Hero worship

The dustbowl districts of Bhiwani, Sonipat and Hisar in Haryana are the inexplicable factories of fine sportswomen and sportsmen who are rewriting the conventional theories about Indians underperforming in “power” sports like boxing (think Vijender Singh or Vikas Yadav), wrestling (Geeta Phogat or Yogeshwar Dutt), “urban” sports like badminton (Saina Nehwal), mountaineering (Santosh Yadav), and even cerebral sports like chess (Anuradha Beniwal from a small tehsil, Meham) to name a few sports and even fewer sportspersons.
Providentially, even the latest toast of the nation, Dipa Karmakar, attributes her success to an ex-Army physical instructor Dalip Singh from Haryana for training and shaping her prowess in gymnastics.

Whether it is the sweaty pugilists in India’s “Little Cuba”, i.e. Bhiwani, or the ultra-discipli-ned, shakti-bhakti-brahmacharya abiding wrest-lers in dilapidated akha-das in the rural hinterland — their devotion, singular focus and commitment to sport is alm-ost inhuman and sacred. Emanating from such furnaces of challenges is the lament of Yogeshwar Dutt against the frivolous appointment of a Bollywood star as the goodwill ambassador of the Indian contingent at Rio Olympics — a 140-character tirade does not come naturally to a sportsman who typically prefers to let medals do the talking, especially in an “unglamorous” sport like wrestling.

Yogeshwar rightfully pondered, “What is the purpose of an ambassador? Stop fooling the people of this country.” This is not posturing for publicity. This comes from someone who has won the gold in Asian Games, gold in Commonwealth Games and, even rarer, an individual medal in the holy grail of sports, the Olympics. He was the Bronze winner in 2012 London Summer Olympics. The dismay of the sporting fraternity got echoed in the haunting tweet by Yogeshwar, “Big sports stars like P.T. Usha, Milkha Singh worked hard for the country in tough conditions. What has this ambassador done for sport?”
Importantly, the point raised was beyond emotions and rooted in facts. Salman Khan was named the brand ambassador of football in 2009 by the All India Football Federation (AIFF). Though the efficacy, commitment and contribution of Salman is not necessarily reflected in the global ranking of India at 162, as per the latest Fifa ranking (below countries like São Tomé and Príncipe or, nearer home, Afghanistan), the grouse is about the lack of any visible efforts by Salman to popularise the game for which ambassadorship was bestowed.

Thus, a question mark on Indian Olympic Association (IOA) president N. Ramachandran’s defence of Salman being picked up as the Olympic ambassador when he says, “When he talks about it, millions of people who do not follow sport will also take note of it.” History is clearly not supportive of such a simplistic hope! India’s sporting icon (sometimes enfant terrible for the authorities for calling a spade a spade) Milkha empathised with Yogeshwar’s stand and tweeted, “IOA has taken wrong decision. We don’t need any ambassador. Sportsmen representing nation in Rio Olympics 2016 are our ambassadors. IOA shouldn’t have made a Bollywood person ambassador for sports event.” Coming from someone who has gone through the tribulations to emerge as a world-class athlete, Milkha’s concern was brushed aside by a graceless tweet from Salim Khan in defence of his son: “Milkhaji it is not Bollywood, it is the Indian Film Industry and that too the largest in the world — the same industry that resurrected you, preventing a veteran athlete from fading into oblivion.”

Unmistakable hubris against the sporting fraternity. Given the dismal contribution by Salman to an earlier sporting ambassadorship, Yogeshwar alluded to commercial aspects of the need to differentiate between truly representing and supporting sports versus the act of promoting impending movie launches (Salman’s upcoming movie Sultan has him playing a wrestler). The major beneficiary of such an ambassadorial arrangement is therefore clearly the Bollywood star and not the sport or sports people. Adding to the questionable selection is the multiplicity of cases with serious charges in hit and run cases, poaching of black bucks and many other disciplinary issues, including strange comments on Yakub Memon and 26/11, only to retract and apologise subsequently. Together they betray a sense of responsible public conduct.

There is precedent of cross-category ambassadors with mixed results — the Indian defence forces too, give honorary ranks to eminent sportsmen and others. It is both a recognition and a responsibility that is accorded to the awardee to dignify the uniform with a certain conduct and commitment. A Mahendra Singh Dhoni personifies the ideal ambassadorship as he wears his military uniform as a badge of honour with much aplomb and respect, and not just on ceremonial occasions. To his credit, Dhoni went the extra mile and trained with his parent para-commando regiment in Agra.

His honesty towards the Indian forces is clear when he says, “It’s a real honour as I always wanted to be part of the Indian Army. It’s (joining the Army) something that I always wanted to achieve as a kid and now that I have donned the olive greens, my dream has been fulfilled.” This is in sharp contrast to the other equally gifted (if not more) cricketer who has been made a member of the Rajya Sabha. His contribution (even in the limited domain of sports or youth affairs) remains negligible with low attendance, treating the responsibility and honour like membership to an elite private club. It is this inconsistency of behaviour and lack of commitment by an individual towards an insti-tution or a cause that rankles as their suitability as an “ambassador”.

The reaction to Salman being made the Indian Olympic contingent’s goodwill ambassador has less to do with the practice of cross-category nominations, though there is merit in Milkha’s line of “sportspersons only for sports”, especially in a country like India where assorted politicians and corporates are known to have treated sports bodies like personal fiefdoms. Therefore, the need to purge out elements that have nothing to do with sports.

The film industry has a distinct role, responsibility and unquestionable mass appeal in the Indian context, however that does not lend it automatic legitimacy and credentials for being ambassador-worthy only on the basis of stardom — a certain qualitative aspect and moral optics pertaining to institutional sensitivities need to be considered before extending ambassadorship. Therefore the angst and ire from our real heroes.