Two rich yet too poor

India needs to raise the bar in sports

The national euphoria over P V Sindhu and Sakshi Malik's extraordinary performance at the Rio Olympics cannot mask a basic truth: Almost any way you look at it, the country's performance at Rio has been poor - and this assessment should include the egregious behaviour of India's sports minister Vijay Goel and other officials. The country sent its largest-ever contingent of 120 athletes to Brazil, only to yield two medals won by two gallant women. That's four less than the country's medal tally at London 2012 and one less than the haul in Beijing 2008, which, however, yielded India's first (and so far only) individual gold.

It is not as though India was an outlier in terms of the size of its contingents. The US, too, sent one of its largest contingents, at 558 athletes and several other countries were only a tad less ambitious in terms of the size of their squads. Host country Brazil, for instance, had 464 athletes participating at Rio and China 403. Great Britain (373), France (406), Germany (429) and even Australia (424) also sent squads to Rio that were far larger than India's. The point to note, however, is that these countries also won a sufficient number of medals to justify the number of athletes in the squads. At the time of going to print (on Day 15), most of these countries had improved on their London performance in the medal standings and their squads' productivity was also high. In terms of medals per participating athlete, for instance, India's ratio stood at 1:60. This was significantly worse than the ratio of roughly 1:5 for the US, and 1:6 for Great Britain and China respectively. To complete the BRICS comparison, Russia with 293 athletes won 48 medals, of which 13 were gold; and South Africa's team of 140 athletes, won nine medals including one gold (or approximately 1:15, not great but still better than India). If the medals tallies were weighted for gold, silver and bronze, India's performance would look even worse.

At best, India can take some comfort from being the best performer in South Asia, since all of the neighbours drew blanks. It must be said, however, that the ambitions of Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal (which sent seven athletes each), Sri Lanka (nine) and Bhutan (two) were modest enough not to raise questions about the absence of gongs. India's demographic liability is evident even when the comparisons are made in relation to population sizes. Among the world's five most populous countries - China, India, US, Indonesia and Brazil - India was, again, the worst performer by a long margin. Even Indonesia (which sent 28 athletes) did far better, winning three medals, one gold and two silvers (making for a healthy medals-to-participant ratio of 1:9).

Those who wish to see the metaphorical silver lining will point to the noteworthy close misses such as that of Dipa Karmakar, the first Indian female gymnast to compete in the Olympics. The manner in which she performed the death-defying "Produnova" has justifiably won her much admiration. If the many officials who travelled to Rio were to conduct an evaluation, it is possible that they would focus on raising the bar on excellence and emphasise the need for unrelenting practice on the part of athletes - a trait Sindhu and Malik demonstrated so admirably. There is reason for the accolades heaped on them, but their success stories are crafted around individuals driven to succeed largely on their own steam. But with the sports minister barging into restricted areas and commandeering selfies with exhausted athletes, India's sporting fraternity has a poor example to follow.