| |
COVER STORY: ARJUNA AWARD
Prize And Prejudice
Milkha Singh's refusal to accept
the Arjuna Award for a lifetime's contribution to athletics has finally
blown the cover off the country's highest sports honour. Political lobbying
and corruption have reduced the award to a complete farce.
By Sharda Ugra with Ramesh Vinayak
If you want to know how the nation bestows its
highest sporting award, there's a simple way. Step out of your home and
head for the nearest market selling fish. It will have all the ingredients
of an Arjuna Award panel meeting: spilt blood, gutted fish, loud voices,
the striking of bargains and a very distinctive odour. Till now, Indian
sport had chosen to hold its nose and pretend the market was a rose garden,
choosing to see the presidential ceremony rather than the not so grand
process behind the award. Until Milkha Singh said, no thanks. Now the
feisty 70-year-old who talks of himself in the third person will not accept
his Arjuna Award for "lifetime contribution" (see interview)
and his refusal has sent sports officialdom scattering.
|
|
HIT
AND MISSES
|
| |
CONTROVERSIAL CHOICES
G.S.
Bhangu: Coach of the women's hockey team. Sacked last year
for poor results, given the Dronacharya.
Kalpana
Debnath: Gymnast-turned coach and sports hostel warden. Given
Arjuna for a lifetime's contribution.
Rachna
Govil: Unknown deputy director in SAI, given a lifetime Arjuna
for athletics despite one-race win.
|
| |
ODD OMISSIONS
|
| |
Leslie
Claudius: Played in three gold medal-winning Olympic hockey
teams, an ex-captain, now forgotten.
Sunny
Thomas: Coach of the best crop of Indian shooters in several
decades. The Dronacharya still elusive.
Aparna
Popat: National badminton champ and world junior finalist
had her name rejected this year.
|
It is Milkha's stature that has put the Arjuna
Awards on the night news but the honour list for 2000 is not an aberration.
It is merely the end result of the slow erosion of scrutiny and standards
in the awards committee, and the final victory of political recommendation
over sporting result. When the names for the year 2000 were announced
Milkha found himself on the same platform as a sacked hockey coach, a
gymnast with no international competition on her CV, an official with
only a half-marathon victory to her credit. It was not only the final
nail on the coffin but rather the final handful of mud on the grave. It
has taken 40 years but the barbarians have finally broken through the
gates. Or, to use an idiom more suitable for Indian sport, the lunatics
have taken over the asylum.
GO FORTH AND APPLY
Union Sports Minister Uma Bharati would not
agree. She staunchly maintains that all awards raise a furore-whether
it is the Arjunas, the Padmas or the Oscars (see interview). Is Milkha
then merely the leading nominee for the most bitter actor award in Indian
sport's annual rant? Not by a long shot. Unlike the others, sports awards
should be fairly cut and dry: those who win major titles and break important
records qualify. Losers, quite simply, should lose out.
So, surely, Milkha must be mistaken. Surely,
he can count. This must be the golden age of Indian sport-if you go by
the number of Arjuna Awards handed out, that is. In the past five years
(1996-2000), 122 awards, both regular and lifetime, have been announced.
This is more than 20 per cent of the total number of Arjunas, 575, handed
out since their inception in 1961. But between 1996 and 2000, Indian sporting
achievers at world level have come in a paltry trickle and would go into
double figures only if you counted each man in the 1998 Asian Games gold
medal-winning hockey squad. The generous quantities in which the awards
are handed out-like ladoos, says Milkha-do not reflect the health of Indian
sport. More like its biggest ailment: the lowering of standards, on the
field and in officialdom. "The decline in the criteria for the Arjuna
Award has been due to the decline in our performance at the international
level," says J.S. Saini, veteran athletics coach. It is pure chicken
and egg-had the standards for the award not been lowered, the Arjuna would
still have counted for something. "There is no consistency in the
way the awards are handed out and no transparency in selection. In two
or three years, they won't mean anything," says former world billiards
champion Michael Ferreira.
The selection procedure is the key to the rot.
All applications have to be made to the Ministry of Sports and Youth Affairs
and are then run through a Sports Authority of India (SAI) scrutiny list
before being shortlisted and finalised. Previously, only national federations
could send applications. In the mid-1980s when job promotions in government
offices began to be linked to the Arjuna Award and cash prizes were also
handed over, the decay set in. An Indian Olympic Association (IOA) insider
says, "It was common for federations to ask athletes for money to
recommend their names for the Arjuna Award. Sometimes, girls were even
asked to sleep with officials for a recommendation."
Officials of the Arjuna Awardees Association
(AAA) say that the practice of asking for a commission in exchange for
an Arjuna recommendation was found not only in traditional sports but
in the handicapped sport category too. "Athletes come to me and say,
'Sir, officials bahut tang karte hain' (The officials trouble us a lot)."
The athletes who were seen as being undisciplined or troublesome could
keep winning but remained unrecommended. "It is not an award anymore,
it has become a reward for services rendered outside the sports arena,"
says badminton international Leroy D'Sa whose application has been turned
down repeatedly. To prevent federations from holding athletes to ransom,
the awards were thrown open to individuals. Pandora had nothing on the
box that this change opened up. Now an application can be backed by anyone-the
athlete's state sports council, his local MP, a powerful politician from
the region, an industrialist. The more power these backers wield, the
better the chances of the athlete landing the award, sporting achievement
be damned.
|
|