Analyzing Paris Olympics and preparing for next

Based on a Conversation with Saibal Dasgupta*

If we set aside cricket and hockey, India’s journey in the world of sports has rarely been a source of pride, marked by occasional highs but often overshadowed by unfulfilled potential. The Paris Olympics served as a stark reminder of both the progress we have made and the significant gaps that still exist. As a nation with over 1.4 billion people, and one of the world’s largest economies, it might be asked: why does India lag behind in securing a prominent position in the global sports arena?

For instance, look at India’s performance at the Paris Olympics. It was an uneven mix of some creditable individual achievements but a hugely disappointing underperformance as a nation. India managed to secure a few medals, but when compared to other countries with much smaller populations and economies, the performance was underwhelming, to say the least.

Countries like Uzbekistan, with a population of just over 35 million, managed to secure five gold medals, while Azerbaijan, with a population of 10 million, secured two gold medals. These comparisons are sobering when we consider India’s vast population and its economic prowess. Countries like these, with far fewer resources and a much smaller talent pool, are outperforming us on the global stage. This raises a serious concern: why?

India’s large population should ideally be a significant advantage in the sports world. A vast population provides a larger talent pool, which, theoretically, should translate into more world-class athletes. However, this has not been the case for India. The country’s sports infrastructure, talent identification, and development programmes are inadequate and unevenly distributed. While some states like Haryana have made significant strides, much of the country still lacks the facilities, coaching, and support systems necessary to nurture world-class athletes.

In contrast, China, with a comparable population, has consistently excelled at the Olympics. China’s sports system is highly centralized, with rigorous talent identification and development programmes starting from a very young age. The government invests liberally in sports, treating it as a matter of national pride and international prestige.

Economic Power vs. Sports Performance: A Disconnect?

Since the advent of liberalization in early 90s, India’s economic growth has been impressive, and the country now ranks among the world’s largest economies. However, the much-acclaimed economic strength has not translated into success in sports. In developed countries, economic prosperity is closely linked with sports success. Corporate sponsorship, state-of-the-art sports infrastructure, and a culture conducive to sports encourages sports participation. In India, however, the disconnect between economic power and sports performance is glaring. The lack of investment in sports infrastructure, inadequate support for athletes, and the inefficient sports administrators have stifled India’s potential. For a country that takes pride in its economic achievements, the lack of matching success in sports is a significant oversight.

We need to recognize that success in sports is not just about pseudo national pride; actually,it is a valuable tool in economic and foreign policy. When a country’s national anthem is played at the Olympics, it is a moment of soft power—a demonstration of a nation’s strength, discipline, and global standing. Countries like the United States, the European countries and China understand this and invest in sports accordingly.

We should also learn to view sports as a strategic investment. This would mean investing in talent development alongside infrastructure; and also, incoaching (including coaching by international coaches) and international exposure for our athletes.

As far as resources are concerned, we can begin with involving the private sector. For instance, Nifty 50 companies, or even the top 100 companies in India, should be encouraged to use their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) funds to support athletesand sport-persons in different disciplines.

This could involve sponsoring international training programs, providing world-class facilities, and linking their support to brand-building efforts. For coordinating the resources amongst different disciplines, a central body can be formed which can allocate funds and resources as per the needs of different sports organizations.

The role of state governments in promoting sports cannot be overstated. Haryana has set a remarkable example of what can be achieved with focused investment and a strong commitment to sports development.

Despite spending far less than other states like Gujarat, Haryana has consistently produced world-class athletes, particularly in sports like wrestling and boxing.Other states can learn from Haryana’s model. Each state government should develop its own blueprint for sports development, tailored to its unique strengths and resources. This could involve setting up state-of-the-art training facilities, hiring top coaches, and creating programs that identify and nurture local talent from a young age.

National sports associations also need to step up. Each association should be required to present a clear and detailed blueprint for the 2028 Olympics, with specific targets and timelines. The government should hold these associations accountable, linking their performance to the continuation of funding and leadership positions.

Similarly, there is a pressing need to revamp the Sports Authority of India (SAI) which plays a critical role in the development of sports in the country.

However, SAI should be revamped in such a way that it becomes more accountable and results-oriented. This could involve handing over the SAI to reputed professional players like Abhinav Bindra who can help in restructuring the organization and reduce its bureaucratic flab. A professional revamp would help in implementing performance-based metrics for funding allocation, and increasing transparency in decision-making.

Should India Bid for the 2036 Olympics?

India’s interest in bidding for the 2036 Olympics has sparked a debate on whether the country should focus on hosting the Games or investing in athlete development. While hosting the Olympics could be a moment of national pride, it comes with a hefty price tag. India should carefully weigh the costs and benefits. Instead of pouring resources into hosting the Olympics, the country might be better served by investing the same resources into developing world-class sports infrastructure and prepare the athletes who can bring home gold medals. Hosting the Olympics may give us a few days of pride, but winning medals in varied sports disciplines at whichever venue would be much more impressive.

*******

*This article is based on a conversation with Saibal Dasgupta, a senior journalist who writes columns on foreign affairs for national dailies and news portals. He is an avid sports enthusiast.