It has always been a puzzle to me that there is no league in basketball for small people. Height is a vague concept, like baldness, but just as some people are unquestionably bald, others are unquestionably short. Shortness is a category to which I, unfortunately and indisputably belong.
I’m a fan of basketball. In another possible world I’d have liked to have been a professional basketball player in the NBA – among other things, I’m attracted by the fringe benefits – such as the salary, and the vests. I think I’d have made an excellent basketball player, had I better coordination, more speed and strength. Oh, and been able to jump. And shoot. And had I been a foot taller
The Paralympics in London had numerous categories. There were categories for those with cerebral palsy, those with an intellectual disability, the visually impaired, those in wheelchairs and amputees. Within the broad categories, there were also sub-categories, classifying people according to their level of impairment.
What case can be made for such categorization that can’t be made for a basketball league for short people? Is there any intrinsic difference? The games were marvelous to watch, but shorty-basketball might be a great spectator sport too. Of course, those who competed in the games have had to overcome extraordinary obstacles and setbacks and in many cases have shown tremendous courage and resilience: but these are not obviously good reasons for the establishment of separate sporting leagues. Those born into abject poverty are seriously disadvantaged, but we do not set up leagues for poor people.
I suspect that most people believe that the categories in the Paralympics are justified because of an inchoate thought that they ‘level the playing field’. In most sports a blind person would have little chance of victory against a sighted person. Perhaps it seems fair that the blind should compete against the blind and those with cerebral palsy should compete against others with cerebral palsy.
But that rationale doesn’t survive scrutiny. Or at least, exactly the same can be said of basketball. Nobody of my height has a chance of making it to the NBA. Being short precludes me from a career in basketball, just as being blind precludes a person from being a professional football player and just as no woman could ever win a 100metre sprint against the fastest men. So why not have short people playing against short people?
There is a downside to the multiple categorization In the Paralympics: it inevitably leads to rows about which athletes fall into which categories and lays fertile ground for cheating: there have been many controversies over the years, such as whether the Spanish basketball team in 2000 contained players who were intellectually disabled.
So can any case be made for creating separate categories for disabled athletes and not for dividing basketball into height leagues?
Yes, a strong one: but all of it having to do with external, contingent factors. For example, sport has a critical rehabilitative role for those who’ve lost limbs in accidents or war. What’s more, disabled people are more likely to self-identify and be identified by others as a broad category, in a way that short people are not. This is a contingent fact about our world: in another possible world there might be other divisions and other identities: were society to be divided on various important measures (such as wealth and power) not along racial or class lines but by tallness, people might strongly identify with others of similar height.
In such a world, especially if height were strongly correlated with power and wealth (at present it is correlated, but only weakly), pressure might grow for a short basketball league. We don’t live in such a world, so my dreams of a career as a professional basketball player will have to remain just that – dreams. But it doesn’t seem fair.