and not the lower or the higher ones. This is again something which is very difficult to understand purely on a scientific basis. Maybe there are sports scientific experts who know much more than I do and of course I'm not an expert in this area at all. We have one doctor who was also a part of Kester Sabanyar's case, who's from Delhi. So I think we should definitely try and reach out to her and have a discussion on this. And I think she was also helping other athletes, including Bhutichar. So we should actually talk about this in more detail with her. But as I said, on the examination of at least on the face of it, do not find a very logical understanding, either the range in which this particular restriction has been imposed or the scientific basis of what constitutes gender. Both these, I think, to my mind, extremely problematic. And I'm hoping that the fight that Kester Sabanyar is launching and other athletes in her support will be doing, will in the long term see this verdict defeated, even if it survives in the short run. Yeah, fair enough. Incredible. And so she said that no one can ever stop her from running. And she's already moved on to start competing in the longer 3000, 5000, let's see. So yeah, it'd be interesting and she definitely seems like she's up for the fight. And you know, this kind of testosterone change medicine that she's asked to take has lifelong effects. Effects, yeah. Already, I mean, yeah. So these are not things that you prescribe as if it's something which is completely over the counter drug, these have serious effects. She said that she had massive weight gain and uncontrollable weight gain, nausea, almost constant abdominal pain. So physical as well as forget about the fact that you're messing with all your levels. So what's happening in your mind, I guess we don't understand those things, but so pretty hard run. And I guess her decision is to look after herself and not at any cost be involved in this whole medical plan that the IWF seems to have prepared for her. But we move on from there to an upwardly mobile gentleman, Mr. Michelle Platini, who's been or was detained for a brief while for investigation for ethics violations in 2015. It's an ongoing investigation that began in 2017 and highlights sort of the link between big money, football and politics. So it's not strictly speaking a sports story today. If you can break it down in three minutes. How does this money go around and what is the connection between sport, big sport and big money? Well, you know, one thing is sports is no longer just sports. It is the biggest entertainment industry in the world today. I think it's beats films and it beats television for sure. And probably it beats the other sport quote unquote gaming, the game, the box boxes and all other stuff, which is also very big business, which people don't realize. But in this particular case, we see a strange mixture of both politics and of money. And of course, the big football club, because the, but the, but the bigger ones, and that's is Barcelona, Real Madrid, you have the English football clubs and now for Rafa, which are pretty big, those sort of are out of reach because already they have acquired a certain size and they've been taken over by big money earlier. So Qatar, who was looking to try and get votes for the World Cup, then also invested it not only in a club and Paris Sanjama was the, of course, the vehicle for Qatar, the bought the club also promised big money in it. But also the fact that it was linked to Sarkozy, who was the president of France in the time. And France's political support was required to get the, shall we say the support of other countries to bring it into Qatar as the World Cup venue. And as you know, the World Cup venue being Qatar was a very bad venue for various sides, apart from the fact that about 3000 to 4000 workers have died in constructing this. It's a place where really it doesn't sustain any other sports, let alone football. It's a very small kingdom, so to say. So the whole hinterland or the support base that should have been there isn't there. So this was an obvious, shall we say, money power speaking and in this case the vehicle seems to have been Paris Sanjama and the fact that Sarkozy was a part of the club. And of course this meant quote-unquote money being given, bribes in other words, and other favors. It's not just bribes that is there, but this I think is the clearest example of politics, money, and sports. So all the three come into focus here. And the allegations or the investigation, it's a criminal investigation with fairly serious ramifications perhaps if things are proven in court. Looking into both the award of the 22 World Cup of course, but also the 2016 euros to France, Platini was a key figure in the background negotiations and also on the front of it for that tournament. How do you see any of this playing out? Do you feel like there will be real results? There will be a sort of conclusion to these investigations or will it just be another eye wash? You know these are very difficult to say as we know that both in the case of World Cups we have other issues also, not only Qatar, but not only shall we say Michel Platini who's a very well-known name in that sense because he was himself a big player. But also the fact there have been other countries, other people involved who are also under investigations who just are not that big a name, partly because they never played football at that level. They were just backroom boys who later on became shall we say important players in the federation and in the world, you have a hierarchy itself. So living that part of it out, you know the question is that how much of this really ever translates into cleansing the system. Now we know not only it's a question of say the federation that we are talking about, we are also talking about the clubs. The clubs have been supposed, they are supposed to be under certain discipline. They cannot spend to more than this amount for doing various things. Financial fair play. Financial fair play so that the league does not become completely lopsided, a few clubs can play among themselves, the rest don't matter kind of scenario and that will lose at the end of it spectator interests. So therefore this is kind of killing the golden goose because ultimately spectators really sustain the sport. So therefore there is also this element that fair play within the leagues themselves and also within the how much money they cannot spend and we know that this is being violated. We have again the equivalent of the Snowden revelations taking place here where all the clubs how they have shall we say siphoned money to pay far beyond what the guidelines are what the rules are though that's also there. So how much of this will translate into actual from investigations of punishment is really something that I have to see. Some people will be punished but the big guys the ones who really own the money and the clubs I don't think there's going to be much that will happen to them. Certainly I don't think Sarkozy the former president is going to suffer for this. Thank you Pravee for all those insights both on the Semenya story and on Platni of course will follow up on these stories as we go along. Thank you for watching. Stay tuned to NewsClick.