There’s no sports culture in India, and it showed at the Paris Olympics

Beyond cricket, India hasn’t had too many world-beaters. So the Olympics has never been a happy hunting ground for Indians. Of India’s 10 gold medals in Olympic history, eight were won by the hockey team — their last triumph was at the 1980 Moscow Games.

The only individual gold medallists were Abhinav Bhindra (10m air pistol) in 2008 and Neeraj Chopra (javelin throw) in 2020. Chopra failed to defend it in Paris and had to be satisfied with silver — India’s only one at the 2024 Games.

India’s record at the Olympics

There was a time when India used to return empty-handed from the Olympics. That hasn’t been the case lately. India won three in Beijing (2008), six in London (2012) and two in Rio de Janeiro (2016). The best haul of seven was in 2020 (Tokyo, the Games were held in 2021 due to Covid).

The six (one silver and five bronze) in Paris were marginally lower than the effort in Tokyo. So it isn’t much of a comedown, but India had an Olympic champion in Tokyo. Besides Chopra, wrestler Vinesh Phogat had the best chance to win a gold in Paris, but her disqualification has been retold so many times that it doesn’t warrant a repeat of the 100gm miss.

India may not have an Olympic champion, yet there’s enough to celebrate. Manu Bhaker’s double bronze (women’s 10m air pistol and the mixed 10 air pistol with Sarabjot Singh) has been a highlight. So was Swapnil Kusale’s bronze in 50m air rifle (men) and Aman Sehrawat’s in 57kg wrestling (men).

Indian hockey revival

The men’s hockey continued its revival with their second consecutive Olympic bronze. So gutsy were their displays that they were unlucky to have missed a slot in the finals. In javelin, Chopra simply didn’t have the best day.

Is six medals good enough for India? Not at all. A country of 1.417 billion should do better. In Paris, India finished way behind countries like Saint Lucia (population 180,500), Uganda (50 million), Dominican Republic (11.4 million), Guatemala (18.3 million), Dominica (73,368) and Pakistan (251 million) — all of which have at least one Olympic champion.

After every Summer Games, there is an introspection in India. A post-mortem. Where did it go wrong? The answers remain the same.

In simple terms, India’s not a sports country. All the adulation and big bucks are restricted to cricket. No other sport comes close. Football has had a large following in West Bengal, Kerala and Goa. That’s no longer true since cricket has eaten into the football fan base.

What’s the basic problem?

The development of successful athletes starts at a young age. For that there has to be a sports culture, which is sorely lacking in India. Even in cities, much of the focus is on education. All parents want their children to be doctors, engineers or accountants. In some parts of the country, civil service jobs are more coveted.

Nowhere in India will you find schools that focus on nurturing sportsmen. A handful of schools, including Sainik Schools, promote sports. But none will devote as much attention to sports as studies. There are grace marks for successful sportspersons, but that too has been reduced last year. So much for incentives.

Against such a backdrop, why would students pursue sports as a career in India? Even successful athletes drop out to build careers outside of sports since it’s not lucrative.

Nurturing talent

Contrast that against the system in a country like the United States, which offers sports scholarships in universities. Even foreign students are eligible. Saint Lucian 100m gold medallist Julien Alfred honed her sprinting skills with a scholarship at the University of Texas.

Students on sports scholarships will pursue sports seriously during their collegiate days and go on to represent the country. In the US, college is the cradle for draft picks for the National Football League (NFL), National Basketball Association (NBA), National Hockey League (NHL) and several other professional sports leagues. The scholarships also help churn out champion swimmers, track and field athletes, tennis players, golfers and so on.

In India, there’s just one Bhaker in women’s shooting and one Chopra in javelin throw. Look at the 100m men’s Olympic final in Paris: Three of the eight, including the winner Noah Lyles, were from the US. Jamaica too has been a nursery for sprinters, while Ethiopia and Kenya are home to long-distance runners. The Chinese are the best bets in diving, gymnastics and other disciplines.

When there’s stiff competition at home

All these powerhouses have sports systems that spot talent at a young age and develop them through a conveyor belt of age-group competitions. No funds and facilities are spared to turn them into world-beaters. There’s so much world-class competition within their ranks that the world stage becomes an extension of the domestic circuit. The gulf in standards ceases to exist.

Talent spotting exists in India but at a basic level. There are sports schools in some regions, but they are grossly inadequate in a vast country. There is good infrastructure, but that’s limited to major cities. For every talent migrating to the cities for better training facilities, thousands must remain behind, laying their skills to waste. That explains why most winners are isolated cases.

Competitions should be held in every village regularly, allowing talent scouts to spot the wonder kids and provide them with better coaching and training facilities. Indian cricket has a praiseworthy system for spotting and nurturing talent, which explains the abundance of world-class players waiting in the wings. Other sports could emulate the National Cricket Academy’s approach.

How world champions are made in India

Every world champion for India has been the result of their singular pursuit of excellence. All of them were not products of the system. They became world champions despite the system. That’s true of Olympic champions Bhindra and Chopra.

That’s true of other sports, except cricket. Wilson Jones, Michael Ferreira, and Geet Sethi (billiards); Leander Paes, Mahesh Bhupathi and Sania Mirza (tennis); Prakash Padukone, P. Gopichand, Saina Nehwal and PV Sindhu (badminton), Mary Kom (boxing), Karnam Malleswari (weightlifting) and several others became world champions on sheer dint of the sweat on their brow. They were not products of a system. The thirst for excellence helped them overcome the hurdles. Imagine how many more champions India would have had if there had been a system like the US, China, Australia or Japan.

Not everything is gloomy. India has a fine array of badminton players who won the Thomas Cup in 2022. Lakshya Sen had the champion Viktor Axelson on the run in the semifinal; a narrow loss deprived him of at least a silver. He lost the bronze too. Sen is only 22; he will be a world champion and an Olympic champion. There’s hope.

How to manage sports better

To keep hope alive, India has to manage sports better. How can the archery team leave for Paris without the chief coach who trained them for the Olympics? Even the Phogat fiasco was disappointing. Worse was wrestler Antim Pangal’s disciplinary breach. To avoid such embarrassments, federations should take their responsibilities more seriously.

There’s no room for lapses. Athletes shouldn’t have to pay for a federation’s blunder. It helps to have former players in the associations to tap their insights and experience, but professionals should be in charge if these bodies have to work flawlessly.

A federation that takes care of the athletes will mould champions. India needs champions. Olympic champions. Los Angeles 2028 is just four years away.