Every politician and bureaucrat among the many heading national and local sports organisations is up in arms against the proposed National Sports Policy.
Almost every possible sport in India has a federation and affiliated associations that claim to run it. They are led in many cases by top political leaders, bureaucrats, policemen and in some cases also men from business. For example the National Rifle Association is led by Digvijay Singh, the Athletics Federation is led by Suresh Kalmadi; KPS Gill heads the Indian Hockey Federation; and Sharad Pawar “runs” the Board of Control for Cricket in India.
Most of them are politicians. None of them is known to have played the game for India or even their own states. They are all aged and very demanding that their importance in the sport be recognised. They are invariably good political infighters and bring this capability into the governance of the sport. Most have held the top positions in the governance of their sports body for many years. But, they have no vision or ambition for the sport they lead. They do little to identify, train and nurture talent.
However, their associations are “national”, and the teams and players they select play for the nation, wearing the national uniform and carrying the national flag. What law gives them this right? But there is certainly no law or regulation that compels them to provide sports persons with enough inputs to perform well for the nation!
These positions give power without responsibility and accountability, even pelf: in choosing participants, coaches and other officials, commissions in awarding contracts for infrastructure and running large events, and foreign travel when accompanying the sportspersons to international events. Government and sports association officials sometimes outnumber participants at such events.
The public wants Indian sports people to win and they have a stake in how sports activities are governed and managed. Sports persons are in the sport for the love of it, the competitive thrill of winning, and in some sports also for the money and the celebrity status it gives them. Sponsoring companies have a stake in sports like cricket, tennis, in some places hockey and football, with many viewers of television and advertising revenues. Do sports officials have interest outside their own personal needs in “managing” sports in India?
During the Cold War years, Russia, East Germany and China won many Olympic gold medals. They continue to do so. They track and take over talented children, give them intensive training, luxurious living by local standards, and provide them opportunities to compete internationally.
India, despite size and diversity of people and climate has not won gold medals or trophies in any sport activity for many years except the rare wins in badminton, tennis, cricket, football or hockey. A bronze or a silver medal to an Indian evokes media hysteria. We may have little to show in sports victories but we do have many associations and substantial government and public funding to them.
But, the new draft national sports policy aims at “Sports for all”, by providing constitutional, legal and institutional measures to operationalise the policy. To achieve this, the Ministry wants to provide universal access to sports and physical education for all classes of citizens, in all segments of society and across all age groups. The policy expects to develop local institutions with substantially enhanced public investments to provide facilities for sports in urban and rural areas. It encompasses sports facilities and supervisors in educational institutions and to aim at women, people with disabilities and senior citizens.
The policy draft rightly belittles the hosting of mega events. They give “very short-term benefits” for the country unless they are part of a “comprehensive and long-term vision” encompassing a larger base of athletes. The policy wants the economic, social and cultural benefits of hosting mega sporting events to be weighed against the huge opportunity costs involved.
As described earlier, governance of our autonomous sports associations is opaque, without vision, and with no professional management. They are resting places for powerful people least concerned with development of the sport. Other countries do more to develop talent in cricket than the BCCI with its big bucks. American baseball, basketball and football associations also have issues of mismanagement, but they have helped to develop talent spotting and development into a science.
Self regulation in sports has not worked. Sports association leaders do not see themselves as accountable for improving the sport and its performers. Yet their teams wear India blazers and the leaders speak for the country. Legislation must ensure that all associations give representation to sports persons, are transparent in their governance and finances, and the leaderships accountable for performance. The Sports Association of India could be the independent regulatory body for this purpose.
