CHENNAI: With the Paris Olympics in the rearview mirror, there is a need to seriously assess India’s performance in the French capital. The number of medals, unfortunately that’s the only yardstick through which success is measured at the Olympic Games, does not indicate a striving sporting powerhouse. Nor does it show that India is improving in new sports disciplines. Fourth finishes can only be taken as a consolation.
Going by numbers, we have won the same medals as London 2012. Considering India won two silver medals then, one silver and five bronze at Paris shows stagnancy. It also reflects poorly on the various schemes of the sports ministry, the National Sports Federations (NSFs) and their Annual Calendar for Training and Competition (ACTC).
The Sports Authority of India (SAI), that had become the all-powerful arm of the ministry in supporting the NSFs, should take a relook into their own projects, especially the Target Olympic Podium Scheme (TOPS) that started with all earnestness in 2014, which, according to SAI website, "was revamped in April 2018 to establish a technical support team for managing the TOPS athletes and providing holistic support".
Bright side: Funding increased
At the 2008 Beijing Olympics, India had a first — winning more than one individual medal (one gold in shooting, one bronze in wrestling and one in boxing). At the London Games, four years later after massive investment in sports due to hosting of the 2010 Commonwealth Games, the medal count rose to six – two silver and four bronze in shooting, wrestling, boxing and badminton.
Four years later, at the 2016 Rio Games, India hit the nadir as they returned with two medals — badminton (silver) and wrestling (bronze). In Tokyo, India won seven medals with one gold (Neeraj Chopra) in athletics, two in wrestling, one each in boxing, badminton, hockey and weightlifting. In Paris, we won six medals in shooting, wrestling, hockey and athletics.
No medals in boxing, badminton and weightlifting. India were placed 71. In Beijing, it was 51st. In London, 57th and in Tokyo India were 48th.
If we look at funding, since 2008, it would have been more than three times. In 2007-08, the budget allocation for sport was Rs 780 crore. In 2023-24, the budget increased to Rs 2462 crore. In 2008, contribution for NSFs was about Rs 55 crore. In 2023-24, it was Rs 325 crore.
This is the fund that is utilized for hiring foreign coaches, training and competition (including international exposure) under ACTC. It also includes diet and nutrition. The TOPS supplements individual needs of athletes. On top of that, there are organisations like Olympic Gold Quest, JSW Sports, Reliance who support specific athletes with other individual needs
(Note: it may look like funding has increased a lot but these figures are before adjusting for inflation).
Interestingly, Khelo India, a pet project of the SAI and sports ministry, has a budget of around Rs 1000 crore. Even after this, the highest budget for sports seemed to be in 2009-10 just before the Commonwealth Games, about Rs 3500 crore. Yet the spending is nowhere when compared to the US or China (estimated to be in billion dollars annual budget). In the US, there is no sports ministry.
Policies good, implementations could be better
Investment in sports increased manifold, so were various sports foundations and organisations, since the 2008 Olympics and more so after the 2012 Olympics, but results have remained stagnant. The numbers too don’t reveal a healthy system. There are 120 athletes (excluding men’s hockey team) in the TOPS elite programme out of which only five individuals ended up with medals (hockey was a team).
Of the five, three were in one sport -- shooting. Other medals in Paris were in wrestling, a sport mired in controversy since January 2023, and athletics (one of the top spenders). Not winning in boxing and badminton, sports where TOPS and SAI spent maximum amount, isn't a healthy picture.
The SAI has invested in infrastructure and created 23 National Centre of Excellences (NCOEs) with good intentions and state of the art facilities.
The National Institute of Patiala, one of the featured NCOE, has undergone a facelift. The modern amenities, swanky climate-controlled practice halls in boxing, weightlifting, recovery rooms equipped with sauna and ice baths are some of the best facilities in the world of sports. Unfortunately, there is a lack of good coaches.
Because of that there is an over-reliance on the expertise of foreign coaches, who are hired on some extraordinary packages. Perhaps, it’s time to also train our coaches and focus more on the grassroots. The NSFs junior programme should be strengthened rather than creating another parallel one. There should be more clarity about the Khelo India programme.
The SAI had spent over Rs 470 crore in the 16 disciplines India had qualified for the Olympics. The SAI as of now is supporting seven sports as High Priority Disciplines (HPDs) and seven are being developed for the 2028 Olympics and beyond — Priority Olympic Discipline (POD). Among the seven that figure on the list four – judo, swimming, fencing and cycling -- look out of place. In Paris, one judoka went in continental quota, two swimmers under a universality quota and there were no representations in fencing and cycling.
Perhaps, it is time for SAI to take a fresh look into their schemes. There have been instances when the TOPS were dealing directly with athletes and sometimes without the knowledge of the NSFs. Sometimes, even chief national coaches were sidelined. What is more perplexing is that Mission Olympic Cell has members from sports foundations and organisations. People with multiple conflicts of interest.
Court cases complicate things
If one were to look at the whole sports scenario ahead of the Games, it was not ideal. A slew of court cases over sports code violation of NSFs and even the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), the organizations that can send entries for international events and Olympics/Asian/CW Games, only made things worse. This shows, intentionally or unintentionally, the NSFs have been subdued. Their powers seemed to have been curtailed. There have been so many court cases and orders that one is not sure what the NSFs need to follow -- court orders or the provision of the National Sports Development Code of India (2011).
Since about end of last year, the SAI had been supporting athletes directly and funds were apparently been given to them (coaches, players and vendors) for training and competition abroad, and not through the NSFs. There was another intriguing pattern in newly-elected NSFs. Administrators without any knowledge of sports were appointed in key positions. In an organization like the IOA, a new set of officials were elected under a new constitution. Majority of the office bearers do not have any experience of running a sports body. It had its own setback when the executive committee and the IOA president had a fall out. In short, in the last Olympic cycle some of the policies and decisions seemed to have pushed the NSFs to the fringes.
TOPS need a serious relook
The programme was one of the best things that could have happened to India sports when it was launched. However, in the last Olympic cycle it seemed to have gone an overdrive. Another aspect that can be looked at is the stipends given to top elite athletes who earn in lakhs if not in crores. That is fine but the same stipend would mean a lot to up and coming athletes in the development group.
Thrust should be to produce bench strength rather than strengthening only a few at the top. India need to produce at least eight to 10 players of the same calibre and skill in one category, or else if one fails then there would be no one as back up.
It would be interesting to see if TOPS would include the Indian cricket team with the same benefits as other athletes in the next cycle. Just for the record, the Indian cricket board gave `8.5 crore to IOA before the Paris Olympics. And also whether cricket would also have to follow the sports code!
Though most schemes were started in good faith, a few schemes seem to have lost their way. It was as if players were empowered to keep NSFs under check. A player could choose where he or she would want to train; with his or her personal coach at a centre of his or her choice. The concept of national camps in some sports got diluted. The NCOEs were refurbished into world class centres but somehow have stopped producing world class players.
For India to do well in LA 2028, preparation must start now. For that, all stakeholders (the SAI, NSFs and NGOs) must shed their differences and start working together instead of focusing on one-upmanship.