Under any flag, Jana equals drama RICHARD HINDS
June 30, 2010
Play video Venus Williams out of Wimbledon
In the context of Jana Pittman-Rawlinson-Pittman-Rawlinson’s soap operatic career, and a well-publicised silicone enhancement, her latest appearance on the front pages might be considered a mere storm in a D-cup. Or, after her patriotic decision to subsequently sacrifice the destabilising implants for (this) country, maybe an A-cup.
Yet, having reportedly fluttered her eyelids at British athletics officials - and, no doubt, having noted the vast lottery funding that has expanded the Brits’ Olympic war chest almost as greatly as she once expanded her own - some will accuse Pittman-Rawlinson-Pittman-Rawlinson of treason. They will demand her passport be surrendered and the brilliant hurdler be given nothing more by Australian taxpayers than a bottle of nail polish remover to erase the southern crosses she once daubed on her well-manicured claws.
However, if Pittman-Rawlinson-Pittman-Rawlinson did seriously contemplate representing Great Britain, her great mistake was not to betray the nation for which she has performed admirably - never more so than when she won the 2007 world championships just nine months after the birth of her first child. Her mistake was to allow those Australians who have supported her through thick and thin - and, a bit too often, thick-headedness and thin-skin - to contemplate life without her. And, unlike her stride between the jumps, her timing was not great.
Last week Australia gained a Welsh-born Prime Minister of unusually polished presentation, political acumen and every-woman appeal. To then lose to Britain a Sydney-born runner of considerable ability, but with a temperament that can make Diego Maradona look like Roger Federer, a painted fingernails-down-the-blackboard public demeanour and an aching body that brings no firm promise of a redeeming Olympic gold medal?
You can make up your own mind whose balance of trade rises and falls. But, safe to say, most of those who threw their hands in the air when news broke on Sunday night of Pittman-Rawlinson-Pittman-Rawlinson’s supposed defection were not gripped by anguish. They were offering to drive her to the airport.
No doubt, Pittman-Rawlinson-Pittman-Rawlinson’s admirers would consider that appraisal harsh. Citing the Tall Poppy Syndrome - the handy all-purpose defence for the high-achievers against criticism - they would contend an outstanding record on the track justifies sometimes bizarre behaviour. They will argue that a supposed lack of appreciation and respect from the Australian public, and particularly the abandonment of sponsors, are good reasons to at least think about trading boxing kangaroo for Union Jack.
In such cases, however, there is a certain veracity in that old saying about being careful what you wish for.
If the highly strung Pittman-Rawlinson-Pittman-Rawlinson has suffered the odd indignity here during moments of duress, how would an Australian be treated by the far less forgiving British media - particularly if she displayed the same diva-ish tendencies that accompanied her injury-plagued Athens and Beijing campaigns? And, most pertinently, if she did not deliver at London 2012?
Of course, the defection story might have been an innocent misunderstanding caused by the attempted procurement of a convenient British passport - made possible by Pittman-Rawlinson-Pittman-Rawlinson’s marriage to English coach, and occasional husband, Chris Rawlinson. Even so, it created an amusing irony.
So who stepped forward to deny reports our girl was bound for Blighty, and to reassure Australians that, should Pittman-Rawlinson-Pittman-Rawlinson return to full fitness by 2012, she would compete in green and gold? Athletic Australia’s head coach Eric Hollingsworth - a former English decathlete. Which, as we cheered on ‘‘Aussie’’ Jarmila Groth and ‘‘Aussie’’ Anastasia Rodionova at Wimbledon, put into perspective the elasticity of sporting nationality.
Some might have worried about Pittman-Rawlinson-Pittman-Rawlinson padding GB’s medal count, instead of ours. But would it really matter? Under any flag, by any name or wearing any sized support garment, Jana will always be an amusing melodrama.
and why wouldn’t I her current PE ratio is rating 40x way overpriced…would you buy a company that hasn’t made a sale in 3years. I am all for teh specualtive mining shares but heck we have the Chinese to buy from us. wait a minute no the Chinese are not in the CWG…nearly got my hopes up there.