MOST of us who thrill to sport, who are enthralled by sport, who are absorbed by sport, would no doubt endorse a quote from Earl Warren, former chief justice of the supreme court of America.

More associated with, or rather tainted by, heading the oft-maligned Warren Commission which investigated the assassination of President John F Kennedy, Warren was also a nifty one for a quote.

One of his offerings was that “the sports page records people’s accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man’s failures”.

Just think of last weekend alone when the coronation of Darren Clarke as the newest winner of The Open – a Major winner at the grand age of 42 no less – was celebrated across acres of newsprint. It was a tale of courage, character, and no little craft and deservedly attracted generous acclaim.

But for all that the sports pages are often draped in the commemoration of celebration and conquest, they can also be the arena for killjoys.

And boy, the sour-puss posse were in prominent position in two particular events this week.

First off, there’s Oscar Pistorius, the double amputee South African athlete dubbed “blade-runner” because of the specially designed metal prosthetic limbs upon which he competes.

In Italy this week against fully-limbed runners, the 24-year-old achieved the ‘A’-standard qualifying time for the World Championships and also the 2012 Olympics.

Ever since he won an arbitration ruling three years years ago enabling him to compete on a level running track the South African has striven to make that time.

Yet rather than be commended for his sheer determination to beat the odds, to overcome the adversity of having his legs amputated when he was a child, Pistorius is vilified and unbelievably described as having an unfair advantage.

Jeez, the guy hasn’t got any legs. How much more of a disadvantage can anyone have, let alone an athlete?

If there is anyone who epitomises the Olympic ideal it is surely Pistorius. He has made light of his ordeal, overcoming adversity to keep his sporting dream alive to compete with and alongside the best.

From athletics to football we have then the case of cheeky substitute Awana Diab.

He is the United Arab Emirates player who came off the bench to score with a penalty which he back-heeled into the net past the hapless Lebanon goalkeeper to seal a 6-2 triumph in a friendly match.

The bizarre spot-kick was captured on the internet and instantly went viral as net-followers revelled in the audacity of the act.

But get this, not only was Diab shown a yellow card for his successful spot-kick, he was then hauled off the pitch by his manager, who labelled him “disrespectful”.

If that wasn’t bad enough there was a strong suggestion that Diab – or should that be Diabolical? – could face a fine and/or even suspension for actually doing nothing more than scoring a goal.

Sometimes the credibility of the game is stretched more taut than the most fragile of hamstrings.

Anyone who saw the penalty should be applauding Diab’s daring rather than handing out churlish punishment as if they were the games-master in Kes. Diab displayed an innovative technique in striding up to the ball, then about-turning to backheel it in.

The diatribe brigade said it was a rum thing to do to a goalkeeper, who could not have anticipated what was to come.

However, anyone who viewed the goal can see that the dozy net-minder could have fallen to the turf in instalments and still saved the penalty. The backheel by Diab was hardly of bullet-like velocity. It had more of the force, if not the mis-direction, of a Diana Ross effort.

The whole furore reminded me of an intuitive free-kick routine by Coventry players Ernie Hunt and Willie Carr in the 1970s when the former stood directly over the ball and flicked it up with both ankles for the latter to lash it into the net.

The authorities outlawed the routine saying Hunt must have touched the ball twice. So much for ingenuity.

Can you imagine though if the puckish penalty perpetrator had been Messi, or Zidane, or Maradona, or Cruyff, or Best, or Pele? Would it have been branded disrepectful then? Somehow, methinks not.