yyetttt
BANNED
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,507
- Reaction score
- 0
India's Olympics shame, once again
India has the world's second largest population, and yet it placed 55th out of 79 countries that won medals at the London Olympics. Our athletes brought home six medals, with no gold medals. As a result, we were firmly in the bottom third of the table. Why does a country with so many people do so badly in international competition?
Those who worry their heads about these things, and even those who don't, identify a variety of reasons for our rather sad tally. One of the favourites is that physical factors conspire against us - our tropical climate and our genes. The problem here is that there are several countries above us in the Olympic standings that have tropical-like climates ( Iran, Jamaica, Ethiopia) and that have people who are as skinny and spindly as Indians (see Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Tunisia, Algeria).
A second argument is cultural. Indians, we are told, are just not "sporty". We apparently despise physical exertion, don't like to compete ("no killer instinct"), are intellectual and spiritual, and so on. This is quite an attractive logic, and i quite often resort to it myself when i am assailed by contemptuous foreigners. But the truth is that the ordinary Indian exerts enormously just to keep body and soul together. In a country of scarcities, we are spectacularly competitive, always desperate to nose ahead in a queue. And just look at our children who are no more intellectual or spiritual than any other nationality but are driven to average 99% in their board examinations!
A third set of arguments is more sociological and relates to our attitudes to the kinds of sports represented at the Olympics. There are those who suggest that Indians don't respect these sports. This is the "cricket argument". For some reason, we only truly value cricket. Our youngsters, teachers, media, sports sponsors and governments are mad about cricket, and nothing else seemingly matters. The difficulty here is: which came first? Did cricket rise in public esteem because we did well at it, or did we fall in love with cricket, leading to its rise?
Finally, there is the view that, as in so many things, it is our wretched politics and administration that lets us down. Above all, our sports authorities don't select the best sportsmen because they are obsessed with the proper caste, ethnic, religious and regional balance in our teams. They are also corrupt, and so the money that should be spent on the proper infrastructure lines their pockets instead. Worse, the government fails to identify talent at a young age, to cultivate and support it, and to provide scientific and rigorous training.
Most educated Indians today would probably agree that this is the core of the problem and that in every sphere of life our political and administrative class botches it all. This is of course close to the truth and does explain a lot, though you wonder if sports governance in Kazakhstan, Jamaica, North Korea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Azerbaijan, Colombia, Tunisia, Algeria, Bahamas, Grenada and Uganda, all of whom placed higher than India, can be much better. These are not exactly the gold medal winners in the league table of political governance!
Climate, genes, culture and social values play a part in winning, but in the end to win at sports requires extended financial and public support. In the 1996 Olympics, Britain won one gold medal! In 2012, it won 29 and placed third in the final table, in large part because a UK lottery poured money into sports after 1984. China, which has risen so marvellously, spends hugely on developing sports at every level, from the everyday school level to the international competitive level. Both countries encourage sports widely.
We in India have restricted sports facilities and training to a few. It is no accident that the only sport where we do well is cricket. Cricket is a middle-class game, and it therefore gets the money, expertise and glamour. When we in the middle class moan about our sports performance in the Olympics, we should look at ourselves. In the end, it is us, the rich and privileged, who are the cause of our country's sporting shame.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiat...-page/33248753_1_value-cricket-indians-medals
India has the world's second largest population, and yet it placed 55th out of 79 countries that won medals at the London Olympics. Our athletes brought home six medals, with no gold medals. As a result, we were firmly in the bottom third of the table. Why does a country with so many people do so badly in international competition?
Those who worry their heads about these things, and even those who don't, identify a variety of reasons for our rather sad tally. One of the favourites is that physical factors conspire against us - our tropical climate and our genes. The problem here is that there are several countries above us in the Olympic standings that have tropical-like climates ( Iran, Jamaica, Ethiopia) and that have people who are as skinny and spindly as Indians (see Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Tunisia, Algeria).
A second argument is cultural. Indians, we are told, are just not "sporty". We apparently despise physical exertion, don't like to compete ("no killer instinct"), are intellectual and spiritual, and so on. This is quite an attractive logic, and i quite often resort to it myself when i am assailed by contemptuous foreigners. But the truth is that the ordinary Indian exerts enormously just to keep body and soul together. In a country of scarcities, we are spectacularly competitive, always desperate to nose ahead in a queue. And just look at our children who are no more intellectual or spiritual than any other nationality but are driven to average 99% in their board examinations!
A third set of arguments is more sociological and relates to our attitudes to the kinds of sports represented at the Olympics. There are those who suggest that Indians don't respect these sports. This is the "cricket argument". For some reason, we only truly value cricket. Our youngsters, teachers, media, sports sponsors and governments are mad about cricket, and nothing else seemingly matters. The difficulty here is: which came first? Did cricket rise in public esteem because we did well at it, or did we fall in love with cricket, leading to its rise?
Finally, there is the view that, as in so many things, it is our wretched politics and administration that lets us down. Above all, our sports authorities don't select the best sportsmen because they are obsessed with the proper caste, ethnic, religious and regional balance in our teams. They are also corrupt, and so the money that should be spent on the proper infrastructure lines their pockets instead. Worse, the government fails to identify talent at a young age, to cultivate and support it, and to provide scientific and rigorous training.
Most educated Indians today would probably agree that this is the core of the problem and that in every sphere of life our political and administrative class botches it all. This is of course close to the truth and does explain a lot, though you wonder if sports governance in Kazakhstan, Jamaica, North Korea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Azerbaijan, Colombia, Tunisia, Algeria, Bahamas, Grenada and Uganda, all of whom placed higher than India, can be much better. These are not exactly the gold medal winners in the league table of political governance!
Climate, genes, culture and social values play a part in winning, but in the end to win at sports requires extended financial and public support. In the 1996 Olympics, Britain won one gold medal! In 2012, it won 29 and placed third in the final table, in large part because a UK lottery poured money into sports after 1984. China, which has risen so marvellously, spends hugely on developing sports at every level, from the everyday school level to the international competitive level. Both countries encourage sports widely.
We in India have restricted sports facilities and training to a few. It is no accident that the only sport where we do well is cricket. Cricket is a middle-class game, and it therefore gets the money, expertise and glamour. When we in the middle class moan about our sports performance in the Olympics, we should look at ourselves. In the end, it is us, the rich and privileged, who are the cause of our country's sporting shame.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiat...-page/33248753_1_value-cricket-indians-medals
