In a world more obsessed with rules than a hall monitor with a new whistle, the International Women’s Sports Federation (IWSF) announced today that Lia Thomas, the transgender athlete, has been banned from participating in women’s sports.

First, let’s address the hot topic, or in this case, the grizzly bear on the diving board. Ms. Thomas, a trans woman, has been making waves in the swimming world for some time now. It seems that every time she dives in, she also plunges us into the deep, heated waters of the debate surrounding trans athletes in sports.

Well, the IWSF, with all the common sense of a group that names itself after an imaginary Star Trek federation, has decided it’s had enough of this fuss. They’ve shown Thomas the way out, like a matador waves his cape, saying “hasta la vista, cariño,” or as the Spanish bullfighters say.

The IWSF’s decision came after an intense debate about the physiological advantages and disadvantages between cisgender and transgender athletes. According to the IWSF, its decision was based on a “scientific consensus.” It’s inevitable to recall the days when scientific consensus believed the Earth was flat and the center of the universe. Let’s hope its sources are more credible this time.

At a recent press conference, IWSF President Sir Reginald Pompous III defended the decision with the grace of a walrus on a unicycle. He commented, “We just need to ensure a level playing field.” It is, to be sure, a rather innovative take on equality that can be achieved by banning certain people. Perhaps someone should tell Sir Reginald that this innovative thinking brought us things like the Berlin Wall and Prohibition.

Unsurprisingly, the ban has caused a stir. Critics argue that this is just the latest step in a trend of increasing regulations that threaten to turn the sport into a bureaucratic nightmare. The IWSF’s solution to the problem of trans athletes? Simply remove them from the equation. Now, why didn’t we think of that? It’s so simple it’s almost medieval. But I guess when you’re dealing with a federation that sounds like it was named after George Lucas, subtlety isn’t your thing.

While there is a valid debate about fairness in sport, the solution shouldn’t be total exclusion. However, the IWSF seems to have the subtlety of a charging rhinoceros. Instead of sitting down to debate an inclusive policy that respects the rights of all athletes, they’ve decided to follow the example of an 18th-century monarch and simply ban everything they don’t like.

Meanwhile, Lia Thomas’s fans have reacted to the news with the same calm and restraint as a cat thrown into a pool. They point out that Lia has adhered to all hormonal regulations and that, by leaving her out, the IWSF is being as fair as a poker game with a mobster.

In an age where we should embrace diversity and inclusion, it seems rather odd to debate banning athletes for not fitting a specific mold. On the other hand, this is the same sports world that gets enraged every time a footballer takes a knee, so perhaps we shouldn’t be too surprised.

As the debate continues, one can’t help but wonder what the future holds for the IWSF. Will they start banning athletes for being too tall, too strong, or too good at their sport? Only time will tell, but it’s clear that, for now, they’ve jumped headfirst into a decision as popular as a porcupine in a balloon store.

This decision may satisfy those who believe in rigid definitions of sports categories, but it’s worth remembering that the world of sports was once a place where a man named Babe was one of the best baseball players, a guy named Magic was a basketball genius, and a woman named Billie Jean King broke barriers in tennis. It was a world where individual achievement was celebrated, not a cause for exclusion.

In this case, it would seem that the IWSF, in its eagerness to ensure a level playing field, has forgotten the spirit of the sport: competition, diversity, and inclusion. This ban of Lia Thomas could be interpreted as a worrying sign of the times or as a misstep by a governing body with about as much grace as a bull in a china shop. Either way, it’s a decision that will undoubtedly continue to resonate throughout the world of sport, reminding us that, even in the 21st century, we still have a long way to go before we truly understand the meaning of fair play.