PARIS: Sifan Hassan was sprinting towards the finish line of the marathon. The Dutch runner won gold. 5000m, 1000m and marathon would test any mortal’s endurance but not hers. More than half an hour later, Bhutan’s Kinzang Lhamo was walking, almost trudging, towards the same finish line (in front of the Grand Palais) through some of the most iconic places in Paris. She had been walking for more than two kilometres.
Behind her were the escorts and beside her were the spectators egging her. Billions were watching her on TV across the globe. At one level it may seem ridiculous but as an athlete one has to doff the hat, she was trying to finish. Olympics is a monumental stage where not many participate. It has that hallowed touch. It is also a perfect embodiment of Olympic spirit and Olympism: equal opportunity for all. It also cruelly reveals the difference between the best and the rest.
The medals tally reveals another story, in the descending order of sporting powerhouse. If the USA (40 gold; 126 overall) and China (40 gold; 91 overall) are on the top, there are quite a few at the bottom. Among the 91 nations on the list, there are eight countries at the bottom with one bronze each. Twelve places above 84 is India (at 71). Pakistan with one gold was seven spots above India. Considering there are more than 200 nations participating, finishing in the top 71 may look creditable. But when it comes to an emerging nation like India that is planning to bid for the 2036 Olympics this doesn’t augur well.
If winning medals at the Olympics was easy, then there would have been a million Olympic medallists. The aura an Olympic medallist exudes would be reduced to rubbles. Hard work and sacrifices would count to nothing.
When Manu Bhaker went about collecting medals (one individual and one mixed team) on the first few days of the Olympics in the faraway Chateauroux, a nation of 1.4 billion people would have heaved a sigh of relief. The sport that went blank since the 2012 London Olympics has broken the jinx. It had given India the momentum that they rued they did not have in the last Olympics. Sarabjot Singh partnered Manu for the second before Swapnil Kusale hit bronze in 50m 3P.
Shooting has had a process in place, as most shooters agreed, and with a record 21 qualifying for the Olympics, it was a question of how many medals. If Manu, Sarabjot and Swapnil were among the medals, close fourth finishes too hurt. Arjun Babuta, the 10m rile shooter, had the hardest heartbreak followed by Many Bhaker. The build-up was unlike in 2021 when players were depressed before going to Tokyo, this time it was relaxed. Another heartening thing was that shooters have reached the finals in most events.
It took one week of wait amidst multitudes of despair to add another — a bronze by the men's hockey team, their second straight at the Games. A few hours later, Neeraj Chopra, one of the world's most consistent performers, clinched javelin throw silver.
In between was Vinesh Phogat’s unprecedented disqualification after securing a medal – either a silver or a gold. The manner of her wins, just like the disqualification, was the most talked about subject of the Olympics. The 100gm overweight turned into a national obsession back home and a topic of debate here — whether there should be weight concessions for women athletes on the second day of the medal match.
Neeraj had an astonishing day too. One athlete who can be a gold standard in consistency managed only one legitimate throw — his second of 89.45m. If this has not happened before, Arshad Nadeem’s stupefying 92.97m throw too was otherworldly. It was an Olympic record and Neeraj, not known to chase that big a throw, was left with no option than eyeing the mark which he has never achieved. Yet, despite struggling with a groin injury for quite some time, he threw and won the silver.
If he was the silver lining, the hockey team earlier in the day was the revelation. It was a perfect magical end to a campaign that had some of the biggest moments in the history of Indian hockey. A glorious send-off to one of the greatest custodians of Indian hockey — PR Sreejesh.
Except for steeplechaser Avinash Sable, track events once again have been a disappointment. The archery team flattered to deceive like the previous Games.
If any sport needed a medal it was wrestling. The sport, that had fetched India medals at every Games since 2008, has gone through too much of an upheaval in the last one and a half years that ending medalless would have jeopardised the sport’s future. After Vinesh’s disqualification, Aman Sehrawat brought some cheer to the sport with a bronze. For the boy who was orphaned at 11 and made Chhatrasal stadium his home, the medal would mean more than just gold.
The disappointment
The biggest disappointments have been boxing and badminton. The two disciplines in which sports ministry and Sports Authority of India spent unprecedented money. When it comes to shuttlers, including that of PV Sindhu, every demand has been met. Foreign coaches, a posse of support staff and sparring partners accompanied the shuttlers. Lakshya Sen’s bronze medal meltdown would be the most disheartening moment of the Olympics. After being a game up and taking a healthy lead in the second, the way he went blank on the court against Malaysia's Lee Zii Jia. Doubles exponent Satwiksairaj Rankireddy and Chirag Shetty, on whom the nation’s hope rested, exited in the quarterfinal.
However, boxing had been the most disastrous of all campaigns. It all started with qualification when boxers were struggling to secure quotas through world qualifiers and had to rely on the last event in Bangkok. Nikhat Zareen, who became the face of Indian boxing, struggled inside the ring. She blamed it on weight loss and fasting, which seems routine for boxers. Whether she had to shed extra weight was not clear. Amit Panghal was a disappointment. Lovlina Borgohain failed to win a medal and the only boxer who had shown some credence was the wily Nishant Dev. For a sport that had got the maximum attention in the last Olympic cycle, this cannot go without investigation.
The SAI and its Target Olympics Podium Scheme had been issuing bulletins about the support they have been giving to the athletes, but one must realise that they have been investing in elite athletes in the last Olympic cycle. There seems to be no second string in boxing and badminton. They also must look into the concept of herding all the top boxers in one National Centre of Excellence (NCOE) can have a negative impact on the other boxers. This will eventually widen the gap between the best and the rest. This also meant that national campers would be winning national competitions and there would be a lack of sparring partners. The Boxing Federation of India has to wake up and engage experts who have an understanding of the game rather than statisticians and orators.
The six medals are better than no medal but six compared to Tokyo’s seven definitely reflects poorly on the sporting system of the country. Right from the federation to the sports ministry and SAI, all must acknowledge that there has been a slip, or else there will be no room for improvement. Instead of shrouded in the facade of success, they must unveil the reality of their failure to better Tokyo.
A part of Prakash Padukone’s comment is true when he said: “No point blaming the federations, foundations or the academies. They can only do so much. We can provide everything we can. But ultimately players also have to take responsibility and go out there and deliver when it matters the most.” This is one part of the story. To know what works and doesn’t work for the athletes, the federations, government, and sports promotion foundations, all have to work together. It’s not just about the players but one whole ecosystem.
.jpg?w=480&auto=format%2Ccompress)
