What Ails Indian Sports
INDIA IN THE OLYMPICS
In the over hundred years of the Modern Olympics (1896--2000), India, have won a total of eight gold, three silver and five bronze medals. In contrast China, which gained admission to the Olympic movement just two decades ago won 16 gold, 22 silver and 12 bronze medals at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics alone. Ethiopia, Ecuador, Burundi and Costa Rica with national economies and sports budgets much lower than India won gold medals at the Atlanta Olympics and were much higher in the total medal list. In terms of population and landmass, India alone is one-sixth of the Earth, yet in three successive Olympics--1984, 1988 and 1992-it finished without a medal in the Olympic Games. Earlier in the 1976 Montreal Olympics India finished without a medal. In 1968, 1972, 1996 and 2000 Olympics India finished with a solitary bronze medal.
China's target for the 2000 Sydney Olympics was over twenty gold medals. However China surpassed their own expectations and finished third in the medals tally with 28 gold, 16 silver and 15 bronze medals. China's overall tally of 28 gold and 59 medals is the highest ever by an Asian nation. As expected China dominated Table Tennis and Badminton. Chinese players won four of the five gold medals at stake in badminton, including the men singles and women singles crown. In table tennis China made a clean sweep of the five gold medals at stake in the men's and women's individual competitions. India's ambitions at the Sydney Olympics were modest, just three medals in hockey, men's doubles in tennis and women's weightlifting. As in the past, India faltered and finished with a solitary bronze medal, won by Karnam Malleswari in the below 69 kgs. women's weightlifting. In the 1996 Atlanta Olympics India finished with a solitary bronze medal won by Leander Paes in tennis and were 71st in the medals tally. Four years later in Sydney, India also had just one bronze medal, won by Karnam Malleswari in the newly introduced sport of women's weightlifting to finish 70th. The question that arises is what ails Indian sports? Why do Indian sportsmen and women repeatedly flop and often perform below their best in glamour events like the Olympics.
For instance in Sydney 2000, shot putters Shakti Singh and Bahadur Singh who are in the 20 metres plus region managed only just over 18 metres to finish 32nd and 27th respectively. In the javelin throw Jagdish Kumar Bishnoi hurled the javelin to 70 metres, nine metres short of his best and was 15th out of 17th in his group. In women's discus throw and javelin throw Neelam J. Singh (26th out of 32) and Gurmeet Kaur (32nd out of 35) were also about five metres below their life best performances. The relay squads also did not even equal their own life best performances. In years gone by, lack of finance, inadequate foreign competition and overall poverty were cited as excuses. These excuses no longer hold true. There is now no lack of funds or insufficient long-term training. For three successive Olympics, from 1992--2000, the Indian boxing hopefuls trained for months in Cuba at a total cost of over Rs. 10 million (Rs. 1crore), the shooters, the yachtsmen, hockey team and even athletes all get international exposure but finish with no medal.
Apart from the 8 gold, one silver and two bronze medals in hockey, India's other medal successes in the Olympics were confined to athletics, tennis, women's weightlifting and wrestling. The late K.D. Jadhav of Mahrashtra bagged a bronze medal in the 57 kilogram freestyle wrestling category in 1952 at Helsinki, Leander Paes' got a bronze medal in men's singles tennis in 1996 at Atlanta and four years later Malleswari got a bronze medal in weightlifting. Over a 100 years ago, an Anglo-Indian from Calcutta, though some claim he was an Englishman residing in India, Norman Pritchard also secured two silver medals in athletics, in the 1900 Olympics at Paris. He won the 200 metres silver with a timing of 22.8 seconds. In the 200 metres hurdles (an event discontinued after the 1904 Olympics) he again won the silver with a timing of 26.6 seconds. In individual sports, India has just won five medals in the Olympics, since their first participation in the 1920 Antwerp Olympics.
Yet in each Olympics or regional events like the Asian Games, the number of sports officials making foreign jaunts outnumbers the actual competitors. For instance weightlifting coach Raj Kumar Sirohi, who got the Dronacharya Award for 1998 was dropped from the 2000 Sydney Olympics squad so that an official could be accommodated. Sirohi is rated as the best coach in his discipline in the country at present and his wards excelled in the 1998 Commonwealth Games in Kuala Lumpur. The seven-member Indian squad trained by him finished with three gold, five silver and five bronze medals yet Sirohi was not allowed to travel to the Sydney Olympics. Earlier in the 1976 Montreal Olympics, Asian champion Sriram Singh was a likely medallist in the 800 metres. However for the final his muscles were stiff and he needed the help of a masseur. The Indian contingent did not have a masseur in their ranks. Sriram ran heroically in the final and led for about 600 metres before being overtaken by the ultimate winner Alberto Juantorena of Cuba and fading to seventh spot. His personal coach, the Hyderabad veteran Illyas Babbar came to Montreal at his own expense. The IOA did not think it fit to send Babbar at their own expense to Montreal, even though Sriram was India's best bet for an individual medal. Instances of such crass negligence and nepotism are aplenty in Indian sport, and they are also an indication of lack of success. It is a far cry from the idealism that led to the formation of the Olympic movement in India in the 1920s.
The pioneering spirit of Sir Dorab Tata of the house of Tatas, helped develop sports consciousness in India. During his business travels abroad, he noticed the importance of sports in other countries. He wanted India to imbibe interest in sports. Dorab Tata at his own initiative got together a squad of four athletes and two wrestlers to represent India in the 1920 Antwerp Olympics. He paid for the expenses of this trip. On his return from Antwerp, his efforts led to the formation of an Indian Olympic Association (IOA). He helped to form Provincial Olympic associations and to conduct state-level athletic competitions. At his own expense he sent Dr. A. Neohren, then Director of the YMCA to visit every nook and corner of the country and generate enthusiasm for sports in general and athletics in particular. It was due to such pioneering efforts that the IOA was formed in India in the 1920s. Sir Dorab Tata was unanimously elected its first President and remained in that post till his death in 1933. The generous Sir Dorab Tata paid for the expenses of the Indian contingent for the VIII Olympic Games in Paris in 1924. Sadly such zeal and enthusiasm to develop sports standards in the country has declined in the years gone by. The current set of IOA officials are more interested in foreign jaunts and holding prestigious posts in international bodies, than grassroots work to develop Indian sport. To improve Indian sport, it is imperative that IOA officials become more responsible and spend more time trying to popularise sports in various regions. It is then only that India's vast population will become an asset, as from quantity, quality can emerge. State Associations, which do not conduct regular championships in a particular sport should not be allowed to vote. The IOA must have a broad vision to develop Indian sports and not concentrate only on vote-bank politics.
Indian Sports: The Siege Within
Consistent failures in major international meets like the Olympics and World Championships have led to the rise of a plethora of excuses from crippling poverty (people still die of hunger in Orissa) to absence of a sporting ethos. However these are not the main causes for India's dismal performance in international sports. Though many of India's one billion population exist below the poverty line, there is a thriving middle class, of about 200 million, which is larger than the population of most other countries. Yet amongst this otherwise robust and dynamic middle class, there is a type of social ostracism of sports. Until the school-leaving age, sports are tolerated for the vigorous exercises they provide but persistence with them afterwards leads to parental disapproval and social stigma. Mistaken and misguided notions that practise of sport would interfere with studies and affect a career have affected many a promising career. The drop out syndrome and inadequate nutritive intake of food, are causes of India's dismal showing in Olympics. According to a survey conducted some years ago by the National Institute of Nutrition in Hyderabad, the protein intake of school children in the low and lower-middle income group in urban and rural areas is 35.6 grams as compared to a suggested requirement of 41.0 grams. Hence the protein procured is used to maintain energy rather than its primary function of building tissues and strength. Other factors are also cited and experts often dwell on lack of talent, inadequate preparation and faulty team selection.
However seen in a wider perspective, Indian sport is a reflection of contemporary society which is affected by an overall malaise of lack of values and ethics. Match fixing in cricket, Arjuna Awards the highest award for sporting excellence getting linked with connections, pulls and pressures, than actual sporting achievements and doping prevalent at the country's premier training centre, the National Institute of Sports, Patiala are some of the recent sporting headlines. Similar syndromes have bedeviled Indian sports, as can be seen in some of the other case studies in this chapter.
Arjuna Awards Imbroglio
The selection of sportspersons for the Arjuna Awards has become scandalous for some years. Ace boxer Raj Kumar Sangwan (also became a professional) and athlete Mercy Kuttan sought legal help to get the Arjuna Award. A kabaddi player, Randhir Singh employed by the Railways had 90 recommendations of politicians and bureaucrats before receiving the award in 1997. Wrestler Sanjay Kumar got nominated for the Arjuna award in 1997, after resorting to 'gheraos' and incessant pressure tactics. Letters of recommendation from high- ranking politicians matter more in getting the award than actual excellence. Both the Arjuna and Dronacharya award have got devalued. This is best exemplified by the outrageous linking together of Rachna Govil, a deputy director in the Sports Authority of India (SAI), an average athlete with Milkha Singh (4th in the 1960 Rome Olympics and winner of four gold medals in the Asian and Commonwealth Games) for life time contribution to athletics. Milkha who got the Padma Shree in 1958 rejected the Award. His rejection created a stir and made people realise the scandalous process of selection. In the past few years there have been an average of 250 nominations for the Arjuna and Dronacharya Awards. The lure of Rs. 1.5 lakhs and unlimited free rail travel by second AC, plus possible avenues of promotion makes the Arjuna award attractive and and has caused so much politicking. When the Arjuna award was instituted in 1961, it was for performance in the previous year. In that case Milkha Singh should have got the Award anytime during the early 1960s. However the rationale in those years was that as Milkha had already got a higher award the Padma Shree(in 1958) it was not befitting for him to get the Arjuna Award. So ace hurdler Gurbachan Singh Randhawa, long distance runner Tarlok Singh and 400 metres runner Makhan Singh got the awards in 1961, 1962 and 1964, the years that Milkha was still at his peak. Milkha's grouse against the politicization of the awards is justified. After all, when life time contribution to athletics was first considered in 1998, he should surely have been considered first ahead of walker Chand Ram, a gold medallist in the 1982 Delhi Asiad, but with no performance in the Olympics.
What is painful, is the absence of consistency or any rationale in the selection of sportspersons for these awards. The awards have become so politicised that now even the recommendations of the National Sports Federations get bypassed. The secretary of the All India Tennis Association (AITA) Anil Khanna had recommended Akhtar Ali's case for the Dronacharya Award. Akhtar was a successful coach of the Indian Davis Cup squad for several years. He was the coach when India notched up a memorable 3-2 win over Brazil in the 1966 Davis Cup final and qualified for the Challenge Round tie against Australia. He has also spent years grooming junior talent and his coaching abilities are recognised in foreign countries also. Akhtar deserved this award but strangely was given the Arjuna Award for lifetime contribution to tennis. This is surprising, as Akhtar's exploits as a coach are more renowned. He played just 11 Davis Cup-ties for India and had no famous victories as a player. Over the years the dignity of this Award has got marginalised. The choice of sportspersons who have made a lifetime contribution are even more arbitrary. There is no consistency in selection. In athletics, Henry Rebello who almost won a medal in the triple jump in the 1948 London Olympics (a pulled muscle prevented him from becoming Independent India's first Olympic medal winner) should have been an automatic choice for life time contribution. Again in hockey, speedy outside right Balbir Singh of Railways who scored the match-winner against Pakistan in the 1966 Bangkok Asian Games and was considered the best in the world in his position and legendary inside left Inam-ur Rehman have been consistently ignored. In contrast lesser known players like Balbir Singh of Punjab (did not play in the first eleven in the 1964 Tokyo Olympics) full back Baldev Singh and outside right Syed Jalaluddin have been considered for life time contribution to hockey. It is said that Jalaluddin got selected because he is from current Sports minister Uma Bharati's constituency and was recommended by some of her party workers. Also in football, India finest coach, the late S.A. Rahim who guided India to two gold medals in the Asian Games in 1951 and 1962 and fourth in the 1956 Melbourne Olympics has been ignored for a posthumous Dronacharya Award. To improve the stature and image of these Awards, the guidelines for selection should be more transparent. Political recommendations should be banned.
Age-Group Cheats
The lack of morality is seen in other spheres of Indian sport. False age certificates is the bane of Indian sports in age-group sports meets. Every year in junior tournaments like the Subroto Mukherjee Cup, the premier football tournament for schools in India, the Junior and Sub-junior Nehru Hockey tournaments and the Junior and sub-Junior nationals in all sports, age violations are rampant. False age certificates are produced with the connivance of unscrupulous sports teachers who pressurise Principals to issue fabricated documents. Impersonation is also a malaise in age-group sports in India. Madhyamgram High School, West Bengal won the Subroto Mukherjee Cup in 1983 by fielding a 22 -year -old postman Panna Lal Mazumdar, impersonating as a school student Moti Mazumdar. There were similar charges against some players of Mamta Model School, Delhi, which won the Subroto Cup in 1998. The Indian junior cricket team that won the Junior World cup in January 2000 had several players who were born in the month before the cut-off date. Either a remarkable coincidence or a typical case of connivance by officials desperate to succeed. What is not realised is that such cases leads to short-term success but is disastrous in the long run. Genuine sportspersons often dropout from the game, in sheer disgust. Politicking to get selected in national teams is a common malady in Indian sports. However there have even been instances of violence being used to eliminate a competitor. In the mid-eighties, swimmers from a clan in rural Delhi, who enjoyed official patronage attacked a Bombay based swimmer on the eve of selection of the team for an international meet. The subsequent leg injury prevented the Bombay swimmer from competing in the trials. In August 2000, junior Indian grapplers Palminder Singh Cheema and Ramesh Kumar Bhure attacked another wrestler 19-year-old Sandeep Rathi from Gangroli village, Meerut at a training camp in NIS Patiala. It started as a minor scuffle over a game of volleyball but rivals using knives, swords and iron rods seriously injured Rathi. Even a year later, he still has pain in the abdomen and kidney where the Palminder and Ramesh had inflicted injuries. Rathi had to spend fifteen days in the hospital and lost his place in the National squad. His wrestling career is almost over. Typically he got a raw deal from the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) who neither punished the culprits nor assisted Rathi in his recovery. Young Sandeep Rathi is thus growing up into a bitter man, who feels he has been denied justice. Sports officials have to be more responsible and set certain moral standards, otherwise the law of the jungle will start prevailing in Indian sports. As regards age group cheats, strict disciplinary action is needed. For instance the Subroto Mukherjee Cup authorities in 2000, took stern action and banned over a hundred players. Some schools had to play with just seven players. The tournament lost some of its lustre but at least an effort was made to check the malaise of over-age players masquerading as juniors.
DOPING
At the start of the new millenium, the death of 32 year old Ajit Bhaduria, a former Asian champion in discus throw, allegedly due to the side effects of doping was an eye-opener. However what often does not make the headlines are the unknown sportsmen whose lives are ruined or have even died of drug abuse. The officialdom at NIS Patiala admits that drug abuse is rampant amongst sportsmen and women of lesser calibre who are desperate to somehow make a living from their sport. Way back in 1990, weightlifter Subrata Pal was stripped of his medals in the Commonwealth Games in Auckland, for taking drugs. The theory prevalent at that time was that the lifter was not to blame but unscrupulous competition between the coaches, Pal Singh Sandhu and Salwan led to the intake of performance enhancing drugs. Both Sandhu and Salwan were vying for the coveted Dronacharya Award. Earlier at the 1986 Seoul Asiad, four Indian competitors, three lifters and a boxer returned positive results in dope tests. The weightlifters, N.G. Naidu, Tara Singh and Balwinder Singh (all Railway employees) were found to have used 'nandrolene and anabolic steroids'. The trio was banned from weightlifting for two years. Boxer Daljit Singh, who won a silver medal, also had traces of dubious drugs in his urine samples and was stripped of his title. Coaches O.P. Bhardwaj and G.S. Sandhu added to the confusion claiming that herbal medicine for a fever had led to the positive test. However the boxer, after close questioning, denied the illness. Insinuations of performance enhancing drugs were also made against shot-putters Bahadur Singh and Balwinder Singh and middle distance runners Charles Borromeo and Suresh Yadav. At home both the Indian shot-putters were in the 18 metres plus region. However neither of them repeated over 18 metres throws in competitions abroad. Similarly Borromeo faded away after winning the 800 metres gold medal in the 1982 Delhi Asiad, citing stomach ailments and injuries, that were not even cured after treatment abroad. Suresh Yadav, a captain in the Army, won the 800 metres in the Asian Track and Field Championships but also faded away quickly, complaining of several internal ailments. The first case of doping in India was noticed in rather bizarre circumstances. During the selection trials at the National Stadium, Delhi for the 1968 Mexico Olympics, then national record holder in the 10,000 metres, Kripal Singh set a blistering pace. He set near world record laps timings. However midway through the race, Kripal ran off the track, climbed the stairs of the stadium, frothing from the mouth and abused officials assembled there. It was later confirmed that Kripal had taken pills to boost his performance. However subsequent illness led to his career getting curtailed. The menace of drugs has increased in Indian sports since the 1982 Delhi Asiad. Due to declining moral standards and get rich quick attitudes it is now even widespread in Inter-University sports meets. Taking drugs is a short cut to success and ultimately the dream of a life in comfort. Drugs in sports are a universal menace, which is even recognised by the International Olympic committee (IOC). India does not even have a dope -testing laboratory of international standards. Financial constraints and huge costs are cited as reasons for not setting up a laboratory in India. However the petition filed in the Delhi High Court by long distance runner Sunita Godara and her husband that positive drug tests of several Indian sports stars were not being disclosed by the Sports Authority of India (SAI) caused a stir. Both SAI and IOA now admit that this menace is widespread in India. Efforts are being to set up an internationally approved drug-testing laboratory in the country. However this alone, will not act as a deterrent. Serious efforts must be made to educate young sportspersons of the dangers of drugs. The media should be used to spread this message. Sports teachers in schools and colleges should be educated on the perils of this problem and made to impart these lessons to young players in their institutions.
Such instances are symptoms of the morass that Indian sports have slipped into. More evidence of the malfunctioning of Indian sports and lack of morality and ethics is evident in an analysis of the three most popular sports in the country, Cricket, Football and Hockey.
HOCKEY
In hockey India first entered a team in the 1928 Olympics at Amsterdam and won the gold medal on debut. All of India's gold medals in the Olympics were in hockey, six in a row from 1928 to the 1956 Melbourne games, and again in 1964 at Tokyo and at the boycott-ridden 1980 Moscow Olympics. Seven of these hockey gold medals were won when the competition was held on grass. Since the advent of hockey on artificial surfaces at Montreal in 1976, India's only gold medal came in the Moscow games, an especially depleted competition with only six teams participating, due to the boycott by nearly 40 countries in protest against the erstwhile USSR's invasion of Afghanistan. India has also won a silver medal in hockey in 1960 at Rome and twice got bronze medals, in 1968 at Mexico and 1972 at Munich.
An analysis of the hockey results in the five fully competitive Olympics since 1976 reveals India's steady downfall in hockey. Leaving aside the 1980 gold medal triumph, the results have been dismal. India's best was fifth in 1984 at Los Angeles. Other results were seventh in1976 at Montreal, sixth in 1988 at Seoul, seventh in 1992 at Barcelona, eighth in 1996 at Atlanta and seventh in Sydney 2000. This shows that India has been unable to adjust to the demands of hockey on artificial surfaces, which demands greater speed, strength and stamina. An example from the conversion of penalty corners will illustrate this point. India's best penalty corner expert in the 1990s was Anil Aldrin whose hits were timed at 150 kilometres (about 93 miles) an hour. The world's best, during this decade, Floris Bovelander of the Netherlands had hits timed at 220 kms and the average is 180. India has been unable to bring any guile or variation in conversion of penalty corners, a vital part of modern hockey. Despite their poor performances renowned hockey coaches of the world have emphasized that even in the nineties, India had several world class players like defender Pargat Singh, centre forward Dhanraj Pillay, right winger Mukesh Kumar and midfielder Mohammed Riaz. The reason Indian hockey has underachieved in the 1990s is because of lack of tactical awareness. The contrast with current World and Olympic champions Holland is obvious. Holland has revamped their playing style, with constant inter-changing of positions, long bouts of possession play, expertise in penalty corner conversion and speed in counter attacks. India still relies on individual talent, which gets bottled up on the more demanding artificial surfaces.
Indian hockey in the 20th century can be divided into two phases, dominance on grass and the gradual decline on astro turf and artificial surfaces. From 1976 onwards the international body FIH has made it mandatory that all recognised tournaments be played on artificial surfaces. India's performances have plummeted since then in both the Olympics and the World Cup. In the World Cup, India were 12th and last in London in 1986, 10th in 1990 at Lahore and 9th in 1998 at Utrecht, Holland. This trend was only partially reversed in the 1994 World Cup in Sydney, when India finished fifth.
Leslie Claudius, the talented right half back, who was captain in the 1960 Rome Olympics feels that the shift from grass to artificial surfaces has led to declining standards because Indian hockey has not changed their approach to the game and overall technique. Claudius and several others feel that Indian coaches have not done enough homeowrk on how to prepare teams for hokey on artificial surfaces. He reasoned that, "Hockey on astro-turf means precision hitting, accurate passes and precise stopping, facets in which the Europeans and Australians are superior. The guile and stick-work for which sub-continental hockey was famous is not of much use on artificial surfaces." Claudius also felt that a mental block and a tendency to live on past glories has led to the decline of Indian hockey. He said that in contrast Pakistan, which still plays with five forwards has adopted well and won the World Cup at Sydney in 1994 and the Olympic gold medal at Los Angeles in 1984.
There are also other causes for the decline of Indian hockey. The aftermath of Independence and Partition led to the migration of large numbers of the Anglo-Indian community to Australia, England and Canada. This community had produced several stalwart internationals, Hockey in Bombay and Bengal, two important nurseries slumped with the departure of the Anglo Indians.
Interest in hockey has even declined in traditional nurseries like Bhopal, Aligarh, U.P. and even in Punjab.
The youth of Punjab are slowly playing more cricket, golf and tennis and the numbers in hockey are declining. The major reason is the absence of big money, glamour, poor visibility on TV, nepotism in selection of teams and negligible promotion or marketing of the game. In the past there would be many stalwarts competing for a single position. Now quality players fighting for a berth in the Indian team has declined rapidly.
The 1968 Olympian Inam-ur-Rehman recalls his youth in Bhopal in the 1950s and says, "there were so many players practising daily that we often had to play in gullies and streets. Each locality in Bhopal had a hockey club." Nowadays factionalism and petty politicking has ruined Bhopal hockey. The club culture has declined and the youth of Bhopal is alienated from this game. Teams from Bhopal no longer produce players of the calibre of Inam, Latif, Shahid Noor, Abdul Hamid and Aslam Sher Khan.
Former Member of Parliament and 1975 World Cup winner Aslam Sher Khan has an interesting theory about the Muslim community's gradual decline of interest in hockey. He says, "During the 1960s, Ashwini Kumar of Punjab Police and later BSF controlled the IHF. His word was final. It was rumoured that Muslims will not play well against Pakistan and so were not selected." A feeling grew that Muslims were unwanted. Such parochial attitudes led to the alienation of Muslims from Indian hockey.
Faulty selection has also led to the end of India's era of supremacy. Ashok Kumar, son of the legendary Dhyan Chand and former Olympian feels victimisation and inconsistent selection led to declining and interest in the game. He says, "if only Balbir Singh (Railways), Inam and Shahid Noor had not been dropped on flimsy grounds and been selected regularly from 1970--1975, we could have won regularly and hockey would have become a dominant sport in India with a large cult following." Ashok himself was a victim of inconsistent selection, when he was dropped on the morning of the final vs Pakistan in the 1970 Bangkok Asiad. They said he was too young to handle the pressure, even though he had played in all previous matches.
In January 1999, KPS Gill, the IHF president needlessly dropped six key senior players, after Indian returned triumphant from the 1998 Bangkok Asiad. The players were branded as rebels as they asked for regular payment for international matches. The momentum and combination of India's winning squad got shattered. Also public interest in the game declined. Frequent chopping and changing of coaches, especially in the recent past has also affected playing standards of Indian hockey.
The glory days of Indian hockey were in the late 1940s and 1950s. When the victorious 1948 London Olympics team returned by ship from the Liverpool docks, over 100,000 frenzied fans assembled at Bombay to give a tumultuous welcome to their heroes. After the 1956 Melbourne Olympics triumph, the first Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru had said, "Your victory gave the nation a certain stature. Keep it up." The current Indian players do not respond to such idealism. Monetary incentives are what concern them the most.
For the Sydney Olympics, the Indian squad had gone a month in advance to acclimatize. Coached by Vasudev Bhaskaran, the squad was a judicious blend of experienced stars like Dhanraj Pillay and Mukesh Kumar, playing in their third successive Olympics and talented newcomers like Mohammed Sameer Dad, Gagan Ajit Singh, goalkeeper Devesh Chauhan and Deepak Thakur. Financial incentives for success were also ample. Samsung, the sponsors of the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) had promised a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs to the Indian team if they returned with the gold medal. A sum of Rs. 25 lakhs was promised to the trio of coaches Vasudev Bhaskaran, assistant Harendra Singh and penalty corner specialist trainer Ranjit Singh (a resident of Spain associated with the national team for the last three months) if they guided the team to the gold medal. Way back in the 1992 Barcelona Olympics, Palm Beach had also promised a sum of Rs.10 lakhs for the gold and Rs.5 lakhs for the silver medal plus Rs. 5,000 for each goal scored. Four years later for the 1996 Atlanta Olympics, sponsors AT &T offered $20,000 for a gold medal and there were separate incentives from co-sponsors Iodex. Besides these offers the hockey team would also benefit (Rs. 15 lakhs) from the Government of India's financial award scheme (started in 1988) for winning an Olympic medal. So there is no dearth of financial gains for Olympic success.
Expectations in India were sky high, during the Sydney Olympics. Hopes soared when India started with a bang, beating bogey team Argentina 3-0 and drawing 2-2 with favourites Australia. TV ratings for India's matches were very high. The nation seemed to have found new sporting heroes. However then came the 0-2 loss to Korea, a stumbling 2-1 win over Spain and a 1-1 draw against Poland on a rainy day which put India third in the group on goal difference and out of the semi finals. The great expectations were shattered. All the old failings, inadequate physical fitness, poor conversion of penalty corners and lack of killer instinct again re-surfaced. TV ratings of the Indian hockey team dropped. The Indian sports fan again felt let down.
In July 2001 in Edinburgh, India coached by Cedric D'Souza in his second -coming as national coach, struggled to qualify for the World Cup being held in March 2002 in Kuala Lumpur. In the Edinburgh World Cup qualifiers, India finished fifth (seven countries qualified). Change of coaches has not helped. Indian hockey is like old wine in new bottles. The Indian Hockey Federation (IHF) has signed a Rs. 3 crores sponsorship deal with Castrol but no payment schemes for players are forthcoming. The players remain disgruntled. Coaches are unable to blend the senior and junior players into a cohesive national team. The overall scenario is depressing. The stark reality is that India is no more a world power in hockey and qualifying for the Olympics and World Cups seems to be the objectives rather than winning medals as in the past. Nobody has answers for this downfall. The IHF does not know where to start. Broadbasing the game in the country, reviving club hockey and activating state associations are some of the immediate tasks for the IHF, otherwise standards will fall futher.
CRICKET
In terms of television and media coverage, spectator response, generation of advertisements and sponsorship and nation wide acceptability, cricket is the 'King of Kings' in Indian sport. A survey carried out by the Sports Authority of India (SAI) some years ago revealed that over 80 per cent of India's youth prefer to play and watch cricket, rather than any Olympic sport. Middle class India has embraced cricket, because of the glamour it involves, the chance of a lucrative career and above all because cricket is one of the few games in which India gains reasonable international success. So cricket in India bestrode the firmament like a mighty colossus, dominating all other sports. However Manoj Prabhakar's sensational disclosures in the tehelka.com tapes and the CBI enquiry about alleged involvement in match fixing has jolted cricket's supremacy. Suddenly Indian cricket became an area of darkness.
Former sports editor of The Indian Express, Kishin R. Wadhwaney in his informative book, Cricket's Murky Underworld reveals that "murky deals proved one thing that cricket players were involved with bookies who, in turn, were under the thumbs of dons of the underworld." (126). Wadhwaney has warned that the nexus of the underworld, punters, bookies and cricketers and betting, bribery and match-fixing is so deep-rooted that "it may not come as a big surprise if one or more stars are done to death by the dons or their alleged associates." (126). The author states that in an important one-day match, about Rs. 1,000 crores changes hands in Mumbai alone. In Delhi also betting is said to be in the range of Rs. 1,000 crores. Thus betting in cricket has outstripped that in racing, which is never more than Rs. 1 or 2 crores on a particular day or a maximum of Rs. 5 crores on the day of the Derby. The meticulous CBI inquiry revealed the links of several established stars with punters and bookies. The reputations of giants like Azahruddin, Kapil Dev, Ajay Jadeja, Nayan Mongia, Manoj Prabhakar and several others took a tumble. With cricket under a cloud, sponsorship started to decline. For instance Kapil Dev's Samsung and Azharuddin's Pepsi's advertisement along with some others were withdrawn. It was revealed that for several years, some star players had 'fixing' matches for undisclosed sums of money. The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) suspended former Indian skipper Azharuddin and Ajay Shama for life and Ajay Jadeja and Manoj Prabhakar for five years. They have also issued a six-point code of conduct for the players.
However it is felt that the BCCI had the knowledge and opportunities to break the players--bookie nexus earlier but failed to act due to vested interests. The BCCI officials felt that the problem would just blow away and scandals could be avoided. Cynics also believe that some officials of the BCCI were themselves involved with bookies and hence no action was taken, till there was a public outcry due to media revelations and investigations of the Delhi Police. The delay in prompt punitive action has led to the game of cricket getting tainted.
The media was full of lurid tales of the lack of integrity of several Indian cricketers. Each day it became a case of the god that failed. Suddenly cricket was not a symbol of national unity in India. The middle class who thought of cricket twenty-four hours a day felt disillusioned and disappointed at the greed of the cricketers. Results on the field of play also dipped. So the compulsion to watch Indian cricket declined. Viewership perceptibly diminished during the Asia Cup in Dhaka May 2000. During the past couple of years, cricket had become associated with a type of fierce national identity, an expression of nationalism and the growth of the Indian nation state. Success on the field of play like in cricket or in beauty contests were visible expressions of triumph which exponents of Information Technology cannot provide. Midnight's Children are now very nationalistic and Mona Bhattacharya, noted TV anchor, best summed up such feelings. She said, "I like watching cricket, especially one -day cricket because it is nice to see your country win once a while." But by the end of May 2000, all this had changed. The Indian cricket team was losing regularly; the icons had become fallen idols. This trend continues.
Results on the field also plunged. In the winter of 1999-2000 India's tour of Australia became the blunder Down Under. India lost 0-3 to world champions Australia and flopped in the three nation one -day series. India's twelve- year- old unbeaten record at home also fell by the wayside. South Africa trounced India 2-0 in the two test series. India fared miserably in the Sharjah tri-series and the Asia Cup at Dhaka in April-May 2000. In early 2001 there was a glimmer of hope in the comeback 2-1 series win against Australia at home mainly thanks to the batting V.V.S. Laxman and the bowling of Harbhajan Singh. However this sense of well being also faded rapidly as India continued their dismal run in overseas tours. They were held to a 1-1 draw by lowly paced Zimbabwe, fared badly against Sri Lanka and lost both the one-day finals on these tours. The cash rich BCCI has emerged as a body more interested in profits than promoting the sport. The lack of attention to detail, such as producing sporting wickets at home to enhance India's overall standard and improving domestic cricket is an indictment on their style of functioning. The BCCI must show more concern for the welfare of players in arranging overseas tours, provide better facilities for domestic cricket and take greater interest in curbing the bookie/punter-player nexus so that Indian cricket does not get further tainted. After all justice must not only be done but seen to be done.
FOOTBALL
Football in India is always an enigma. Domestic matches between arch-rivals Mohun Bagan and East Bengal always draws huge crowds in the region of 75-80,000. About 120,000 spectators watched the August 2001 league tie between these arch -rivals at the Salt Lake stadium, Calcutta. The Goa derby between Salgaocar and Zee-Churchill also attracts crowds of 35--40,000. The National football league ties between clubs teams from Calcutta and Goa also attracts spectators in excess of 50,000. However the All India Football Federation (AIFF) has done little to either develop standards or market this people's sport and capitalise on public enthusiasm. In the 1950s and 60s, India won the Asian Games gold medal twice in football (in 1951 and 1962), were runners up in the 1964 Asia Cup, and regularly finished either second or third in the Merdeka tournament in Kuala Lumpur. But now India has slumped in the international arena and are ranked 113th in the world and 19th in Asia, according to the FIFA Coca-Cola list of August 2001. The game has not expanded in India and remains confined to a few pockets in India, like the North-East region, Bengal, Kerala and Goa. In most other states it remains popular in small areas, like the Mahilpur region in Punjab or the Walled City area in Delhi. The popularity and participation in the game has slumped in traditional regions like Hyderabad and Bangalore.
AIFF officials are busy in petty politicking and are not men of vision. At present the AIFF president, Mr. Priya Ranjan Das Munshi who is often busy with his political career is being charged with embezzlement of funds. An internal AIFF audit in 1996, Indian football's richest year revealed that Rs. 2.5 crores could not be accounted for. This anomaly formed the basis of the current lawsuit against the AIFF president and his cronies. Financial irregularities have led to further loss of revenue. A $250,000 (approx. Rs. 1.5 crores) FIFA Youth Development grant given to India in 1999 was frozen, following complaints that AIFF officials were siphoning off the grant for purposes other than football. The game does not have a good image in India. Also sadly the nationalistic middle class tend not to identify with the Indian football team, as they barely play enough international matches. Indians in the urban metropolitan cities tend to root for Brazil or Argentina or Netherlands but Indian football is scoffed at as being too slow. TV coverage of Indian football is also inadequate, so it does not attract enough sponsorship. Thus Indian football is in a vicious circle from which it is difficult too escape.
...match against a local club team. This was again due to apathy by the AIFF.
For many years there was no monetary incentive for Indian players. They got paid $10 per day during trips abroad. Payments per match and bonus incentives were rare. The AIFF is unable to retain sponsors because of unfulfilled promises. Hence for many years there was not enough money to pay the national team. The newly elected (Dec. 2000) AIFF secretary Alberto Colaco introduced graded payment for the national team in the World Cup qualifiers (Asian zone, Group

in April--May 2001. Each member of the Indian squad was paid Rs. 25,000 as basic pay with bonus money of Rs. 15,000 or Rs. 10,000 per win, depending on the nature of the opposition. This helped to stem the rot and led to marginally improved performances. For the first time in the World Cup qualifiers, India beat a country ranked 60 places ahead of them (UAE ranked 64 as compared to India's 124) and finished with three wins, two draws and a solitary defeat in their campaign.
India's junior and sub-junior teams are chosen only for participation in Asian championships and get limited exposure. Despite such handicaps in the 1974 Asian Junior championships in Bangkok, India emerged joint-champions with Iran (2-2 draw). Four Indians, skipper and striker Shabbir Ali, roving forward Harjinder Singh, left winger Mohd. Yacob and midfielder Prasun Banerjee were chosen for an Asian squad, selected from amongst players in these championships. So India, had the talent to be amongst the best in Asia. However this talent was not groomed and some players like defenders Joaquim Baretto, B. Dayanand and Amit Dasgupta just faded away. A waste of quality human resources. In contrast six players from Iran developed and represented their country in the 1978 World Cup finals in Argentina. This trend sadly still continues.
There is little follow up on talented players that emerge from the North -East and the Andamin and Nicobar islands. Due to little encouragement, competitive football has become dormant in many states in India. In the 1960--70s, about 100 domestic tournaments took place annually. The number has whittled down to a mere 24 tournaments per year. The AIFF should ensure that regular tournaments/leagues are held all over India to increase the reservoir of talent and get more people involved in the game.
Professional management, better marketing, greater attention to the senior and age-group National teams and broad-basing the game in different states are required for Indian football to have a brighter future in the 21st century.