CHENNAI: Scenario 1: August 8, Closing Ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. India coming home with 10+ medals as projected by the then sports minister Kiren Rijiju. The country will be euphoric. Everything will be hailed — from athletes’ skills to government support and policies.
Scenario 2: Back with six or so medals, as many as India had won in 2012 London Games. Happy times no doubt but there would be some soul-searching.
Scenario 3: Three or fewer medals. Face-saving Games, but in terms of policies and preparations, not adequate. Same old near-but-yet-so-far stories. Sabres would be drawn. Decisions would be questioned and, if some sense prevails, changes would be ushered in.
Well, I am not even going to the last scenario: a zero-medal haul in these times, at least on paper, is improbable. Going by form and ranking of players, medals should be won but how many is the question.
These are not hypothetical scenarios. Three of the four are very possible. It’s the Olympics, the grandest of all stages, incomparable to any World Cups or World Championships. It is where nerves fail, the mind breaks, the body shakes and a pinch of luck eludes. Athletes are the heroes and everything else is support cast.
For India, which is struggling to bring consistency into its medal tally after the high of the London Olympics, this is a phase where transition can be made from good to better and then to the best. A lot of money and resources have been pumped in. Some kind of synergy had been vividly visible among all stakeholders. But in the end, if all these fail to transform into medals, there is something lacking. Athletes’ success is not just because of the athlete but it is also because of the system. Similarly, failure.
In that sense, Tokyo will perhaps be the most important of all Olympic Games for India. There are multiple reasons, but one that would perhaps determine whether certain policies would continue or need tweaking.
Take for instance the amount of money the government has spent on athletes. According to the Sports Authority of India (SAI), `1200 crore have been spent through two distinct schemes — Annual Calendar for Training and Competition (ACTC) and the much famed Target Olympic Podium Scheme (TOPS) — covering 18 disciplines and over 150 athletes. The seeds of TOPS were sown after the 2012 London Games. But it was in 2014 that it started functioning officially. 'Professionalism’ was infused by appointing a Chief Executive Officer (CEO). It was a parallel arm of the SAI that used to manage the ACTC programme that covered all athletes until then.
The purpose was simple — help individual athletes with specific requirements. There was another theory. The sports ministry usually funds all athletes for training and competitions. However, with the advent of the now defunct Mittal Champions Trust and later Olympic Gold Quest, JSW Sports and the ilk, things started to change. These facilitators looked after the specific needs of the athletes providing them customized training and providing support staff. Whether TOPS was created as a buffer to these NGOs or as a tool to customise athletes' training is secondary. Over the last Olympics cycle, especially after the disastrous Rio Games, athletes have been getting benefits. So much so that it has pushed the National Sports Federations (NSFs) to the fringe, especially last year when they were not recognized for a while.
Take for instance weightlifter Mirabai Chanu. She needed to recover from a back injury and a sore shoulder. A specialist was identified in the US, the TOPS funded her recovery and rehabilitation programme twice for around Rs 1.3 crore in less than one year and now she is one of the medal contenders. In fact, if everything goes alright, she might win us the first medal on Saturday. She is ready to bury the painful Rio ghost.
There are issues also. At times athletes were getting in touch with the TOPS directly without the knowledge of federations for personal coaches or trainers. No policy is flawless. Coaches hired for a team turned into personal coaches in some. Yet, it managed to assist athletes in whatever way possible. Even SAI spent Rs 1100 crore in ACTC for foreign training and exposure trips. The athletics team in 2019 spent more than eight months abroad in Turkey and Poland under this scheme. Some Rs 50 crore spent in the last two and half years.
From buying a gun through TOPS to setting up electronic targets at home for shooters, there are numerous other examples from all 18 disciplines that qualified for the Olympics.
Like P Gopichand, who was part of the Olympic Task Force to strategise for better performance in Olympics, feels, there is a lot of synergy between stakeholders. So does Viren Rasquinha, who too was part of it. London Olympic bronze medallist Gagan Narang also believes the Tokyo Games is very important not just for shooting but for overall development of Indian sports. “We couldn’t win medals in Rio but we did well in identifying young shooters who are now representing the country. I feel a good show at the Tokyo Olympics will reinstate faith on our athletes. And this faith is very important.”
Rasquinha is quite forthright when he says: “We will be judged by medals whether we like it or not. There are two aspects to sports. One is at the grassroots level and building a culture of sport. The strategy to improve grassroots culture is different from that of winning an Olympic medal or at elite level. The measurement barometer for elite level is medal. Of course, there is pressure in this Tokyo Olympics because medals are critical as it is hard to justify so much money spent by all stakeholders involved. We must win medals. Is it hard? Yes, it’s very hard to win medals. Is it possible to win six to eight medals? I definitely think this is possible.”
In terms of process, too Rasquinha and Gopichand feel processes have improved. “The level of support in preparation of athletes despite the pandemic... I think SAI and TOPS have really improved a lot in the last five years in terms of professionalism and efficiency, in terms of support and funding towards Olympic athletes. One important aspect has been much better teamwork between all stakeholders — NSFs, IOA, SAI and NGOs.”
Gagan, part of SAI’s high level committee, also echoes similar thoughts. “The government and NSFs have done a wonderful job by supporting the athletes through schemes like TOPS but the amount of hard work and self-belief the athletes have shown is unbelievable,” says Gagan. “Yes, I feel we are heading into the right direction.”
Gopichand feels in terms of support to shuttlers, the TOPS and SAI have been very proactive. “Overall we had a good preparation for the Olympics. Thanks to the SAI, TOPS and the Badminton Association of India, we have individual coaches and support staff for each of the players.”
Apart from athletes’ performances, the processes and policies in place too would be under focus. And this time because of hype created and promotion on social media, the focus will be a lot more for all stakeholders but more on SAI and TOPS, because most of the requirements of the athletes have been taken care of by the SAI. Good, better or bad, August 8 will tell.
Perhaps it will be apt to end with Gagan’s profound words, “We are a work in progress and we will take time to reach the top but the part that we have carved is leading into the right direction in Tokyo and beyond.”