Glamorising our performance at London 2012, different sections of the Indian media reported that India had doubled their medal tally at the Olympics, in comparison to Beijing 2008. A dose of reality – the ‘doubling’ consists of only an extra three medals, none of them Gold. So have we really improved from Beijing 2008? There are different ways of interpreting and answering this question.

With regards to individual athletes, yes most of the athletes competing for India at London 2012 did improve on their performances from Beijing. Sushil Kumar has now won consecutive medals in wrestling, which is no common feat. The Indian shooting contingent continued their good showings at International events, adding another medal to their count from Beijing. Indian female athletes have shown a much-improved performance, embodied in the fighting spirit of Mary Kom and Saina Nehwal, who can hopefully inspire the next generation of female athletes.

Looking at it objectively, yes we did win three more medals than Beijing, but we also won no Gold medal and finished 55th in the ranking table, as compared to 50th in Beijing. Compared to other nations in the BRICS economies, India’s population to medal ratio at London 2012 is the worst at approximately 201 million people per medal. Compare this to Brazil (≈113 million), China (≈15 million), South Africa (≈8 million) and Russia (≈0.17 million).

Ironically, our best-ever medal haul at Olympics coincided with the falling standards in our national sport, where we are eight-time Olympic champions. We stand nowhere in the development ladder in the sport of Weightlifting, a sport where we won a breakthrough bronze in 2000 Sydney Games. Similarly, we are years away from winning medals in the sporting disciplines of Athletics, Gymnastics or Swimming, where the maximum medals are on offer, and these are also the disciplines the Olympics are most popular for. For India to become a sporting power our best brains need to join this industry and the spotlight needs to be on building a strong grassroots base.

Unless long-term programs are in place with funding at different levels, our performance will fade out like it has in the sport of Tennis where we have an odd “Paes”, “Bhupathi” and “Sania” to show for results. We need accountable and professional sporting bodies for building a sustainable sports model. Our current system doesn’t educate sportspersons to be self-sustainable; there are no career development practices for athletes in our sporting set-up. With all due respect to the sports minister Ajay Maken, we are not convinced about the government spoon-feeding elite athletes by offering them officer grade jobs at the Sports Authority of India (SAI). What about their qualifications? Is the National Institute of Sports (NIS) really a centre of excellence where our Olympians will be able to learn the best practices? If this was the case, we would have in place indigenous coaches, not foreign think tanks, in our sports structure.

What about the sportspersons who are just international or national-level athletes? What measures has our system put in place to support them? We just cannot afford to polish the elite set-up and ignore the grassroots. How are the state or national federations helping these athletes to remain in the set-up and contribute to the development of their respective sports? There is a young battery of sports professionals who are pursuing different degrees from some of the best sporting institutions abroad, but our government guidelines doesn’t recognise the qualifications. You must be qualified from the NIS or a medal winner at the national-level to work in the government set-up. The authorities don’t reconise the UEFA or the England & Wales Cricket Board (ECB) or the Australian Sports Commission qualifications for government jobs here.

Our higher education institutions (Government-run colleges and universities) still insist on an MPEd for a sports officer position. The job profile requires one to manage sports and the sporting infrastructure at the establishment. What about those who are pursuing sport management? Is the degree only relevant for sports marketing companies in the private sector? Furthermore, there is a requirement for clearing a National Eligibility Test (NET) for teaching positions at an educational institution. Is a sports officer job a teaching or an administrative position? The flaws are many; we may be satisfied with our six medals, but to repeat the heroics and convert these performances into gold will demand a much more prudent system than exists now.

By Aman Dhall & Suheil Tandon

(The authors are Co-founders & Partners at Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

With two more wrestlers biting the dust yesterday, India is now pinning its hopes on India’s flag bearer for the London Games, Sushil Kumar to lead from the front in the wrestling ring. Kumar has a chance to rewrite the history books when he enters the ring tomorrow. No Indian athlete has ever won back-to-back medals at the Olympics in the individual event.

With attention of fans slowly shifting towards Cricket (with news coming out of swashbuckler Yuvraj Singh making a comeback to the Indian team for T20 world cup), there has been a dull din, growing louder over the past few days in the social media with respect to our Olympic campaign. A late spark from either Kumar or Dutt can bring the nation back together cheering for the Olympic sports. Currently lying outside top-50 countries on the medals table, India will be hoping for that elusive gold from the two to finish on a high and improve on its Beijing performance, where we finished on the 50th spot.

Coming to the lessons from our London performance, a closer look at the sport that fetched us medals tells an interesting story. We have so far won two medals in Shooting and one each in Badminton and Boxing. Apart from Badminton where our coaches were indigenous-led by a great mind, Pullela Gopichand, both Shooting and Boxing medals were courtesy foreign think-tank. In fact, in Shooting, out of the five coaches that assisted the team, four of them were from the foreign shores. While Vijay Kumar’s silver success has been credited to the Russian coach Pavel Smirnov, Gagan Narang has said that Kazakh coach Stanislas Lapidus had a huge role in his bronze medal winning effort, as he made him mentally tougher. Similarly, in Boxing, Mary Kom‘s training was done under the guise of the American coach, Charles Attkinson. Yes, we have outstanding national coaches in Sunny Thomas (Shooting) and Gurbaksh Singh Sandhu (Boxing), but the reality is we are heavily reliant on foreign expertise for our sporting success.

In India, if you are an ex-international or a national player, you have an automatic license to become a coach. Qualifications matter little in our sporting set-up, if you are a good sportsperson our system accepts you as a good coach. Those who pursue a degree or a diploma in coaching from National Institute of Sports do so to become eligible for state and central government jobs, not because they seek improvement in their skill-set. Last month, I met one of the coaches working with a state federation who asked me to help him rewrite the paragraphs he had verbatim lifted from a sports coaching website that can be inserted in a program he has made for athletes. I was not shocked but surprised by his open embrace of cut-copy-paste production.

Our coaches need education, some of them I spoke to don’t even understand the meaning of plagiarism. Many of the coaches I have spoken to in the last few months told me how they used the social media to learn drills from the videos uploaded on the world wide web, though very few of them had understanding of how these drills will help athletes better their skills. I was speaking to ex-chief of Lakshmibai National University of Physical Education (LNUPE), Gwalior, on what can be a possible solution to this problem. He said that unless we have a provision for regularly evaluating and strengthening our coaching courses, we will continue to raise outdated coaches.

For coach development in our country, we need to introduce a system that makes coaching qualifications mandatory and licenses are issued to coaches that need to be renewed from time-to-time. This will ensure that coaches are updating their knowledge regularly. Coaches are unsung heroes and a vital cog in sport development at the grassroots. For India to become a sporting power, coaching the coaches, for now, should be our priority and the first step forward towards our pursuit of sporting excellence.

By Aman Dhall

(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

Devendro Singh – future bright for India at Rio 2016?

With just two more days of competition remaining at London 2012, India will be vying for another medal, with wrestling being the discipline most likely to bring us more joy. Beijing bronze medalist Sushil Kumar remains India’s best hope for another medal at London 2012. Though as we have seen with the likes of Vijender Singh and Abhinav Bindra, it is not an easy task to defend a medal at the Olympics.

Realistically, India will probably not finish with more than 5 medals in total (this is assuming Sushil Kumar or another Indian wrestler win a medal). With a population of over a billion people, along with a fast-growing economy (of which we are reminded quite often), are we as a nation going to be satisfied with just 4 or 5 medals?

I am sure such questions were asked after our performance at Beijing 2008, and Bindra’s Gold encouraged the public and private sector to devote large sums of resources to Indian athletes at the elite level, most of them medal hopefuls in four years’ time. This was never going to be a long-term solution, as we have seen at London 2012. In India, everyone is looking for a quick solution to everything – they want instant results, and so was the thinking behind our strategy four years ago. But true Olympic champions are made after several years of dedication and commitment, which starts with a young boy or girl enjoying a sport of their choice and only thinking about the satisfaction they derive from doing so, not about Olympic medals. The process starts at the grassroots, which is the base from where our elite sport can build on, which is where different stakeholders in Indian sport need to devote their time and resources.

The focus should be on developing infrastructure and putting systems in place at the grassroots, to encourage more kids to take up different sports. It is not enough to have parks or large playgrounds for children to run around and play in. There needs to be a structure, where facilities are built for specific sporting disciplines, and a large number of children can participate in these sports recreationally. The next step would be to identify talent within the kids participating recreationally, to graduate to the competitive level. Those showing willingness should then be groomed by professional, knowledgeable and well-educated coaches, who have a passion for coaching, and have the best interests of their pupils in mind. Around this we need to build a strong club structure, where children of all ages can join and participate in events and leagues.

After London 2012, the Indian sporting authorities, including the several sport governing bodies, need to gather together to think about the future of Indian sport, especially at Olympics. Instead of taking another myopic route to winning medals, sports administrators need to show vision and long-term thinking in their approach to developing Indian sport. Instead of throwing resources at elite athletes and elite sport, we need to develop a long-term plan for the next 12 years, where different stakeholders’ energies and resources are concentrated on developing sport at grassroots, which is a slow yet rewarding process. Instead of ‘buying’ champions for Rio 2016, let us aim to develop the future athletes of India, and ‘build’ champions for the Olympics in 2024.

By Suheil Tandon
(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

A Bronze, which in every Indian’s eye should glitter as Gold

A picture tells a thousand words. So did Mary Kom’s, after losing her semi-final bout to GB’s Nicola Adams. She was evidently disappointed with the result, as she had trained arduously and sacrificed willingly in the pursuit of winning a medal at London 2012 – not Bronze, not Sliver, only Gold. But at the same time, she was gracious in defeat, acknowledging the crowd for their round of applause, her opponent for a competitive bout and her coaches for their support. So down-to-earth, so humble – you would not guess Mary Kom is a five-time world and four-time Asian champion.

To this, Mary Kom has now added an Olympic medal, a Bronze, which in every Indian’s eye should glitter as Gold. It is not the numerous medals, the several world titles or the different awards she has received that make her a champion. She is a champion because of the long and painstaking path she has taken to get here, one that is very well documented. She is a champion because she has not just highlighted the sport of women boxing in India, but has embodied London 2012’s motto: Inspire a Generation. Mary is a role model for the next generation of aspiring female athletes in India, not just because she has given them hopes of winning an Olympic medal in the future. She is a role model because she has given hope to every girl child to take up sport, any sport of their choice and has taught women not to let marriage, children or their family give up on their sporting aspirations.

Saina Nehwal – The Golden Bird of India

Mary and Saina are both champions in their own right, and now have an Olympic medal each to their names. India has a lot to learn from their success at London 2012, where till now the four medals that have been won by India are equally shared between women and men. This is in stark contrast to the fact that India sent 58 male athletes as compared to only 23 female athletes, to compete at London 2012. One wonders whether we would have won two more medals had we sent the same number of female athletes, given their conversion rate. Now people might question my logic by saying that to reach the Olympics, athletes have to qualify, and so the greater number of men in Team India is justified, and they are competing in London 2012 on merit.

This is true, but one has to dig deeper to see the reality. Women’s sport in India is very much neglected, right from the grassroots all the way to the elite level. There is a glaring disparity between male and female sport in India, in every aspect from access to proper equipment and infrastructure to provision of quality coaching. A simple example is this – why do men’s teams in different sports get coaching assistance from foreign professionals whereas women’s teams don’t? It’s true for many sports, be it cricket or football. The system in place does not allow as many girls to participate in sport as compared to boys, it does not allow as many aspiring female Olympians to make a mark in their sport, as compared to males.

Sadly, the reality of women’s sport in India is a reflection of the male chauvinism present within Indian society. I sincerely hope that Mary and Saina’s medals at London 2012 are a lesson to everyone that has an interest, a stake, as small as it may be, in Indian sport. We cannot let the effort and sacrifices of two true champions in Mary and Saina go in vain. London 2012 beckons a new era for female sport in India, to empower the female athlete.

By Suheil Tandon
(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

In the coming days, given the public sentiment and political pressure, many heads are likely to be rolled out. Some seniors may retire, some support staff members asked to leave and some administrators forced to quit. But the question we need to ask is this — can all this stop the erosion in equity of hockey? The reality is, hockey might be a popular sport, after cricket, in terms of viewership but not even 1% of those viewers themselves play the sport. Contrast the same to Cricket, Football or even Basketball or Table Tennis and you will undestand where hockey lags behind.

Incidentally, I met one of the ex-Olympians (from another sport) today, who is now director of sport of an international school. He took me on the tour of the campus showing off the Olympic-size swimming pool, multi-purpose recreation hall, squash courts and a state-of-the-art gymnasium. He spoke about how the school takes great pride in sporting facilities and got my attention to the construction work going on at a far site, he said that will be the place where a hockey field will come up. I was impressed and told him that the school will be probably the first one in Delhi NCR to have an astro turf at its premises. Before I could add more, he cut in saying that the field will be a grass surface. He said that kids are more interested in playing sport like Basketball or, for the matter of fact, even horse riding in their school. The interest in hockey is on a wane and they don’t see any merit in investing a sum of more than a crore to lay a surface from which they cannot recover the cost.

The big picture story of Indian hockey is bleak. Our university hockey is still played on grass, forget about schools where chances are you won’t even find hockey sticks in the sports room. Even the sponsors who are putting money in hockey are drawing funds from their social responsibility reserves, not from marketing budgets because they see merit. In 2008, when India failed to qualify for the Olympics, critics had argued that “it cannot get worse than this (for Indian hockey)”. Sadly, it has got even worse…

By Aman Dhall

LONDON, ENGLAND – NOVEMBER 25: Mery Kom Hmangte of India (Blue) punches Pamela Paoloa Benavidez of Argentina during their quaterfinal, 48kg-51kg bout at ExCel on November 25, 2011 in London, England. (Photo by Jamie McDonald/Getty Images)

Assured of the biggest medal haul ever courtesy Mary Kom‘s victory on Monday, India go into the last week of the London Games with mixed feelings. The script, which started with so much promise, has delivered a two and a half star rating show so far. The audience doesn’t know if it should call the big picture of Indian sports a “success” or a show of “missed opportunities”. However, what is sure, at this point, is a yellow metal in the remaining days can definitely improve the rating of our performance.

India is currently lying 44th on the medals table and nothing less than a gold will satisfy the critics who have started their work on the report card which has more red marks than blue. In Beijing, with one gold and two bronze medals, we stood on the 50th position. Chances are, if we don’t manage a gold over the next couple of days, we might finish even lower on the medals table in London. Given our culture promotes herd mentality and sport being an emotional subject, it is likely our performance will be celebrated as the best ever, giving little importance to the reality on paper.

It is pity that a small country like Kazakhstan in Western Asia has managed to win six gold medals at London so far, while our country with population of more than a billion is still waiting for a gold as the Olympics are nearing to an end. Even tiny Islands such as Dominican Republic and Grenada have managed to strike it rich in London, digging gold. It shows even though we have world-class athletes in sports such as Archery, Badminton, Boxing, Shooting, Tennis and Wrestling, we are surely not world beaters yet. In fact, swimming great Michael Phelps has more gold medals (18) to his name than our country (nine) in the history of the Olympics.

Having said that, the biggest underperformers of the games so far has been Australia. The Australian contingent has won only two gold medals so far, leading the authorities to launch an investigation into the missing gold rush. It will be ironical if the Indian contingent returns home without a gold medal, as there were a number of initiatives launched in the run up to the London Games by the corporates, government and the NGOs that all revolved around the theme ‘Go for Gold’.

Can Mary Kom or Sushil Kumar complete the Indian cupboard with the missing gold? Or will we need to wait for another four years to get that elusive gold, which Abhinav Bindra got us after an agonising wait of 28 years? Let us keep our fingers crossed for now..

By Aman Dhall

(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a
high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

Today every Indian sports fan, and for that matter sports fans all around the world, would definitely have mentioned the name of one athlete in particular participating at London 2012. You guessed it – Jamaican ‘Sprint King’ Usain Bolt. Bolt successfully defended his gold medal at London’s Olympic park, and didn’t he do it in style. Several others before him have set the 100m track ablaze, thrilling audiences worldwide and injecting sports fans with a shot of adrenaline. But no one has entertained millions like Bolt has. He has transformed sprinting into a form of entertainment, just like other prominent global sports such as football, cricket and basketball.

If you saw his pre-race antics before the 100m showdown, you would know what I mean – the commentator described it as “such theatre”. I am sure many millions of fans tune in to watch the athletics, especially the sprints, due to the drama that surrounds the events, and part of that credit has to go to Bolt. What baffles me though is the immense confidence in his ability and the masked composure that Bolt possesses to ‘mess around’ like such before a race and still win gold. I am sure he knows that he and his theatrics would be ridiculed by the media and fans alike if he were to even win silver. But he soaks up the pressure of a big occasion and loves being in the spotlight.

Looking closer to home, I cannot think of many athletes in the Indian contingent at London 2012, who are pure entertainers such as Bolt. The ones with the most similarities, I feel, are the Indian boxers, and in particular, Devendro Singh. He has ruthlessly dismantled a few of his opponents at London 2012, and possesses a swagger and confidence that can be mistaken by some as being cocky. This can only be good for Indian boxing, and we will have to wait and see if he can back his attitude with a medal.

The other Indian athletes, unfortunately, lack the dynamism and charisma, as shown by Bolt, in going about their work. Anyone who saw the pre-London 2012 media campaigns surrounding the Indian contingent will know what I am talking about. This doesn’t mean to take anything away from these athletes – each one has his or her own style which works for them and with which they are comfortable with. But for an Olympic sport to raise its profile in India and for sports fans to really stand up and take attention of the sport, it requires an element of entertainment to it, which at times must be provided by the athletes in the spotlight themselves. India needs Olympians who carry themselves with flair, and have the ability to reach to the masses and inspire youngsters by not only performing well in their sport, but by entertaining them in doing so.

Many stakeholders in Indian sport can play a part in making an athlete ‘entertaining’. Coaches at the grassroots need to ‘guide rather than teach’ young athletes; they must allow athletes to express themselves and their individuality. For example, Sehwag would not be as entertaining as he is, if his coach had curbed his natural instincts and made him follow ‘the book’. It has started happening in cricket, and it needs to happen in other sports as well. National sports federations too can help elite athletes become dynamic and charismatic by providing media training and leadership development programs, which help them become comfortable in front of cameras and project confidence to the viewing public during media interactions, press conferences and interviews. Finally, corporates can also contribute to the personality development of Indian Olympians, to transform them from mere athletes to entertainers. Puma has done just that for Bolt, and Bolt has not let them down.

By Suheil Tandon
(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

It was a day when one of the greatest athletes ever to grace the Olympic Games, Michael Phelps, retired from swimming, ending with 22 Olympic medals to his name, finishing with gold in the Men’s 4X100 team medley. He now has a staggering collection of 18 gold medals.

It was also a day when an Indian champion, Saina Nehwal, clinched bronze and sent a clear message to the badminton fraternity that she is one to look out for in the future. Even Saina would agree that the she would have ideally liked to have the bronze medal around her neck after completing the match against the World No.2, Xin Wang. But, that is how sport goes, and Saina will take it any day of the week. More importantly, this should not take away from her impressive performance at London 2012.

Whatever luck came her way, she has earned every bit of it. Saina has worked hard in the lead up to the Olympics, and it was clear in her attitude and body language that she was here to win. She was extremely skillful, superbly fit and well-composed throughout the Games, and handled herself very gracefully on and off the court. She is a complete athlete – a rare commodity in India, and her performance at London 2012 will only motivate her to reach greater heights. Saina’s performance will also go a long way in motivating aspiring female athletes in India to dream big, but in doing so they must look at not only the destination that Saina has reached, but the path she has taken to get there.

Saina’s bronze medal overshadowed the other Indian performances of the day. Paes and Sania surrendered to the top seeded Belarusian pair, while Manoj Kumar was ‘boxed’ out of the Olympics under dubious circumstances. There was great expectations from Commonwealth 2010 Gold medalist Krishna Poonia in the Women’s discuss competition, as she had qualified for the finals. Disappointingly, she could only manage seventh place. Even if she would have thrown her personal best, she would have not have managed fifth spot. In the Olympics, athletes usually have to find something extra to finish on the podium. Several Olympians who win a medal do so by eclipsing their best performance of the season, or even their career. The Olympics motivates them to find that extra strength to go the distance. Unfortunately, Poonia could not find that ‘something extra’.

Looking forward, today is when, officially, the fastest man on earth will be decided. The 100m dash is always a thrilling event, but one feels that these men must have tremendous mental capabilities to prepare for four straight years for an event that lasts less than 10 seconds!!!

So will Usain Bolt defend his crown, or will his young compatriot, Yohan Blake, cause an upset? Will the world record be broken? The question though for Indian sports fans is – how long a wait will it be before we see an Indian competing at the 100m finals of an Olympics?

By Suheil Tandon
(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

LONDON, ENGLAND – Vijay Kumar of India celebrates winning the silver medal in the Men

Something unusual happened on the national sports channel yesterday. With India trailing by four goals against the formidable German side in hockey, the national broadcaster switched coverage from the Riverbank Arena to the Royal Artillery Barracks where an unnerved challenger was rapidly raising hopes of scripting a new chapter in the Indian shooting history. Like millions of fans who either switched off television in frustration midway through the hockey match or flipped channels to see a rising star announcing his arrival, our national broadcaster also wanted to show viewers something more cheerful and optimistic rather than the broken sticks of our national sport.

The army marksmen shot like a disciplined soldier who knew what his commander (our country) expects of him. A commodity of Army’s Olympic Mission Programme — which was launched in 2004 after Rajyavardhan Rathore’s silver in Athens Games – Kumar’s calm demeanour speaks volumes about the mental strength of our army man. Kumar has come through ranks and a system that is regimented and well-organised. This is in sharp contrast to the utter chaos our national sport is in, where two fractions are fighting for power and players are clueless on the direction.

For success in a team event, every individual has a role to play and there is a plan to implement. Sadly, our team looks like a disorganised unit and they are not “preaching what they practice”. Our hockey coach Michael Nobbs has already expressed his displeasure saying the team is not learning from mistakes and players are just not adhering to the game plan on the field. Nobbs, unlike our coaches who are soft spoken, is a blunt man. The Australian coach likes to call a spade a spade. Next few days will tell whether we will plummet to another ‘low’ in hockey or restore pride by finishing among the top-six.

Yesterday also saw the action begin in the track and field events. India’s only medal hope, Commonwealth Games Champion Krishna Poonia did well to qualify for the finals in her second attempt, by throwing the discuss to a distance of 63.54 metres. She overall finished eighth in the qualifying, if she can breach the mark of 66 metres on Saturday, we can hope for a medal, though a lot will depend how her competitors fare. Track & Field usually sees new records made during the Olympics, as athletes up their game, Poonia will need to come up with something spectacular to have any chance of medal hanging by her neck.

In Badminton, our ace shuttler Saina Nehwal could not sustain the momentum and lost in the semis against her old nemesis, Yihan Wang who is proving to be a Great Wall of China for her. For Saina, there will be a second chance on Saturday when she meets world number two Wang Xin in the bronze medal match. Saina has defeated her opponent before but she will need to make a fresh start in the play-off to accomplish her dream of winning an Olympic medal.

Stars are not born in a day, they come through a well-organised program. We need more unsung heroes like Kumar who are not only tough skilfully but also mentally. His measured comments after winning the medal tell a lot about this confident Subedar who credited his success to “discipline” and “routine”. Our success in the sport of boxing, badminton and shooting has been primarily due to the holistic programs structured by our top coaches who have a vision and are utilising the services of support staff effectively. We have today a strong factory of boxers who are waiting on the sidelines to enter the ring in case any of our top boxer slips in his performance, same is the case for Shooting and Badminton.

Kumar’s success story is an ode to commitment he has shown to all those who worked behind the scenes to help him realise his dream. Wish our hockey team had shown the same sparks of dedication and discipline!

By Aman Dhall

(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

LONDON, ENGLAND – AUGUST 02: Ronjan Sodhi of India competes in the Men

The Indian Olympic contingent finally had a day where there was more to cheer about their performances than to lament on what could have happened. The standout performance of the day came from India’s top female athlete, shuttler Saina Nehwal, who played brilliantly against her vastly experienced Danish counterpart to reach the semi-finals of the women’s singles badminton event. Vijender Singh won a closely contested bout against American Terell Gausha, showing great tactical play while doing so. Leander Paes and Sania Mirza’s mixed double pair had a good outing at Wimbledon as well, comfortably beating their Serbian rivals in straight sets.

Even P. Kashyap, who lost in straight sets to World No. 1 Lee Chong, played with a huge heart, showing immense grit and character in a tough tie. Kashyap was impressive throughout the match, especially in the first game where he matched Lee point-to-point. His experience at the Olympics will give him great confidence in his abilities, and I am sure he will be determined to come back four years later and win a medal at the Olympics.

All the highs throughout the day for India could not mask the disappointment in the Men’s double trap shooting event, where Ronjan Sodhi failed to even qualify for the finals. The obvious disappointment came partly due to the result, but the majority of it stemmed from the post-event reaction given by Sodhi. In professional sport, everyone has a bad day in the office, but it’s how you react to it that matters.

Sodhi’s reaction to his performance was, and I quote, “I just don’t know what happened”. A similar reaction was given by World No.1 Indian Archer Deepika Kumari, after losing in the round of 32. Later, when asked by reporters if Sodhi poor performance was related to ‘stage fright’ of performing in the Olympic, he denied it. He also went on to say that he was not used to crowds shouting in the background, but in the same sentence denied it to be an excuse. Then why mention it in the first place? His reaction is even more disappointing when put into perspective with the confident comments he made before the event, saying that he felt no pressure at all, but felt a sense of responsibility to the nation.

Sodhi and Deepika’s reactions were utterly disappointing, but the entire blame cannot be put onto them. Such reactions stem from a lack of accountability and a culture of denial present in India sport, which is a reflection of Indian society, where these shortcomings occur frequently in professional and personal matters. Deniability and a lack of accountability is seen in every sphere of Indian sport from professional sportspersons themselves to sport administrator and national federations.

Why is it that the different stakeholders present within professional sport in India are not held accountable to their preparation, performance, governance, transparency and results? What would be the reactions of top executives at an Indian company if a working professional failed to deliver on a project, and reacted by saying “I don’t know what happened”? Why should Indian sport be any different?

By Suheil Tandon
(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

When you are competing for glory, a thin line separates winners from losers. India’s biggest medal hope, Deepika Kumari literally blew away the chances of etching her name in the history books. Commentators in the newspapers today described her loss as a “rude shock”, while some others consoled the young archer saying “her time will come”. Her coach, Poornima Mahato blamed the media for “hyping” the archer as a medal prospect in the run up to the Olympics. It wasn’t the loss that shook the fans but it was the manner in which she capitulated under pressure. For an archer who is ranked number one in the world, it’s genuine on the part of fans and media to expect her to deliver and win herself the piece of the yellow metal. It was daylight robbery for fans who expected her to fight, and hoped for a medal from her.

Yes, she will learn, but four years is a long time. Sometimes as an athlete, you don’t get a second chance. The 18-year-old cannot be blamed, but then who to blame for our archers’ disappointing show — the federation, the sports ministry, media or us who were unrealistic with our expectations? If the Indian contingent improves on its Beijing performance, we will forgive our archers’ flop show for four years and if we are not able to do so, every stakeholder will blame each other for the mess we saw at London. If Deepika’s performance was an “utter disaster” for a top archer, Saina Nehwal showed the calmness and hunger for a top-athlete competing at this level. Pictures speak louder than words, and Saina’s calm endeavour showed on the badminton court, whereas in comparison Deepika’s grinning smile on sending bows wayward showed her fragile mindset that gave confidence to her British opponent.

In another instance, contrast the performance of Deepika with our young shuttler P. Kashyap, who barely made it to the Olympics by nudging out his compatriot Ajay Jayaram. Kashyap has not only played with a lot of heart but looks a man who belongs to the top league. Much credit needs to go to our Badminton support staff led by a great mind, P.Gopichand who looks in charge of a mission to make India one of the best badminton playing nations. Kashyap’s next opponent in the quarterfinals is world’s top ranked shuttler from Malaysia. Fans won’t be disappointed if he loses, Kashyap has already given them a lot to cheer about. Though he will know deep down his heart, he has now a real shot at something which can make him a sporting icon in this country. Yesterday also saw the exit of our men doubles pair of Leander Paes and Vishnu Vardhan in the second round. The duo fought gallantly and lost a close encounter against the number two seeds from France, Tsonga and Llodra. Young Vishnu will come back home with his head held high, knowing he did his best. His serve wasn’t broken in the match and he played excellent tennis combining with his senior pro to almost create an upset.

As we reach the mid-way through the games, the clock has started ticking for India’s medal chances at London 2012. With pockets of brilliance in shooting, badminton and boxing but an abundance of poor showings in archery (men’s and women’s), tennis (barring Paes/Vardhan) and hockey (slim chances of a medal with two losses in first two league matches), Indian sport is at crossroads, for now. Can we be still realistic about winning eight to ten medals, as predicted by pundits pre-London 2012? Or should we lower our already ‘low’ expectations to avoid further heartbreak?

(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

On a day when Michael Phelps confirmed his place in the annals of Olympic greatness by winning his 19th medal overall (of which 15 are gold), the most by any individual Olympian, India got a reality check, a day after the nation joyously celebrated Gagan Narang’s bronze. It was a day of extremes for the Indian contingent, with a few spectacular performances contrasted with several mediocre and poor ones.

Bhupathi and Bopanna, after going to great lengths to assure their partnership at the Olympics, surrendered meekly to the French pairing of Gasquet and Benneteau, who ironically do not play doubles regularly. This should not only be a humbling lesson for the pair, but also for AITA, who must take decisions for advancing the game in India, rather than to stroke the egos of a few individuals. The Indian archers had a forgetful day at London 2012, with all those in action failing to make any medal rounds. This puts immense pressure on the lone remaining archer Deepika Kumari – only time will tell if she can make it to the other side with a medal. Even if she does, the poor performance of the archery contingent as a whole must not be swept under the rug.

Credit must be given though to shuttler P. Kashyap, ranked 10 places above Vietnamese Tien Minh Nguyen, who was in great form, beating him comfortably in straight sets. But the standout performance came from boxer Devendro Singh in the 49Kg category. Devendro’s swashbuckling performance lasted less than two and a half minutes, when the referee was forced to stop the tie and award it to Devendro, after his opponent felt dizzy from the forceful blows. Devendro’s performance was in contrast to most of the other Indian Olympians over the first few days, as he managed an explosive start to his campaign. But it’s important for these promising athletes to maintain their momentum and intensity, as a great performance in the pre-quarters or the round of 32 will be soon forgotten unless they manage to medal-up.

The most remarkable moments on Day 4 of the Olympics were the reactions of some of the athletes, who despite winning a medal, were far from being satisfied. As the women’s Team Artistic Gymnastic event came to a finish, it was evident that Team USA would win gold, whereas Team Russia would have to settle for silver. But their reaction would suggest that they might have finished outside the medal tally – each of the five Russian gymnasts had tears rolling down their cheeks – and these were not tears of joy but of anguish. Similarly, in the men’s 200M butterfly, Phelps narrowly missed out on gold, and his displeasure was there for all to see. Even though Phelps had won silver, he threw his cap in disgust after the race, suggesting nothing less than gold would satisfy him. Even the American commentator sounded disappointed.

Compare this to Gagan Narang’s reaction to winning bronze. Further, compare this to the reaction of elation and joy from Indian fans, media, politicians and sports administrators after his bronze triumph. I do not blame Narang or any other Indian Olympian for such a reaction, because only they know what they have had to endure to reach such a position. But as a country, we really do need to react appropriately to such ‘medal moments’. Why do we set such low targets and get ecstatic with achieving them? Is it mediocrity that we want the next generation of Indian Olympians to strive for? Or is it greatness?

By Suheil Tandon
(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

A billion prayers were answered on Monday as Shooter Gagan Narang opened the account for India at Olympics with a bronze. The sigh of relief was visible in the emotions of Gagan Narang who hugged the other medal winners and raised his hands to acknowledge he has got that “huge stone off his chest”. Even sports minister Ajay Maken admitted, “Izzat bacha dee isne (he salvaged our reputation).” On the social media front, millions of tweets and Facebook posts thanked Narang for restoring the faith showed by the fans in the Indian contingent in the build up to the games. Out-of-the-box thinking is always out of the reach of our politicians, and they didn’t do any different on Monday, announcing rewards for Narang to cash-in on the public emotions.

In all these emotions, one man was unmoved, he was happy but not content with what Narang achieved in 10m Air Rifle. He expected him to win the yellow metal, and now he is advising the experienced marksmen to focus on his next two events. Bhimsen Narang, father of Gagan, is elated but not satisfied, and so should be our fans and all those stakeholders who have invested their time, energy and emotions in this Indian Olympic team. We need to hold off our celebrations for now and focus on the task ahead of us to make this Games our best ever.

Our hockey team played well in patches but failed to convert the chances that came their way against the Netherlands in their opening group encounter. Our tennis pairs of Mahesh Bhupathi/Rohan Bopanna and Leander Paes/Vishnu Vardhan just managed to scrape past their opponents in the first round. Boxer Sumit Sanghwan was unlucky to lose his bout and Commonwealth Games Women Doubles Champions Jwala Gutta/Ashwini Poonappa are still in the hunt after a three-set victory against Chinese Taipei pair, seeded ten in the world. Saina Nehwal‘s biggest test is yet to come, as the knock-outs will now begin in the singles.

Abhinav Bindra became one of many high-profile casualties joining the league of the likes of Michael Phelps & Stephanie Rice (Swimmers), Mark Cavendish (Cycling) and Spain (Football) who failed to live up to their expectations. To win a gold on the world’s biggest sporting show is priceless, but to win back-to-back gold is supreme, it makes you a great sporting icon across the world. Many sporting greats have failed to win at Olympics, a notable example is of Roger Federer who is hungry to complete his cupboard with the only singles trophy missing in it.

The enthusiasm is again building in the virtual world, the spirits have been lifted, the camp’s morale has picked up. Can the rest of the contingent raise their game in the days to come? Are we happy with a few medals? Or are we hungry to inspire a nation, long waiting to look beyond cricket for inspiration? Only the next few days will tell…

By Aman Dhall

(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

Barring a few pockets of sunshine, the Indian contingent again slipped on a wet day at the Games. Sluggish starts from the women’s archery team, the mixed doubles pairing of Gutta Jwala and V Diju in Badminton, Somdev Devvarman (Asian and Commonwealth singles gold medallist) in Tennis as well as shooters Heena Sidhu and Annu Raj Singh means that they will return home from London without any medals.

However, there were a few promising performances on a soggy Sunday with Swarn Singh Virk comfortably winning the repechage race in the men’s singles rowing, while medal hopefuls Jai Bhagwan and Saina Nehwal were on the ball from the word go with thoroughly confident and professional performances in boxing and badminton.

Amid the gloomy start, India has a lot to look forward heading into a new week at the games. Serious medal contenders Abhinav Bindra and Gagan Narang will be on show in the discipline of shooting, while the Indian men’s hockey team will try to restore lost glory as they take on the mighty Dutch in their opening encounter.

At London 2012, Indian fans will be particularly looking forward to the performance of three athletes – Abhinav Bindra, Vijender Singh and Sushil Kumar, as they have previously won medals in Beijing 2008, and have maintained their form since those games. More importantly, they have vital experience of not only in participating at the Olympics, but of winning medals, which will give them an edge in their competition.

Having said that, it is extremely hard to defend a medal at the Olympics, especially a gold. The most notable example at London 2012 being that of swimming great Michael Phelps, who dominated the pool at Beijing 2008, winning eight gold medals, but has looked a pale shadow of himself at London 2012, finishing fourth in the 400m individual medley, and only managing silver as part of the highly fancied American team in the 4X100m freestyle relay.

On the other hand, there are a few examples of athletes successfully defending their gold medals at the games. An instance of sporting greatness at London 2012 was witnessed yesterday, when the South Korean women’s archery team won their seventh successive gold medal at the Olympics since 1988. That speaks volumes about the sport in Korea – the systems and infrastructure in place to consistently produce champion archers.

All Indian sports fans will be hoping that Bindra, Vijender and Sushil can defend or better their medals at London 2012, and leave a lasting legacy in their respective sports in India,  inspiring a new generation of Indian shooters, boxers and wresters. But can this trio soak the pressure of expectations of a billion sports fans desperate for a truly global Olympic icon? Does the trio have the mental make-up to sustain the hunger of another medal at London 2012? Monday will answer some of these questions…

By Suheil Tandon

(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

LONDON, ENGLAND – JULY 28: Shiva Thapa of India

A good start is half the job done. Late starters, we are, and our failure to press on a good start may severely hurt our chances of making this Olympics our best-ever. Day two of the Olympics brought gloom, despair and agony among the large Indian public who were expecting our athletes to glow in the glory of having a billion beats behind them. It wasn’t the losses that dented the confidence of our fans but the manner of abject surrender, in some instances, and failure to wrest control in others which is rubbing them.

The male archers, having had a forgettable day on Friday, had a chance at redemption. They threw the healthy lead against Japan to lose in a tie-break. Little counts (our world cup wins, rankings) when you fail to perform at the greatest sporting show on earth. Our mixed doubles Badminton pair of Jwala Gutta and V Diju were at a loss of words as to what hit them like a tsunami in their defeat against the Indonesian pair in their Group C encounter. They still have a chance to qualify for the quarter-finals but they have made their path difficult by putting up a dispiriting show.

Similarly, Sania Mirza who partnered Rushmi Chakarvarthi in the women doubles event of Tennis, failed to shine as a team, going down to the more experienced Chinese Taipei pair in the first round. In the run-up to the Olympics, Sania had created a storm by arguing that she was used as ‘bait’ to please the top-two Indian male players, who were involved in an ego tussle. Later, she defended her mother from critics who questioned Naseema Mirza’s credentials to be named in the tennis team as a ‘manager’. It will be only her performance which will be able to silence millions of fans, who are already questioning her professionalism in the social media.

Then there was the performance of 19-year-old young paddler, Ankita Das who went down to her Spanish opponent 1-4. It wasn’t expected of her to create miracles but she failed to wrest control of key moments in her match, showing the lack of self-belief. For fans who don’t know, India entered the Table Tennis singles event of Olympics through South Asian quota place, defeating much lower ranked opponents of countries such as Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.

India’s teen boxing sensation Shiva Thapa too lost in the first round against his Mexican rival Oscar Valdez Fierro in the bantamweight category. Much was expected from Thapa, it looked that the pressure of playing his first Olympics and public expectations led to his downfall. In the weightlifting, Soniya Chanu gave her best to lift a total of 171Kg (74Kg + 97Kg) but she could finish only seventh in the 48Kg category. Her 74Kg lift in the snatch wasn’t good enough at this level to win a medal, the Chinese who won the gold, lifted a total of 205Kg (91Kg + 114 Kg). She was 34Kg off the mark, which shows we are going down in our weightlifting standards. A number of doping cases and failure to raise the profile of sport after Karnam Malleshwari won the bronze in 2000 Sydney Olympics have led to a decline in standards.

In Shooting, Vijay Kumar had a poor outing finishing 31st in men’s 10m air pistol. He was way off the mark, even a creditable display outside the final-eight could have given a lot of confidence to the much-fancied shooters who will be testing their mettle in the next couple of days.

The bright spots came on a gloomy day from star Boxer Vijender Singh (who entered the round of 16), young Shuttler P Kashyap (who won his Group D match) and promising paddler Soumyajit Ghosh (who entered the round of 64). Disgruntles have already begun pouring on the social media with fans ridiculing the hype in the lead to the Olympics. A fan has tweeted that with Kabaddi not included in the Games, our chances of winning a sure shot medal is gone. More such voices will grow with each passing day at the Games, till we win a medal.

A lot will be expected from women archers on the third day, a good performance will go a long way in lifting the low morale of our Indian camp. A fighting performance from the whole Indian contingent (be it in Badminton, Shooting, Tennis or Table Tennis) can easily set the tone for a better finish. Let’s see if we can make it a super Sunday!

By Aman Dhall

(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

Have Indian Olympians got the mental make-up to handle the pressure of expectations at London 2012? Going by the show put up by the Indian archers for the ranking rounds, our performance exudes little confidence.

The highly fancied Indian Olympic contingent was given a reality check as the archery ranking round saw both the female and male archers struggle to come to terms with the pressure of performing at the biggest sporting spectacle in the world. The top ranked Indian was Deepika Kumari at eight, while the rest of the archers all performed under-par to be ranked outside of the top 20. In the team event, the male archers were ranked bottom at 12th, while the female archers fared slightly better by securing 9th position. This means that our male archery team will face Japan in the first round, and if they do cross that hurdle, they will face the highly fancied US team, who are currently ranked number one in the world. In the buildup to London 2012, the Indian sporting fraternity as well as the media had labeled the archery contingent as “serious medal contenders” (DNA, July 26 2012). Then what are the possible reasons for this poor start, which has seriously hampered their medal chances?

A resounding reason that comes to mind is a billion people’s ‘weight of expectations’. In previous Olympic competitions at Beijing 2008 and Athens 2004, there was little media confidence in Indian Olympians winning a medal, little corporate interest in the athletes and a dearth of information amongst sports fans, hence leading to almost no expectations from Indian Olympians to come back home with a medal. This meant that previously they had no pressure of performance and no accountability to corporate sponsors and the sport-loving public. But now they are expected to win – which can seriously affect the psyche of how a sportsperson performs.

This poor performance from the archers in the ranking rounds, due to the expectations of over a billion people, could have been the combined effect of nerves and their mental make-up. Any sports coaching and playing professional will agree that nerves or nervous energy can be good for a sportsperson, as it can be turned into positive energy to translate a mediocre performance into an exceptional one. Hence, this points to the fact that there was a lack of mental conditioning of the archers in preparation for London 2012, because a focus on the mental aspect of their game could have helped them use their nervous energy to perform better, instead of succumbing to the pressure. A lack of belief within India’s sporting fraternity regarding the importance of a mental coach, as observed in the absence of such personnel in the Indian Olympic contingent, could cost India a few medals in the upcoming days at London 2012.

Finally, a poor start by the archers does little to inspire confidence in the the rest of the Indian contingent hoping to shine at London 2012. Poor starts are not just confined to Indian Olympians, but have been noticed in past in Indian cricket, hockey and other team sports. This also points to a lack of preparation – to win a medal at the Olympics, a team or individual has to be at its very best throughout, not just at the start or the end.

By Suheil Tandon

(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)

There is optimism in the air. And why not? For the first time, India will be participating in the Olympics with a realistic chance of winning more than just one gold and scripting its best finish ever. On the social media front, millions of Indian sport followers are busy predicting the number of medals the country will bring home this time around. They are rallying behind Indian contingent by hitting the “like” button at every post related to these athletes. Such are the high hopes that if we win more medals than the previous time around, our fans are likely to go drum beating on the roads and the social media platform about India’s rising sporting prowess. The opposite may lead to abuses hurled towards the government, officials and even athletes. In all this euphoria, the question we need to ask ourselves as sports fans is this — are we over ambitious with our expectations? Have we really arrived on the big league of sporting nations as world-beaters?

Whatever happens in London over the next fortnight will surely go a long way in shaping the future of Indian sports, as it will give boost to the aspiring sportspersons who want to believe they can compete with the best in the world and make a professional career in sports. It will give millions of parents hope that their child is not playing with fire but aiming for a glittering gold in their career.

Though the work for Indian sports will begin post-London 2012, we must not get euphoric with a few medals won at London, we must aim to build on our success and through sport development at the grassroots, ensure that we are on right track to become a major force to reckon in world sports in the years to come. This will require coordinated efforts from all the stakeholders, be it government, corporate sector or NGOs.

I remember meeting a few coaches while doing a recce of the market for my venture, when I realised our coaches do have the skills and vision but lack career development practices and scientific methodologies. Coaches are insecure about losing their disciple to someone more qualified and experienced, so they do not partner with other coaches even though they understand they cannot groom the athlete beyond a point.

What we have in our country is sports academies run like a mom-and-pop shop by coaches, who are reluctant to hire the services of support staff (strength & conditioning coaches, nutritionists, psychologists etc) fearing they might dis-balance the equilibrium they have created over the years. I asked one of the coaches — why this reluctance? – the reply I got was that I am already producing players who are playing at the national level and few of them have even donned national colours. Why should I make changes to my training methods? The answer has merit, and he further adds that they have build this academy over the years, this is their only “earning” besides the salary they get from their fourth-grade government job, which they have obtained through the sports quota.

In India, coaches feel they are making good money, living a comfortable lifestyle after having worked hard in the beginning; they now have a name in the market and their academy gets good business. Why fiddle with a “tried” and “tested” model? Many middle-age and senior coaches I met, conceded they don’t want to create world champions, they are happy to hold on to what they have. They fear competition yet they are unwilling to invest in updating their knowledge. They are happy organizing a coaching camp by a foreign coach or a top Indian player nearing retirement for a fortnight or sending kids abroad for so-called exposure trips (which those athletes who can afford to foot the bills) yet they are unwilling to innovate and invest in themselves or their academy to step ahead of the competition.

To compete on the medal count with the western superpowers (i.e. US, UK, Germany) and Asian giants (China, Japan, South Korea), we need to invest in our coaches and sports facilities so that our base is strong to fuel the talent pipeline. I even overheard in the sporting circles how an assistant coach of a national team told the federation to pay him a little more and get rid of the foreign coach who is an expensive baggage, since he now understands all the methodologies the foreign coach uses to train athletes. This dangerous “cut-copy-paste” culture highly prevalent in our sporting set-up is breeding cocky professionals who are leading the country nowhere. We need to remove the trap our current coaches are creating by encouraging their pupils to play overage, which gives us and these athletes a wrong sense of belief that our sporting future is bright.

For Indian sport to rightly progress, our best brains need to join this industry, not only in the role of a sports manager but also in the role of a sports nutritionist, sports psychologist, or a sports scientist. Unless we nurture nurseries across the country (guided by qualified sports professionals) where the future “Sainas”, “Leanders”, “Bindras” or “Sushils” can groom their skills, we will continue to struggle for our next sporting icons that can rightfully step in their shoes. There will be surely one or two odd ones who will challenge the system and become a sporting great primarily due to their own efforts, however by the time they do so, we might lose this great sporting wave which we are in. We have seen in the past how it took 28 years for Indian cricket team to replicate 1983 World Cup win, we haven’t won a tennis medal since 1996, we haven’t been able to raise the profile of weightlifting despite a breakthrough bronze medal by Karnam Malleshwari in 2000 Sydney Olympics.

We need centres of excellence in the form of sports institutions on the lines of Australian Institute of Sport and Loughborough University in the UK to raise the profile of Indian sports. There is hope that the London Games can herald a revolution in Indian sport, however we will need a sustained effort from every stakeholder in this country to make this dream come true.

By Aman Dhall

(The author is Co-founder & Partner, Pro4Sport Solutions, a high-performance coaching firm that trains young athletes in the sport of Basketball, Cricket, Football and Table Tennis)