Life After Paris

THIS WAS EXPECTED to be India’s best Olympics by far. Ten medals seemed very realistic and the quality of athletes on show promised more. The inclusion of a hundred plus support staff for 117 athletes was evidence that India had turned the corner. The Olympic Games was no longer a mere junket for babus and sports administrators. But then not everything went to plan. The number of medals stopped short of the expected figure and the Games will now be remembered for our athletes failing to follow the rules, and in the process, losing out on a possible gold medal. There were other acts of incompetence, which cost India dear and each of these points need to be critically introspected so that such acts are not repeated in the future.

To start with the end, just before the closing ceremony on August 11, 2024, the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) issued a media release, which stated that the IOA strongly condemned the hate that was being directed at Dr Dinshaw Pardiwala, who was heading our medical contingent. The release said that every boxer, wrestler or weightlifter and his or her support team was responsible for the weight of that particular athlete and Pardiwala was in no way responsible for Vinesh Phogat failing the weigh in and being overweight by a meagre 100 grams on the second day of her competition. While on the face of it, the release was an act of standing up for Pardiwala, who is a top-class orthopae­dic surgeon but not a sports nutritionist or scientist, a deep dive shows a clear case of disconnect between the IOA and the athletes. It is true that the athletes can have their own teams, but eventu­ally they are supposed to be under the aegis of the IOA at least during the period of the Olympics. Unfortunately in India, that is not the case. With us trying to please the athletes and making them comfortable, they have been allowed to operate in silos with little or no accountability. While the IOA should not have fielded Pardiwala in front of the media, a move that resulted in him get­ting all the hate, it is also true that for Vinesh’s plight, the respon­sibility did lie with her coaches and support team. And even at the time of writing this article, we have not heard a single word from her coach or nutritionist who were responsible for admin­istering her the recovery meal and hydrating her throughout the day on the first afternoon and evening, which eventually re­sulted in her being 100 grams overweight and cost India a possible gold medal. This was not an isolated act of failure. We can call it incompetence, even if it sounds a tad harsh.

Antim Panghal’s is another case of things being mismanaged. Antim, who will turn 20 at the end of the month, is one of India’s most talented wrestlers. To go with it, she was lucky enough to get a very good draw in Paris. So much so that I had predicted a medal for her and was counting on it. However, Antim lost her bout within a minute-and-a-half and had absolutely no energy when she came on the mat. It was shocking to say the least and in the mixed zone she was in no position to speak to the media and was howling in despair. Later, she made the mistake of sending her sister to get her belongings from her room in the Games village, an act that resulted in the police getting into the act and her eventual deportation. She was apparently embarrassed and did not want to go back to the village. While the embarrassment was one thing, the fact that she was unable to perform was a clear act of incompetence on the part of her support team. Apparently, she was made to starve for close to 48 hours before her weigh in on the morning of the bout and just about made the weight. With no strength left, her fate had already been decided. While the limelight was all on Vinesh, the Antim botch up does bring to focus the inability of the In­dian support groups to make sure that the athletes are up and ready for their competitions. Each of these support staff members are paid top bucks, more often than not, which comes from the Target Olympic Podium Scheme and from foundations like Reli­ance, JSW or OGQ. While Antim was castigated in the media for failing, nobody talked about her coach or nutritionist. Why was not a word said about them and they held accountable? Was a report sought and can they be questioned for their failure of making an athlete turn up in her best shape?

If it was incompetence at one level, it was luck at another. At Paris, India hardly ever had luck going their way, which is very important in sports. Take the Nishant Dev bout for example. Nishant was leading 4-1 at the end of the first round and was look­ing good in the second as well. Had he won the second round, it was all over and a medal would have been assured. However, to everyone’s dismay the second round was awarded to the Mexican boxer who eventually was declared the winner by a split decision. While boxing is a subjective sport and results often go either way, this was a clear case of Nishant feeling hard done by. India lost a possible medal and a young 22-year-old was left mentally scarred.

If Nishant was a victim of bad refereeing, Mirabai Chanu was plain unlucky. Chanu, a lifter of pedigree, has always been excel­lent in the ‘clean and jerk’ and average in the ‘snatch’. In Paris, it was a pleasant surprise to see her lift 88 kilos in the snatch, a personal best of sorts and enough to keep her in medal conten­tion. In fact, at the end of the snatch, I was convinced she would get her second consecutive medal and all she needed to do was touch 200 kilos in her combined lift. I was shocked to see her fail the first ‘clean and jerk’ of 111 kilos. Then when she did clear it in her second attempt, she was under pressure from her Thai opponent. In her third and final attempts he tried to lift 114 when 112 was enough for the bronze. She failed and lost out on a medal by a kilo.

The other player who came really close to a medal is Lakshya Sen. Unlike some of the others, Lakshya in fact punched above his weight and seemed to be playing like a man possessed. Ranked number 22 in the world going in, he accounted for the third seed Jonathan Christie in the round robin stage and then went on to beat Chou Tien Chen in the quarter finals. In the semi-final, Lakshya had multiple game points against eventual winner Viktor Axelsen and blew them all to lose in straight games. Then in the bronze medal play off, Sen was leading by a game and was up 8-3 in the second when calamity struck. From seeming like the match was in his bag, Lakshya lost steam and went on to lose the contest in three games.

In a rare outburst at the end of the match, his coach Prakash Padukone suggested that the athlete needs to take much more responsibility now that they have every facility they need to be at the top of their game in events like the Olympics. While Prakash Padukone was right about most things, the timing of his rant was wrong. He should have waited for the dust to settle and not spoken within minutes of Lakshya losing. In a country starved of champions, Padukone soon started trending and a lot of hate started getting directed at the athletes, including Lakshya, who were labelled a pampered lot. The truth, however, is that it was a collective failure. While the athlete is indeed to take a portion of the blame, and a large part of it, the collective, including Prakash Padukone, are equally responsible for the effort. In the many interviews to me leading up to the Olympics, Padukone time and again emphasised that his team was working on the mental strength of PV Sindhu and Lakshya Sen. And may we say that is where Lakshya fell short.

When India won the T20 World Cup defeating South Africa in the Caribbean, a lot of credit was given to Rahul Dravid. And when the same team had lost the ODI World Cup final in Ahmedabad on November 19, 2023, Rohit Sharma and Rahul Dravid were both blamed for the loss. That is how it always is. If the coach gets a part of the credit, they should be ready to cop a part of the flak as well.

While there were many cases of what could have been, there were indeed some silver linings as well. Shooting for example redeemed itself after Rio and Tokyo. Many Indian shooters made the final and the three medals—two from Manu Bhaker (including in the mixed team with Sarabjot Singh) and one from Swapnil Kusale—is proof that Indian shooting is on the right track. Manu missed the third medal in a shoot off and could con­sider herself unlucky. Arjun Babuta, too, finished in the fourth place after being in medal contention for a large part of the fi­nal. Apart from this, Ramita Jindal, Maheshwary Chauhan and Anantjeet Singh Naruka also came within striking distance of a medal. A properly structured shooting programme now means India has enormous talent in the sport. There are many like Tilottama Sen, Rudranksh Patil, Mehuli Ghosh, Ashi Chouksey who are waiting in the ranks and can win a medal at any interna­tional competition. With 21 Indians having qualified and India participating in 28 shooting disciplines in Paris, there is no reason why shooting should not target seven to eight medals at the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles.

The other sport where the Indians did well was in women’s table tennis. With two Indians making the last 16 and the Indian team beating higher ranked Romania, there is a glimmer of hope going forward.

However, the discipline where our shortcomings were exposed and needs immediate introspection is athletics. Except Neeraj Chopra, who yet again threw his season’s best on way to winning the silver medal, and Avinash Sable who made the final in the 3,000 meter steeplechase, almost every other Indian star in athletics finished way below their personal best. That is where it becomes a matter of serious concern. Long jumper Jeswin Aldrin, whose personal best is 8.20 meters, finishing with 7.61 metres is unacceptable. The same can be said of Tejinder Pal Toor and the men’s 4×400 relay team. Many had expected them to make the finals or at least do their personal best. They ended up two seconds short and were knocked out in the qualification stage itself. With exposure and funding no longer an issue, we need accountability from these athletes and their support teams.

The final couple of points I wish to make are more funda­mental. When you have six athletes finishing fourth, you know two things. One, they have the potential and are capable of win­ning medals. And second, they still need to get better mentally to achieve that decisive one per cent. While the IOA did well to attach mental conditioning coaches to the team ahead of the Olympics, this was done just a month before the team departed for Paris. Mental conditioning is as much a part of modern sport as is coaching and as Neeraj Chopra articulated it beautifully during an interview at Omega House in Paris, “In the Olympics, it is as much [about] mental [strength] as it is about skill. You need to be strong in the mind to make it to the podium and it is something that we need to put a lot of attention to.” It is the mental strength that carried the day for Indian hockey, where PR Sreejesh, who has now retired, yet again saving a penalty corner with just 38 seconds left on the clock. Back-to-back medals at the Olympics shows Indian hockey is firmly back on track and the differentia­tor here was the resilience shown by Harmanpreet Singh and his team. That is where a major amount of work needs to be done as far as other sports are concerned so that we do not falter at the last hurdle and do not miss out on that decisive one per cent.

Lastly, India is all gung-ho about mounting a strong bid for the 2036 Olympics. We have already seen an announcement to this effect at the IOC session in Mumbai in October 2023. However, it is time to question if we should devote our energies and funding to mounting an Olympic bid or continue to invest in the grassroots and make sure that more of our athletes qualify for the games in Los Angeles in 2028. Unless we win more than 15 medals at the Games, is such a bid justified or prudent? A strong Olympic bid will cost India several thousand crore rupees, money that can be better used by investing in grassroots-level sporting talent and coaches going forward.

In short, Paris 2024 has left us with many lessons. While sports is indeed on a move, it is equally true that some tough calls need to be taken to make sure, which direction it moves in. The stakes are high and the time is now. India getting it right could define the future of our Olympic sports going forward.

Indian Hockey teamManu BhakerNeeraj ChopraOlympic GamesParis 2024Swapnil KusaleVinesh Phogat