1 month ago
9
India won six medals at Paris Olympics -a silver and five bronze. While there were notable achievements, the overall performance fell short of expectations. Issues like poor coordination, communication gaps, and near misses marred the campaign. read more
 "Medals and failures apart, Indian sport needs better communication")
Vinesh Phogat reached the gold medal match at Paris Olympics but was stopped short for being overweight by 100 grams and was subsequently disqualified. Reuters/USA Today Sports
India’s story at the Paris Olympics in a nutshell reads - six medals with just one silver and another six fourth places. Then there was that weighty story of an additional 100 grammes that cost India a certain medal in women’s wrestling. Then there were the usual small bits and pieces like an accreditation controversy, which was downright embarrassing, some shoddy apparel and so on.
Paris Olympics: News, schedule, medals tally and more
The Indians, meanwhile, hold on to the slender hope that Vinesh Phogat, whose life story is like a Greek tragedy, will still be awarded a joint silver medal despite failing a weigh-in on the day of her final, for which she was disqualified.
Six medals may not really be terrible for India but considering the-powers-that-be kept talking about double digits, and the amount that was spent on them (each media release mentioned the amount spent on athletes) it did seem a big letdown.
Read | India at Paris Olympics in numbers
Some may say that the six fourth places were all ever so close and with some luck they could all have been medals. Sure.
But the bitter truth is – the medals are awarded to only the top three, and the rest get nothing. Sometimes not even a pat on the back.
As an eternal optimist, I always prefer to look at the good first and then the rest. So, let us look at the medals.
They have all been lauded and appreciated. Manu Bhaker’s story is outstanding. Broken and devastated three years ago in Tokyo, she picked up the pieces and not only joined them nicely, but actually made them shine through the medals. The 22-year-old alone had two bronzes (Women’s 10m Air Pistol and another with Sarabjot Singh in Mixed Team 10m Air Pistol), and one fourth place in 25m Pistol Women.
Swapnil Kusale was a big surprise in Men’s 50m Rifle 3-Positions, though some inside the team and keen followers of the sport, did spot a potential earlier.
The two medals that were celebrated hugely were the silver for Neeraj Chopra, the defending javelin champion. And, the hockey bronze – which could have been of a better colour, but for that heart-wrenching loss to a gritty Germany, who lost to the Netherlands in the final.
Yet the bronze was a great send-off for the legend that PR Sreejesh is and for what he has contributed to Indian hockey.
Almost at the end of the Games, by which time the Vinesh Phogat’s ‘extra 100 grammes’ had overtaken all stories, Aman Sehrawat brought in a wrestling bronze.
The final tally reads six medals – one silver and five bronze – and it was medal short of the Tokyo haul.
How can an Indian Olympic report card ever be complete without a look at the controversies and wrinkles in our campaign.
The most serious and noticeable lapse was the clear disconnect between the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) and the federations.
The athletes continue to be torn between the two. Every four years, the government (which also includes the Sports Authority of India, with its numerous schemes and grants for training and competition) calls the shots for Olympics, Asian Games and the Commonwealth Games, but for the rest of the time, the federation is the key body to decide for World, Asian and other championships.
Yet the largesse doled out by the Government / SAI hits you right in the face. I found it quite funny that every SAI message on any athlete was accompanied by a mention of how much the government had spent on them via ‘Financial Assistance’ through the Olympic Podium Scheme (TOPS), the Annual Calendar for Training and Competition (ACTC) and some other schemes.
Then each profile also had a section called ‘Key Governmental Intervention’. It seemed as if the organisations wanted to send out a message – we gave whatever we could, the rest is up to the athlete. Sure. But what about all other support?
It is like our parents who provide us with all our financial needs. But they also provide emotional support and ensure physical well-being.
When an athlete reaches the podium, there are phone calls from all over, and rarely is the same treatment given when you miss the medal.
That the SAI/government spent crores on the athletes was laudable – they were being given a chance to perform and bring back medals. But the authorities also owe to the people of the country an explanation on why things went wrong when they did.
Did the athletes not owe it to the people to speak to the media on what happened? When they won a medal, all was hunky dory.
But what about when the likes of Lakshya Sen or PV Sindhu or shooter Sift Kaur Samra didn’t deliver? They need to give people their version of the ‘failure’. That version reaches the people only through the media.
Many times, they did not even meet the Indian media and the IOA was unable to share their thoughts. When they don’t speak or the IOA does not get them on the line, it leads to speculation and rumours.
After all it was public money that was spent on them through the financial assistance given to them. We don’t blame athletes for not getting medals, but we do have the right to know and whether corrective measures are being taken for the future.
Having officials on the ground does not mean there is communication; there needs to tangible information, too. And lapses should be admitted and not swept under the carpet.
While financial assistance is vital, emotional well-being and administrative assistance is equally important. So, who does that?
The government and the SAI are connected while the IOA is a separate entity, which needs to be connected to the federations. Together they need to ensure all are in sync. However, it seems that IOA and the governmental machinery is on one side and the federations are on the other side.
The coaches and support staff are being decide by the athletes, who want personal coaches, physios, doctors and even psychologists. Perfect, but should they all not be done with the federation involved in the decision.
Over the years, the federations have not covered themselves in glory, but we cannot shy away from the fact that the federation is the main vehicle in the relationship with international federations which play a crucial role as we see in the case of Vinesh Phogat. A strong domestic federation can present a good argument with the international body, but for that politics need to be kept out. Alas that is our big failing.
Taking one or two federations in isolation is not the solution – it should be across the board. Everyone is a stake holder. In this striking case of Vinesh, the athlete is clearly not the favourite one for the federation, but the federation is thick in with the higher authorities, which gave all financial support to the athlete.
Yet, when it comes to handling a ‘difficult situation’, a federation would be better equipped and have a better relationship with the world body.
Lawyers are smart people, but sports rules can sometimes be vexing and frustrating, and yet they need to be followed. No matter how federations are full of vested interests, their support cannot be ignored. As Nenad Lalovic, President of United World Wrestling, told newsmen that sports have rules and without rules there would be chaos. Rules can be made better, but for that everyone needs to sit together and not trade charges.
Right now in the case of Vinesh, we are still not clear who is in charge – the athlete or the IOA or the government or the federation. There is an official line that keeps informing journalists, whose own efforts are often denigrated as ‘irresponsible reporting’.
India sent 117 athletes, we knew each of their names and their performances were out in the open. That report card will hopefully be dealt with by the powers-that-be (I keep repeating because we don’t know who is ultimately responsible in case of failure) but what about the administrative officials (as different from the coaches) who come with the team. No one has an idea how many are here for official work and how many have come in personal capacity. Every federation seems to be guilty, sometimes athletes, too, who insist on ‘personal’ coaches and support.
Above all, the official line of communication needs to be clear and regular to avoid confusion.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has a daily briefing, as do many other big contingents. So, why couldn’t the IOA have done the same. There are so many senior officials, one of whom could be designated to answer all queries on a daily basis. Is someone afraid to do so ?
If someone had done that, the media, an important vehicle to get the message across, would not be left to speculate. We would have known what the situation with Vinesh’s case, or whether there was an official protest when Amit Rohidas was suspended for a game or what was the progress of golfer Diksha Dagar’s mother, who was hurt in an accident or the case of Antim Panghal ‘allowing’ a relative to use their Accreditation Card to access the Village? These were among the most glaring cases and information on them could have been better. Instead, it was either sketchy or not mentioned at all.
Only the IOA could help clear the air. They represent India at the Games. And every citizen has the right to know.
The full story in brief: the athletes do what they know best. And they do their best, but sometimes that is not enough, or it does not come together. But better administrative support and a better communication system is not rocket science.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
English (US) ·