CHENNAI: Sometimes numbers can reveal a very interesting story. That also reflects on the funding aspects of India’s athletes and the disparity it holds. Take for instance Asian Games’ biggest star archer Kumkum Anil Mohod. According to a Lok Sabha reply in August, she got a fund of Rs.0 for her two gold medals and one silver. On the other hand, athletes like Annu Rani or Manika Batra spent more than Rs.1 crore each as part of Target Olympic Podium Scheme (TOPS) Core programme but could not qualify for the Asian Games. There were others who got funds in crores but could not win medals either. One can argue this is what sport is all about. The TOPS list was redrawn after the Paris Olympics.
Funding issue keeps rearing its ugly head every now and then in Indian sports. The controversy regarding badminton players not getting funds from the sports ministry is the latest in the list with none other than double Olympic medallist PV Sindhu leading the debate. Sports Authority of India officials are saying the Badminton Association of India did not send proposals on time (30 days before the event), while there is nothing much from the latter’s side. This has affected some of the young athletes more due to lack of budget. The funding stopped in early October when players were in Europe competing in BWF Tour events. Sindhu and Lakshya Sen, who won the Hylo Open on Sunday, were affected but the younger players were the ones who were hurt most. This also shows how much athletes depend on sports ministry funding.
Like most Indian sports, there seems to be a disparity in funding too. While top shuttlers get maximum funding from the SAI running into crores, junior players struggle. Some of the top shuttlers like Sindhu, doubles exponents Satwiksairaj Rankireddy and Chirag Shetty, Lakshya usually have sponsors apart from support from non-profit sports organizations like Olympic Gold Quest, JSW Sports and other foundations. Of course, there is prize money too. For example Sindhu and Lakshya who won in Saarbrucken a couple of days ago, pocketed $37,500 (Rs.35 lakh approx) each. Every round, though not a very significant amount, offers money, too. A quarterfinalist in the same competition can earn $3000 (Rs.2.8 lakhs approx).
Similarly, a Super 750 event offers higher prize money of $66,500 (Rs.62 lakh approx) for the winner and $32,300 (Rs.30 lakh) for runners-up. Players like Sindhu and Lakshya can take care of their expenses if the sports ministry withdraws funding, however, those who are lower in the pecking order would struggle because they would not be making too much money or may not be part of TOPS' core or development group.
Focus on up-and-coming players
If one takes a close look at the funding in the last cycle before the Asian Games this year, players like Sindhu, Satwik, Chirag have received more than Rs.2 crore and Lakshya close to Rs.1 crore. This also includes an Out of Pocket Allowance (OPA) of Rs.50,000 per month as part of the TOPS Core list. Players like Ayush Shetty, Unnati Hooda, Anmol Kharb are in TOPS developmental group and their funding is a fraction of what the elite athletes get. Shetty got Rs. 17.5 lakh during the Games cycle, while Kharb's received Rs.2.10 lakh and Hooda got Rs.10 lakh. In fact, according to SAI’s Aiming for Aichi document, athletics, badminton, shooting, hockey and boxing were among the top funded sports from close to Rs.50 crore to Rs.77 crore. (November 2023 to August 2026). Compared to the elite shuttlers, others don’t have the best of support in terms of funds and other staff either. Perhaps it is time for SAI to look into their own policies and start focusing more on the younger players.
Unlike other physical sports, badminton is unique. Experts feel that players, particularly the up and coming ones need to play at least 15 tournaments across the year to climb up the BWF World Ranking. Tournaments are also important for elite shuttlers, especially in the Olympic cycle as entries are based on World rankings (Top 16 qualify in individual). Apart from a couple of BWF Tour events, all competitions usually take place abroad.
Disparity in funding
According to a Lok Sabha answer in August this year on “athletes welfare under TOPS”, eight Core shuttlers received close to a total of Rs.9 crore with Sindhu, Satwik, Chirag getting over Rs.2 crore. Experts feel because badminton requires players to compete in more events across the year, funding should be more compared to other sports. Other sports are usually covered under SAI’s Annual Calendar for Training and Competition because they have a set number of competitions unlike badminton. On top of that all BWF Tour events sometimes are not part of ACTC (funding is through Assistance to National Sports Federation). SAI can earmark a certain budget to cover expenses of athletes not covered by TOPS.
According to the same Lok Sabha answer, there is a disparity in funding for other sports as well. Kumkum was part of the Target Asian Games Group and did not even receive an OPA either. Same is the case with her partner Kirti Sharma, who was part of the three-member women’s recurve team that won gold in Nagoya. Tokyo Olympic and Asian Games silver medallist Mirabai Chanu’s funding was Rs.1.8 crore.
Perhaps, SAI needs uniform policies for all sports. If a player earning well enough should get less funds then it should be similar across all sports. If elite athletes can support their expenses then focus should be funding up-and-coming athletes to build a strong base. The OPA too can be looked into as well. A Rs.50000 for an athlete who doesn’t have a job would benefit more than the ones with jobs and sponsors. This is an opportunity for SAI to intervene and get things sorted before another controversy erupts.
