Opinion The Games we play

Second,and this is important in the context of Indian sport,we perform rather well in the CWG,much better than we do at the Olympics or even the Asian Games. Consider the final medals tally for the 2006 CWG in Melbourne. India,with 22 gold medals,finished fourth,with Australia heading the tally. Importantly,we finished ahead of countries like South Africa,Jamaica and Kenya which routinely perform better than us at the Olympics. Incidentally,an Indian sportsman,the shooter Samresh Jung,was named as the best sportsman of the 2006 CWG (with five gold medals). Contrast this with our performance at the Beijing Olympics where we won just one gold medal,or with the 2006 Asian Games where we won only 10 gold medals and finished eighth on the medals tally.

In fact,at the Asian Games,our performance has been declining over time. When we hosted the first ever Asian Games in 1951,we finished second in the overall medals tally. In 1982,when we hosted the Asiad for a second time,we finished fifth on table with 13 gold medals. At the CWG,on the other hand,our performance has improved over time; in 1982,we had finished only sixth on table with six gold medals. That we perform well gives us some credibility while hosting the CWG,something we would be sorely lacking if we wanted to host an Olympics.

In a country starved of sporting success and sporting heroes outside cricket,it is no mean achievement to win 22 gold medals in a major international sporting event. Even if these Games lack the profile of the Olympics or the Asian Games,winning medals helps sportspersons earn recognition and perhaps even more importantly sponsorships and other opportunities to compete at even higher levels. At least one sport in India has received considerable fillip from success in the CWG: shooting,which brought India 17 out of its 22 gold medals in the 2006 edition. Jaspal Rana and Samresh Jung among others made a name for themselves with a handful of gold medals at the CWG. A certain Abhinav Bindra won a silver and a bronze at Melbourne in 2006 before clinching gold at the Beijing Olympics in 2008. In boxing,Akhil Kumar,quarter finalist at the Olympics and now one of the famous Bhiwani trio,also made a a mark by winning the gold at CWG 2006. In short,the games are a crucial stepping stone for Indian sportspersons even as they aspire to higher goals.

For the cynical,it is easy enough to explain why the usually dismal story of Indian sport plays to a rather different script at the CWG. Top of the list of explanations is the simple fact that the world’s two pre-eminent sporting powers,China and the US,do not participate in the CWG. Even some of the leading second-rung sporting powers like Russia,Germany and Japan are absent. But if one were instead to take a more optimistic view of things,it is possible to view the absence of the US and China in particular as a boon and opportunity for others. One can even find enough top-class competition for the Games not to be a walkover for anyone,not least India. Remember,Britain,Australia and Canada are sporting powerhouses in their own right,and countries like Kenya and Jamaica are world leaders in various track and field events.

Unfortunately,the complete absence of an imaginative and intelligent public relations campaign by either the Indian Olympic Association or the government has ensured that the average citizen has not been told about the many sporting merits of the Games.

It’s a similar lack of imagination that prevents us from looking at the 50-odd Commonwealth group of countries (with two billion people) as an opportunity,rather than a waste of time. Consider how different things could be if we stopped viewing the Commonwealth as a club of former British colonies presided over by the Queen,viewing it instead as simply a club of the English-speaking world. At a time when most important intergovernmental groupings are either global or regional,or based on economic clout,the Commonwealth stands out for its eclectic blend of 50 odd nations that cuts across five continents,contains countries big and small (India vs Nauru),countries developed and countries developing (Canada vs Lesotho). Together they represent a diversity of interests,which because of that very diversity need not always be in conflict or competition like in less diversified groupings.

That leaves plenty of room open for cooperation. The absence of China and the US,the two pre-eminent political powers of our time,presents an opportunity for other countries,particularly India. The UK can after all only do so much,given the historical baggage it carries. But for the Commonwealth’s largest democracy and fastest growing economy,there may be plenty to be gained,at least in soft power terms,via closer engagement with the rest of the non-American English-speaking world. But first we must be convinced that it is worthwhile.

That debate can continue,but there is little time left to be convinced about the 2010 Games. Perhaps it’s time to bring forth the Indian sportspersons who stand the most to gain from a successful Games,and indeed the most to lose if the people of India don’t get behind them now.

The writer is a senior editor with‘The Financial Express’

dhiraj.nayyar@expressindia.com