Paris 2024: For medals, sports governance is the key

Paris was supposed to be the ‘turning the corner’ moment for Indian sport, expectation was we would win double digit medals and announce our arrival on the world stage as a serious player. This would also be the trigger to bid for the 2036 Olympics.
But, due to an unexpected twist, the script went wrong. We won a few medals, lost out on many; some near misses, others by big margins. Naturally, it’s time to ask questions, and find answers.
Normally, post games reviews start and end with blaming the government. It is in the firing line – not entirely unfairly – for much that is wrong: funding, faulty preparation, red tape, it’s a long list. Next in the firing line are the National Sports Federations (NSFs), guilty of unprofessional functioning, monumental incompetence and being insensitive to athletes.
Surprisingly, those firing bullets post Paris have a new target – questions this time are being asked about the athletes, their commitment and focus. When Prakash Padukone, a serious voice, pulled the trigger saying players must introspect and take responsibility to deliver, he unwittingly opened a new front.
Padukone awarded the government a gold medal when he said India was the best funded and supported team. Players got whatever they wanted; other countries don’t provide such facilities.
So, some questions: Why are we where we are, not where we wanted to be? If rukna nahin hai (we should not stop) is our aim, then what’s stopping us? Also, what needs to be done?
No magic formula is there for India to turn things around and win more medals. But if Ukraine wins 12 and Israel seven India must step up. That England, which has a sports structure similar to ours, won a massive 65 shows there are tough lessons to be learnt. Simple stats suggest India, on the international sports highway, is perhaps on the wrong route. The google map to find Olympic medals must therefore be reset.
Before looking at likely reforms, some disclaimers. One: Funds are not an issue, the government has and will continue to do the heavy lifting. Private sector/ corporate contribution is small/negligible and is likely to remain at that level. Corporate spends are mostly marketing efforts, not directed towards sports development.
Anyway, remember Abhinav Bindra’s telling comment that funding is only one of many moving parts – sporting success isn’t a vending machine where money throws up medals.
Two: The role of sports management agencies, though commendable, is limited. They are excellent in hand holding contracted athletes and quick in responding to their needs – something the government struggles to do. Flip side is their good work is accompanied by loud PR noise as they extract disproportionate credit for what they do. These organisations are not main players, but very useful as impact players to execute a small role.
Three: Specialised training facilities for elite athletes are best left in private hands. India needs more set ups like the JSW IIS and Abhinav Bindra’s state-of-the-art performance enhancing centres. Don‘t expect dramatic results from random centres across India, grandly labelled ‘world class academies’.
The main reform for Indian sports to take off sits elsewhere. The big push must be to improve sports governance so that we create an ecosystem that is as good as others and enables excellence.
India’s sports architecture consists of three major players – the Ministry of Sports, Sports Authority of India (SAI) and IOA/NSFs. All three have to up their game.
Pullela Gopichand once famously lamented the fact that neither the sports ministry nor SAI had enough sports expertise – a damning indictment. To correct that problem, and to fill the knowledge gap, it would help to constitute a National Sports Board consisting of technical experts and independent directors to decide vision, formulate policy and work out an action plan. Professional sport is as complex and specialised as any other activity, be it finance, science or IT. The induction of experts will fill an existing gap, and is not difficult to find good people willing to get involved.
Presently, India has two major sports programmes for promoting elite level sports, TOPS and Khelo India. I had a role in shaping the TOPS which has become the flagship initiative for supporting elite athletes. The need for it arose because back then SAI’s teams wing was unable to meet the diverse, and growing, needs of the medal prospects.
Now, TOPS should be upgraded and made a separate vertical free from SAI control. TOPS would be more efficient if provided assured funding and administrative independence to achieve clearly laid down targets. This to cut red tape, reduce delays and make it more athlete friendly/centric.
Refreshing TOPS isn’t difficult but making IOA/NSFs more professional and progressive is a daunting task. Using the shield of autonomy, many sports bodies are case studies of maladministration. One way out is to implement the Sports Code – an excellent document – but given the ground reality that is a distant dream.
Despite the Paris dampener, among the dark clouds and red flags some positives are unmistakable. Sports today is central, not extracurricular, and it enjoys mass support. Parents are investing in the careers of their kids and the media and industry look at sports favourably.
Padukone’s criticism notwithstanding, ultimately it is the hard work and hunger of athletes that will deliver better results in the future. But a word of caution: Reduce unnecessary noise around sport and refrain from raising unrealistic expectation. Sport is fundamentally uncertain, making delusional claims of triumph and conquest is counterproductive.
Avinash Sable is one victim of such over-the-top media hype. Despite making the Olympic final, the only athlete besides Niraj Chopra to do so, he was subjected to vicious trolling, only because someone created a false narrative.