Will the athletes add to the gold tally?

With India struggling to climb up the medals table mainly because of its inability to add to the gold won by shooter Jitu Rai on the first day of competition in the Asian Games in Incheon, all eyes would be focused on the athletics events starting on Saturday, 27th September.

In Guangzhou in 2010, Indian athletes had contributed a dozen medals including five gold medals, finishing second on the athletics roster behind China. That tally looks almost impossible to replicate. But don’t be too sure. No one expected India to win that many in athletics last time!

Chief coach Bahadur Singh has forecast a collection of 12 to 15 medals this time. It could be tough but not impossible. The truth is no one is sure how well our athletes had been “prepared”. If the preparations have gone on as per plans then Bahadur’s prediction would come to fruition, otherwise reaching double digits in the medals tally could be a problem as it was in the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow. In fact in the CWG it was a below-par effort of one gold, one silver and one bronze.

Dozen the target

A dozen medals in Incheon could be an attainable target for India, but that is only if everything falls into place. Otherwise it could be just half of that tally.

Let us take a look at the key events in which Indian athletes could be aiming for medals.

Men

800m-Sajeesh Joseph ran a PB 1,46.81 in the Fed Cup at Patiala. There are eight other men in the field who have clocked better than that this season. But then the 800 or the 1500 do not pan out as per timings and records. Favourites can find themselves struggling on the straight sometimes just as Bilal Mansoor Ali of Bahrain found out in Guangzhou in 2010. Abdulrahman Musaeb Bala of Qatar should be the favourite this time. He has eight of the top-10 timings in Asia this season, with a best of 1,44.03 for the second place in Rieti, Italy, earlier this month. Sajeesh will have to battle it out with Abdulaziz Ladan Mohamed of Saudi Arabia, Sho Kawamoto of Japan and Abraham Rotich Kipchirchir of Bahrain in his drive to get a minor medal. A bronze for the 27-year-old Indian would be a creditable feat.

110m hurdles-Siddhanth Thingalaya has not yet realized his potential. An unfortunate hamstring injury while aiming for the Olympic qualification in a meet in Brussels in 2012 put the brakes on his progress. He did clock a national record of 13.65s even as he suffered the injury. He equaled that mark at Patiala to make it to the Indian team. He is only fourth in Asia with that mark this season, the leading time being the 13.23s clocked by Chinese Xie Wenjun in Shangahi while winning the Diamond League race. Abdulaziz Al-Mandeel of Kuwait is the other front-runner in the event though the Chinese has a clear edge. Reigning Asian champion Jiang Fan is also in the line-up though not at his best this season. Thingalaya will need to stretch himself to get the bronze.

Arpinder leads the Asian lists

Triple jump-Arpinder Singh is the Asian leader with his sensational national record of 17.17m at Lucknow. He bagged the bronze at the Commonwealth Games, though with an inferior  16.70m. There is no other Asian jumper with a 17-metre mark this season. That doesn’t make the 22-year-old Indian the favourite, though. Chinese Cao Shuo, with his 16.83 at the Continental Cup at Marrakech, Morocco, has projected himself as a strong contender for the top honours along with team-mate Dong Bin. Arpinder, who skipped the Continental Cup, rather inexplicably, will have to battle it out with the two Chinese. Renjith Maheswary, the former National record holder who could manage only 15.91 at Marrakech, but produced a 16.61m at the Patiala re-trials, has not been in the best of form this season. Arpinder’s consistency will be on test in Incheon. It is suspect at this point. Renjith will have to bring out all his experience to be able to get among the medals. Local favourite Kim Duk-Hyung has jumped 16.61m this season and can get among the medals.

Discus-This is the best chance Vikas Gowda has to become an Asian Games champion. He would be back at the same venue that saw him clinch his first Asian silver in 2005 as a 22-year-old. Iranian Ehsan Hadadi, Olympic silver medallist in London, and defending Asian Games champion, is not in the best of form. Yet he has a 65.23 to Gowda’s 65.62 for the season. Gowda was more consistent around 63-64 metres early on this season, but has come down to around 62-metre-plus which is what Hadadi also has been throwing of late. Hadadi has an impressive  15-1 record against Gowda, the two being even for the season. Having taken the gold in Glasgow Gowda should be on a ‘high’. He looks the best candidate among Indian men to get a gold. Mohammad Samimi (65.46m in July) is the other major contender in discus.

Women

400m-M. R. Poovamma who led the Asian season lists for quite some time has a close challenger in Kemi Adekoya of Bahrain, who should also be running in the 400m hurdles. She is the favourite in both the events. Adekoya leads the season lists with 51.32 to Povamma’s 51.73. Poovamma was a little disappointing in Glasgow, beaten twice by Sri Lankan Chandrika Subhashini Rasanayake who should be among the medal contenders here. A bronze for the Karnataka girl looks possible. Kazakhs Yulia Rakhmanova and Elina Mikhina would be the other major actors.

800m-Tintu Luka has to shed the tag of a ‘choker’ in big championships. She heads the Asian lists for the season with her 2,00.56, but has not done too well after her Doha performance in May. She was eliminated in the semifinals in Glasgow and was eighth and last in the Continental Cup this month. Kazakhstan’s Margarita Mukasheva (nee Matsko) who won in Guangzhou is once again Tintu’s closest challenger, timing-wise. Or should it be the other way round? Tintu’s inability to produce the kind of finish that wins middle distance races had been a cause for concern among athletics enthusiasts apart from coach P. T. Usha. Once again there is hope that she would run a modest opening lap of around 58.2 secs to be in a position to challenge the others through the final 250 metres. Too fast or too slow for the lap has often left Tintu out of the race by the 600 metres and her inability to ‘kick’ on the home straight has proved to be a great handicap.  Tintu has worked hard this season in the build-up towards the Games. Her own pacing will determine whether she gets the gold or silver or ends up as she did in Guangzhou. Team-mate Sushma Devi who scored a rare win over Tintu at the Lucknow Inter-State should also be aiming for a medal here.

1500m/5000m-O. P. Jaisha, medal winner in the Doha Games, back in great form this season, should have fairly good chances of landing a medal in either of these events if not both. Two Bahrainians Mimi Belete and Maryam Yusuf Jamal, two-time world champion, should be the top contenders in the 1500m. Both have also been entered for the 5000m.

3000m steeplechase-Ruth Jebet of Bahrain, denied the Asian title in Pune because of eligibility questions, is eligible for the Games. The former Kenyan, aged 17, looks unbeatable. For India, Lalita Babar, more than defending champion Sudha Singh, looks poised to grab a medal. Of what colour is difficult to tell, quite possibly the bronze.

Chinese not unbeatable

Discus-Normally the Chinese look too formidable in this event that we don’t even think of picking an Indian as among the contenders for the gold or silver. Not this time, though. The leading Chinese this season, Yang Yanbo (63.31) or the second ranked Chinese, Su Xinyue (61.31) have not been entered. Instead we have Lu Xiaoxin and Tan Jian. This should raise Indian hopes, especially that of Seema Antil Punia who took the silver in the CWG. Seema leads the entry lists for the season with 61.61 followed by Lu at 60.68. Strange though it may sound, Seema is making her Asian Games debut and should be aiming for the yellow metal, though the recent past favours the Chinese. Last edition’s bronze medallist. Krishna Poonia has had fitness problems that hampered her at Glasgow. It is not clear how far she has improved. A medal for her could be possible yet.

4x400m relay-The Indian quartet clocked Asia’s leading time for the season in the trials at Patiala at 3,29.93. Japan, China and Kazakhstan should be looking for a chink in the Indian line-up. Three of the suspended athletes of 2011, Priyanka Panwar, Mandeep Kaur and Ashwini A. C. are in the team though the last two may not figure in the final. India’s strength in this event is likely to be evident once again. If there is a sure gold medal to be had from athletics for India then there is no better event than this one.

20km walk-Khushbir Kaur is the third best in the fray with her national record of 1,31.40 set at the World Cup at Taicang, China, this season. The Chinese look too strong to allow any one to upset their one-two domination. Kaur should take at least the bronze.

The other Indians who could be in contention could be men’s 10,000m runner Rahul Kumar Pal, steeplechaer Naveen Kumar, shot putter Indrajit Singh, women’s metric miler Sinimole Markose and high jumper Sahana Kumari.

The never-ending athletics trials

Indian athletics history from the 1980s will show that normally additional trials are arranged to pick the relay squads just before departure.  Sometimes the trials are held even at the venue of the Games!

Twice, at least in one’s memory, trials were held at the venue of the Asian Games to determine who would be the ‘first choice four in the women's 4x400m team, in Seoul in 1986 and in Busan in 2002.

This time, as the team gets ready for the Incheon Asian Games_well, Korea again, the coaches may please note,  if one more trial has to be gone through in a Games venue!_ yet another trial has been planned, hopefully the last time for these Games.

On Thursday, September 18, 2014, the men’s 4x400m relay team will be given another chance to make the ‘cut’ for Incheon. Also in the fray would be woman long jumper Mayookha Johny and triple jumper Renjith Maheswary.

Men's 4x400 team disappoints

The men's relay team clocked a disappointing 3,08.62 as against the standard of 3,06.49, though it must be admitted the team was without the services of one of the leading quarter-milers, Arokia Rajiv, who in fact has been the No. 1 for more than a season now, notwithstanding the loss to Kunhumohammed at Patiala.  Rajiv was supposed to be nursing a minor injury. By the way, the announcement by SAI that fitness tests were being conducted on injured athletes and in future such tests would be must should be welcomed. But what kind of tests are being carried out? Is it just a matter of producing a medical certificate stating that you are fit, which seems to be the case?
Back to relay trials, an Olympian compared that timing of the men's 4x400 quartet with those achieved by the Indian teams in the 1960s.

Renjith was supposed to attempt the norm of 16.56m at the Continental Cup at Marrakech, Morocco. But he ended up last there with an unbelievable 15.91m. As a junior in 2004 he had crossed 16 metres.

Renjith shows slump in form

This season Renjith had produced efforts of 16.43 (Fed Cup) and 16.54 (Inter-State). These were not really befitting his stature or his record (17.07) that was bettered only this year by the rising star from Punjab, Arpinder Singh. The latter posted a sensational 17.17 to upset Renjith as well as take the Inter-State title and book his place in the Commonwealth Games team. At Glasgow, Arpinder was not that spectacular, reaching only 16.63 for the bronze.

The AFI has high hopes on Arpinder for the Asian Games.

Mayookha has been struggling since recording a 6.56 in the Inter-State long jump competition that earned her a place in the team to Glasgow. There she did a shocking 6.11 in qualification. Back home she did more shockingly, a 6.08 at Patiala.

Switch to triple jump

Given another chance to perform along with Renjith and shot putter Om Prakash Singh, Mayookha opted rather unexpectedly for triple jump and came up with 13.18 at Patiala on September 15. She was still short of the qualification guideline that the AFI had set, that of 13.39. There are more than a dozen other Asians, apart from the Indians, who have crossed 13.39 this season.

Mayookha and M. A. Prajusha have been selected for both long jump and triple jump.

Now, the question is what are these athletes going to show differently in a matter of just days? Even if they achieve the ‘so-called’ guidelines or standards or qualification marks, will there be any credibility in those efforts?

How long will the AFI keep giving chances to athletes to achieve norms that might not have been achieved in certain other cases that are ‘confirmed entries’ for the Games ?

Is there a bias?

The argument, it seems, is in favour of giving a last chance to “experienced athletes”. Since the Government has cleared the whole squad of 56 athletes named by the AFI, including Renjith, Om Prakash and Mayookha, there is no worry for the federation to show results. It wants to ascertain the form on its own, though there is a clear tilt towards a select batch of athletes.

Questions have been asked in the media why, for example, Tamil Nadu’s long jumpers Kumaravel Premkumar and M. Vigneswar (7.90m in Inter-State) cannot be given similar chance like that is being given to a few others.

Premkumar’s drastic slide in form has been mysterious. He complained of having recovered from chicken pox during the Inter-State in June, while doing a seven-metre jump in the qualification round that was not sufficient to get him into the final.

Back in action at Patiala during the Fed Cup, Premkumar topped the qualifiers into the final with a jump of 7.42 metres. And then the most unexpected happened. In the final the Tamil Nadu athlete who holds the National record at 8.09m, managed just 6.82m to finish last.

Indian athletics comes up with such surprises quite often and when one such happens during an Asian Games, in reverse order, you might just savor the sight of a medal!

Could the selectors have been faulted for not considering Premkumar?  ‘No’ will have to be the answer. The long jump standard stands at 7.63m. The selectors ignored Vigneshwar’s Lucknow effort of 7.90m and instead only looked at his Patiala performance of 7.39m. They could not have been faulted for not going by a solitary 7.90 performance.

Case of javelin throwers

Then there are the cases of javelin throwers Davinder Singh and Rohit Kumar. Davinder, who could not qualify for the final of the Commonwealth Games, touched 78.57 at the Fed Cup, good enough to beat the norm of 76.50, but not good enough to get the vote from the selectors.

Rohit Kumar, coming back from a doping suspension, had 76.61m. He too found himself out of favour as the selectors picked the gold medallist, Rajender Singh Dalvir who had a 79.32m.

Selection Committee Chairman Gurbachan Singh Randhawa was quoted in a report as saying that he found little chance for Renjith to make the team. The Olympian hurdler also felt that it would be tough for shot putter Om Prakash to come back after having sprained an ankle prior to the re-trials.

Om Prakash also has shown stagnation around the 19-metre mark this season, except for a reported throw of 19.74m in the US in June.

Randhawa feels that selection has to be based on merit and performance and not on reputation and past record. He is not in favour of any more trials.

But the AFI seems to have made up its mind. For those familiar with this scenario there is nothing surprising.

Criteria diluted

The Sports Authority of India (SAI), busy pruning an unwieldy Indian contingent for the Games, and the ministry have had very little time to devote to the athletics squad, it would seem.

Not all the selected athletes have attained the ‘sixth-place standard’ prescribed by the Government, especially in distance events in both sections.  The argument in favour of diluting the standards at least in the women’s distance events could be that these events quite often provide very little opposition and a medal can come about without really showing top form.

Last time, prior to Glasgow Games, Renjith had pulled out of a possible re-trial stating that he had had enough. If he competes this time will he pull it off?

Post-script 

Renjith Maheswary and Mayookha Johny made the grade in triple jump at the re-trials at Patiala today (Sept 18, 2014). Not unexpectedly, one would say. Renjith jumped 16.61m as against the selection guideline of 16.56 while Mayookha did 13.56m as against the standard of 13.39m.

The 4x400 quartet of Kunhumohammed, Arun K. J., Jibin Sebastian and Arokia Rajiv timed 3,07.05 in the re-trials, coming closer to the standard of 3,06.49. A different combination had timed 3,08.62 last Monday.

The AFI issued a release on Thursday night to state that Renjith and Mayookha were cleared for participation in the Asian Games following the re-trials while it had decided to drop the men's 4x400 relay team. Kunhumohammed and Arokia Rajiv, the two entries in the men's 400m would be allowed to proceed.
-last update at 8.00 p.m Sept 18, 2014

Indian weightlifters at Asian Games

Where does India stand in weightlifting in the Asian Games?

This question assumes importance in view of the sense of “well being” in the sport often caused by the success of our weightlifters at the Commonwealth Games.

India took three gold, five silver and six bronze medals in the Glasgow Games. Since the Asian Games follows the CWG, there is generally some mention of weightlifting in its aftermath though everyone knows Asian standards are tough.

But how tough are they? Where exactly do Indians figure in Asian weightlifting? These questions are worth looking into in the immediate context of the Incheon Games.

Malleswari the last medal winner for India

India has never won a gold medal in Asian Games weightlifting championships! We haven’t won a medal in weightlifting in the Asian Games since Karnam Malleswari took the silver in the 63kg class in Bangkok in 1998.

The last Indian male to win a weightlifting medal in the Games was G. Muthuswamy in the 52kg division in 1986. He claimed the bronze.

So what are the chances of a medal this time if at all there is some?

The Government has cleared a batch of four men and three women. If one applies the ‘sixth-place’ standard then Satish Kumar Sivalingam (77kg) alone makes it among men and Saikom Mirabhai Chanu and Sanjita Chanu Khumukcham (both 48kg) among women.

Sukhen Dey, champion in Glasgow in the 56kg class with a total lift of 248kg, is 7kg short of the sixth place standard of the 2010 Asian Games if his current performance is taken into consideration. He is, however, only one kilogram less compared to the 255kg criterion if we take his best performance of 2013, that of 254kg at the Commonwealth championships at Penang, a fact that must have clinched a place for him in the Government-approved team. That performance placed him at joint 15th in the world rankings for 2013.

The dampener comes when we look at the lifters from Asia ahead of Dey. In the 2013 rankings there are eight other Asians above the Indian. This does not, however, mean that all those lifters could be competing in the 56kg category in Incheon.

Sivalingam's phenomenal improvement

Sivalingam’s improvement from his Asian championships performance (309kg) at Glasgow was phenomenal as he added 19kg to that for a total of 328kg to win the gold in the 77kg division. The Asian championships 6th place having gone for 326kg, the Tamil Nadu lifter just managed to better the criterion for the Incheon Games.

That was something that K. Ravi Kumar, the most experienced Indian lifter, could not do in the same weight class.  He had a total of 317kg for the silver in Glasgow. Ravi Kumar has been approved in the latest team, probably because of his experience.

With his 328kg, if inserted into the 2013 rankings (he had 317kg for an overall placing of 40th in the world rankings in 2013), Sivaligam will figure in the top 10 in Asia. The gold at the last Asian Games went for 348kg, bronze for 310kg. But the gold at the last Asian championships was won with 366kg and the bronze with 355kg. Totals can vary considerably from meet to meet.

Vikas Thakur in the 85kg class is also well behind his nearest rivals in Asia. At the last Asian Games the sixth place total happened to be 365kg while Thakur’s silver medal at Glasgow came at 333kg. In the 2013 rankings he is 10th among the Asians with a tally of 322kg. The standards were rather poor at the last Asian championships with the gold being won at 340kg and the bronze at 325kg.

Since the 2014 rankings are sketchy, not all the lifters are shown in the rankings. The real strength of the field in Incheon would only be known once entries are confirmed for each weight category.

There is also always the question of doping in this sport. Performances vary considerably depending on this aspect.  The unpredictable factor will thus hinge on anti-doping measures in the run-up to the Games.

Women's chances

In the women’s section, India’s entries in the 48kg class, Sanjita Chanu Khumukcham, Commonwealth Games gold medallist (173kg), and Saikhom Mirabhai Chanu, CWG silver medallist (170kg),  do make the grade of 6th place standard (158kg) and might even have a medal chance depending on the field. The gold and silver went for 190kg and 176kg at this year’s Asian championships.

Entry restrictions for the total number of athletes a country can field in either the men or women’s section will limit entries from China in certain categories thus leaving the rest of the field with a better opportunity to grab medals.

The exercise of trimming a jumbo contigent

The Indian Olympic Association (IOA) has always been known for its persuasive powers, especially on matters related to contingents for multi-discipline games.

Since 2010 when the Government started putting more and more control into the functioning of the IOA and the National Sports Federations (NSFs) these persuasive powers have dwindled. The suspension by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) only added to the weakening of the Olympic Movement in the country.

The four-yearly debate over the size and composition of the Indian contingent for the Asian Games has to be viewed this time in this backdrop. It is no secret the IOA has twisted the criteria to its advantage through the years in order to swell numbers.

Norms diluted

The third-place criteria that was adopted by the Government for two decades was diluted by it in 2006 to allow sixth place even as the IOA had agreed to fourth place in the 2002 Games. The IOA should not be saying now that the criteria had been sprung late in the day by SAI. If it did not sit with the SAI/ministry beforehand to know the modalities of approval, then the fault lies equally at the doors of the IOA and the SAI.

Ideally, it would have been logical for the SAI to convey to the IOA and the NSFs at least six months in advance that teams that were invariably finishing outside the top eight or had not even managed a decent win-loss record in the previous games or last Asian championships might be axed, irrespective of whether such teams were provided foreign exposure or not.

To think that the women’s handball team that finished eighth and last in the last two games has been cleared once again only shows how the IOA can manoeuvre and how badly SAI had handled the subject. To say that this is only a one-time exception does not help.

In sport like sepak takraw and taekwondo the situation is not vastly different from handball. Yet they have found their way in.

The threat by the OCA about penalizing India in case it withdrew from team events after confirmation also mattered, it would seem, in the end.

Numbers, at least in IOA’s reasoning, project ‘development’ and development, real or imaginary, in turn, provides the NSFs the bargaining leverage in a variety of spheres even as those numbers provide the NOC with a chance to pack the contingent with coaches and support staff.

It is true everyone wakes up rather late in this ‘numbers game’. For the IOA, the ploy has been found to be advantageous through these past three decades and more. The IOA officials used to send letters on a daily basis to the Sports Ministry in the past to get someone cleared or added to the list once the official clearance for the bulk of the contingent was received.

The 'no-cost' formula

The “no-cost-to-Government” formula eventually used to help the entire lot go and compete in the quadrennial games, irrespective of whether a team had any standing or not. Mostly the funds were drawn from government organizations, making the “no cost” formula meaningless at least for athletes.

The final results quite often told the miserable state of particular sports but four years from then such sports would invariably get back and project an “improved” image.

The “no-cost” business has been shot down by the PMO this time.  It “shall not be a consideration”, said an official release on September 9, 2014, while clearing an Indian contingent of 679 including 163 officials and support staff. That the clearance came with just 10 days to go for the opening ceremony of the Games was a shame. A bigger shame was the fact, mentioned in the release, that the IOA submitted its list on August 21, against the stipulation of 90 days.

The elimination of the “no-cost” formula has its plus and minus points.

Why should any particular component of an Indian contingent be cleared at ‘no cost’ to Government? Are not all sports equal? This is a good argument to support the removal of the ‘no cost’ system. There is pride in representing the country and the country bears the expenditure without grudge to back the “sweat and toil” of the athletes the previous four years.

Ignominy

On the minus side is the poor returns plus the ignominy of either finishing last or near the bottom or ending up with just one win or an all-loss record in a team event when ‘also-rans’ are fielded at Government expenditure on the argument that anyone who represents India need to be funded by the Government.

Should public money be spent to gain the wooden spoon? More importantly, should such teams be approved at all?

 Claims are made every four years but the end result in a number of disciplines remains disappointing if not scandalous. If the Sports Authority of India (SAI) had recommended axing 14 disciplines including football, basketball, taekwondo and handball, it was perfectly justified since  results in these disciplines had been abysmal for long.

On the other hand, the question of course comes up about the popularity of games like football, basketball and volleyball and the need to encourage these sport if only to sustain them as sport contributing at least towards a healthy nation and needing only modest investment and the necessity to spread the Olympic Movement.

Yet, the very same people who today argue in favour of clearing all teams at Government expense will ask the question after the Games “was there any need to enter a 900-plus contingent at Government expense for such meagre returns?”

This is the dilemma of the SAI and the Sports Ministry.

Disappointment for fencing, triathlon, rugby 7s

There surely will be disappointment among the sportspersons in ten pin bowling, fencing, rugby 7s, modern pentathlon, soft tennis, triathlon and beach volleyball, the disciplines that have been dropped while clearing a contingent of 679.

Disappointment will also be there for the six women swimmers who formed the medley relay team, a couple of divers and weightlifters Rustam Sarang and Kavita Devi,  some sailors, cyclists and a few badminton players.

A question will also come up why, for example, should some weightlifters  (Sukhen Dey, Ravi Kumar and Vikas Thakur) be approved even without the minimum selection criteria (sixth-place of the last Asian Games or Asian championships whichever is higher), while a couple of others were being denied.

This phenomenon is not just confined to weightlifting but across sports, prompting the accusation that the ministry had been “selective” in excluding certain sports and individual athletes. And even in approving some managers!

The question of a large number of officials not being cleared is a matter of concern for several teams. And this is where the policy of clearing only on “cost to government” might need a review.

Policy on managers

For the past two decades or so managers were not being funded by the Government since a large majority of the NSFs could not adhere to the original stipulation of the ministry that individuals should have spend a considerable period of time with the campers_one forgets the specified period_to be eligible to get Government support.

In 2010, when the Government approved a contingent of 843 (the latest PIB release claimed that last time a batch of 933 including 324 officials was cleared) including 609 athletes, 127 coaches, 44 managers and 33 other officials, 43 of the managers were cleared on “no cost to Government” basis.

You may not require two or three managers for a sport, but in a majority of sports, if not all of them, managers do perform a function that if entrusted to a coach would mean the latter would be burdened beyond his duties on the field.

Something that the SAI and the ministry could have explored (and still can) was in clearing a few coaches as coach-cum-managers, a practice employed in the past by the Government so that  the impression that the post is being utilized just to “reward” some office-bearer of an NSF or a state association could be removed.

Cutting it down from 942 to 679 is an achievement by the SAI and the ministry and one cannot but appreciate the firm stand adopted by the SAI Director General, Jiji Thomson, and Secretary, Sports, Ajit Sharan.

As posted in an earlier piece here, China entered  647 athletes in 37 sports in the Doha Asian Games in 2006 and topped the medals tally with 316 medals, 165 of them gold.

That only showed a country need not enter 800 athletes to earn over 300 medals. You might say China is an exception and one will have to agree with that argument.

The numbers in Incheon

But look at the numbers for Incheon. Going by what the OCA released on Aug 26, 2014, China heads the list with 899 athletes, followed by the host, Korea, with 831 and Japan, with 716. India was fourth at 658.

That number was what the IOA had submitted to OCA, not what was eventually cleared by the Government. At 516 now, India will be fifth, behind Thailand, by just one entry!

It is worth noting that two countries which finished ahead of India (14 gold) _apart from the ‘big three’, China, Japan and Korea_at Guangzhou in 2010, Iran (20 gold) and Kazakhstan (18) have entered 285 and 472 competitors respectively this time.

In the week left for the Games to begin, the IOA is bound to press for more clearances. The ‘managers issue’ is a serious one. “Let-us-do-away-with-no-cost” and dump managers cannot be an ultimate solution to contingent-trimming.

The Indian MHA saga set to complete four years

It has been nearly four years since proceedings were launched by the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) against 11 ‘offenders’ who tested positive for the stimulant methylhexaneamine (MHA).

Last month (August, 2014), the National Anti Doping Appeal Panel (NADAP) disposed of the cases of athletes Saurabh Vij and Akash Antil, leaving just one appeal, that of swimmer Richa Mishra, to be decided.

Hopefully, the decision should come this month, just after the fourth anniversary of MHA having made its debut before a disciplinary panel back in 2010.

Methylhexaneamine when it was added to the Prohibited List by the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) in 2010 was a relatively unknown substance. At that time it was thought of as an ingredient used in a nasal decongestant since Google searches produced that information, without making it known that the medicine was no longer available in the market.

The tale of massage oils & soaps

Soon it was also publicized as a naturally-occurring substance since it was considered to be available in geranium plants, especially its root extracts.  Probably, the supplements manufacturers needed to show that MHA was a natural substance in order to freely market it. Around the same time, word spread that massage oils, bath soaps and other cosmetic products contained geranium and hence they contained methylhexaneamine. There was even a suggestion that some cooking oils contained geranium and thereby MHA!

Today Wikipedia has this to say about methylhexaneamine. 

More and more studies have claimed that geranium does not contain methylhexaneamine, though manufacturers of dietary supplements continue to claim otherwise. There is no evidence to show that massage oils or beauty soaps or face packs, claiming to contain geranium also show the presence of methylhexaneamine.

The National Anti Doping Agency (NADA) got a batch of VLCC products tested at a private laboratory and it was proved that the products did not contain MHA. A similar claim was also made by the VLCC company in the Nirupama Devi (judoka) case when it was alleged that its products had led to a ‘positive’ result for MHA in the athlete’s case.

Cutaneous absorption unlikely

It was also claimed in the Nirupama case that went up to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) that it was highly unlikely that the kind of levels of the substance found in the Indian athlete’s urine sample could be possible through cutaneous absorption.

It was routinely claimed by various people including athletes and lawyers in the Indian context that massage oils and soaps containing geranium could trigger a positive test for MHA.

‘Just use the soap for a few months and you get a positive for MHA’, seemed to be the argument.

Nirupama was handed down a two-year suspension by CAS, on an appeal by WADA, overthrowing the ‘reprimand’ ordered by a disciplinary panel and upheld by an appeal panel in India. The order came on November 8, 2013.

On September 23, 2013 an appeal panel in India reduced a suspension from two years to one year in another MHA case, that of  swimmer Jyotsana Pansare who belonged to the famous 'batch of 11'. She was the only one among the 11 to get a reprieve like that.

Pansare got it since the appeal panel ruled that the MHA “entered the athlete’s body by use of cosmetic face pack etc”.

The panel further wrote in its order, “there is no question of these being used for enhancement of performance and it was not intended to enhance her sports performance.”

Pansare did not make any claim about having used any particular product that contained geranium or MHA. Nor did the panel seek such information from her nor for that matter did NADA offer to test such substance at the NDTL if that could be made available.

NADA chose not to reveal

Curiously, NADA, which tried in vain to bring in evidence based on laboratory report in respect of the Nirupama case at a late stage before the appeal panel headed by Justice C. K. Mahajan (retd.) did not attempt to present the same evidence before the appeal panel headed by Justice M. L. Varma (retd.) in the Pansare case.

In fact Pansare’s lawyer, Vidushpat Singhania, did argue that the panel in the Nirupama case had considered the argument about cosmetic products having led to the positive test. It was accepted by the Varma panel and it agreed that the “benefit of that case” should be given to the swimmer.

Out of the 12 original MHA cases, one, that of weightlifter Sanamacha Chanu had ended in a quick decision, since her’s was a second offence. She never tried to bring in cosmetics or massage oil into the argument and received an eight-year sanction.

Six wrestlers were all given a reprieve of 314 days as the Varma panel ruled that there were delays that could not be attributed to the athletes and the punishment of two years coupled with the disqualification of all results dating back to sample collection date was too harsh.

The Dinesh Dayal disciplinary panel had suspended all 11 athletes for two years with effect from decision date (Nov 5, 2012), more than two years after the cases began. It also annulled all results from sample collection date.

Last month, athletes Saurabh Vij and Akash Antil also received reprieves for 314 days in tune with the decisions given in the wrestlers’ case. Vij is facing a second charge, of steroid use. That decision was left pending though the panel had concluded its hearings since the question whether he could be sanctioned for a second offence could only be taken after the first one was determined.

The Varma panel upheld the annulment of all results for eight of the 11 cases_one ongoing_setting aside the order of the disciplinary panel only in respect of disqualification of results in the Pansare case!

Amar Muralidharan argues differently

Just one more case has so far deviated in the batch of 11 from the majority of the rest. Swimmer Amar Muralidharan’s father Cdr Muralidharan, appearing for Amar, argued more on technicalities rather than plead concession because of delays.

He argued about the mix-up of sample code numbers (with that of Pansare), the delay in getting the sample across from Jaipur to Delhi, the doubts about the chain of external and internal custody, laboratory procedures etc. The panel rejected his appeal.

Amar Muralidharan has approached CAS, but it is to be seen whether the swimmer has a second window of appeal available after having exhausted his right of appeal in India.

Meanwhile, methylhexaneamine, which raised quite a debate in anti-doping circles in India initially_why should it be banned if it is to be found in daily use products, was a question often asked_has remained the No. 1 choice stimulant across the world since getting into that slot in 2010.

There were 123 MHA cases in 2010, accounting for 21.4 per cent within the drug category of stimulants, 283 (39.4 %) in 2011, 320 (45.9 %) in 2012 and 169 (31.9 %) in 2013.

In India there have been 67 cases of methylhexaneamine reported and dealt with by the disciplinary panel, seven of them having been in combination with other more potent drugs  and, in one case, along with a charge of tampering with doping control procedure.

In two cases, both involving rowers during the 2011 National Games, the athletes were exonerated because of flaws in the doping control procedures.

Taken off the shelves

Methylhexaneamine, in the meantime, has been banned as a supplement ingredient in many countries following adverse reports including death of two US soldiers.

One of the more popular supplements containing MHA, Jack3d, today has its variants in Jack3d Advanced and Jack3d Micro, after supplements containing MHA were ordered to be removed from the markets of some countries including Britain, Canada and Australia. In the US, the FDA has issued warnings

 regarding the sale of MHA supplements (also known by its synonym dimethylamylamine or DMAA). The new Jack3d does not contain MHA, it has been claimed.

However, MHA continues to be one of the 'popular' substances among athletes around the world, whether by accident or design. The recent instance of Botswana’s female 400m runner Amantle Montsho is a case in point. She is facing disciplinary procedures after having been disqualified from the Glasgow Commonwealth Games.

Athlete Laxay Sharma was the last of the Indian cases of MHA to be disposed of by the disciplinary panel with a two-year sanction last month.

Anti-doping authorities including WADA have issued warnings that methylhexaneamine could be marketed through a variety of names including 4-methyl-2-hexanamine, 4-methyl-2-hexylamine, 2-amino-4-methylhexane and 2-Hexanamine, 4-methyl-(9CI), apart from dimethylamylamine (DMAA) and dimethylpentylamine, the last two more common names found among the labels.

Mislabelling

Misleading labelling of supplements had led to a few athletes being given reprieve in the previous years, forcing WADA to issue a clarification in 2011 that MHA could be marketed under different names and athletes needed to be careful.

NADA’s refurbished website does not have a supplements warning or for that matter a methylhexaneamine warning even though the old website had one on MHA, placed there after more than two years of the substance being brought into the Prohibited List. Let us hope the NADA website will evolve and improve in due course.

Methylhexaneamine continues to be in the ‘specified stimulants’ category of the Prohibited List of WADA. That means a ‘positive’ result due to MHA could be argued as accidental and not an effort to enhance performance to get a lenient sanction.

What effect the new Code, to be effective from January 2015, will have on the use of supplements containing MHA is difficult to tell. The new Code contains a clause related to ‘Contaminated products’ that can attract just a ‘reprimand’ at the lowest end of fault or negligence.

The Indian appeal panel did take more than a year to deal with the 11 MHA cases_ with one of them still pending_with the last two having stretched beyond 21 months.

There seems to be a new-found urgency with the disciplinary panel hearings now since positive cases reported in June last have already been disposed of. 

It is a welcome sign that the NADA and the panels have realized the importance of delivering justice speedily unlike in civil suits. The kind of leeway given to defence lawyers in the 11 MHA cases can still delay matters. The only way to pre-empt such tactics would be to prescribe a procedure and fix a timeline as the CAS does.

The difference between a champion side and a first-round loser

Among the 33 sports disciplines recommended by the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) for participation the Asian Games in Incheon is soft tennis.

While checking up the achievements of Indian teams in lesser-known sports or those where the country has had little success either at the last Games or at the continental level in recent years, during the past few days, one was impressed by the record of the Indian soft tennis team as projected on the website of the  Soft Tennis Federation of India

And this is what was stated on that website

7th Asian Soft Tennis Championship 2012 held at Chiayi City, Chinese Taipei from November 15-20, 2012. Indian Soft Tennis Team Secured Gold Medal in Team Event (Women) & Silver Medal in Team Event (Men). Players & Official List Under the below.

Very impressive achievement, one thought, though India had fared miserably in this sport in the last Asian Games.

Perhaps the Sports Authority of India (SAI) and the majority of us who were wondering what a sport like this was doing in the Indian contingent were wrong.  In fact SAI had lined it up for the axe.

Even as we also doubted the capacity of Indian teams in ten pin bowling, fencing, sepak takraw, taekwondo, rugby 7s, beach volleyball, triathlon, handball, cycling and modern pentathlon, it was natural only to look at soft tennis as yet another case of “let’s join the bandwagon”.

But gold and silver in Asian Championships? What else can you hope to get?

It looked too good to be true, however. So, one checked up the Asian Soft TennisFederation (ASTF). Sure enough it had a different set of champions!

Name of Event	The 7th Asian Soft Tennis Championships
Term of the event	15-20 November, 2012
Place	Chiayi City, Chinese Taipei
Category	MEN'S	SINGLES	DOUBLES
	1st Prize 2nd Prize 3rd Prize 3rd Prize	KIM DONG HOON (KOR) UAYPORN SORRACHET (THA) HAN JAE WON (KOR) ARCILLA JOSEPH (PHI)	LAI LI HUANG . HO MENG HSUN (TPE) LEE JUNG SUB . KIM BEOM JUN (KOR) JEON JEE HEON . PARK KYU CHEOL (KOR) LIN SHIH CHUN . LIN SHENG FA (TPE)
	WOMEN'S	SINGLES	DOUBLES
	1st Prize 2nd Prize 3rd Prize 3rd Prize	SUGIMOTO HITOMI (JPN) JON MYONG SUK (PRK) KWON RAN HEE (KOR) ZOLETA NOELLE CONCHITA CORAZON (PHI)	KIM AE KYUNG . JOO OG (KOR) UEHARA ERI . ABE YURI (JPN) CHENG CHU LING . CHEN YI CHIA (TPE) ZOLETA NOELLE CONCHITA CORAZON . ESCALA DIVINA GRACIA (PHI)
	MIXED DOUBLES
	1st Prize 2nd Prize 3rd Prize 3rd Prize	KOBAYASHI NAO . NAKAMOTO KEIYA (JPN) ZOLETA NOELLE CONCHITA CORAZON . ARCILLA JHOMAR (PHI) UEHARA ERI . IWASAKI KEI (JPN) PAK KYONG CHOL . JON MYONG SUK (PRK)
	MEN'S TEAM EVENT
	1st Prize 2nd Prize 3rd Prize 3rd Prize	JAPAN （JPN) KOREA (KOR) CHINESE TAIPEI (TPE) PHILIPPINE (PHI)
	WOMEN'S TEAM EVENT
	1st Prize 2nd Prize 3rd Prize 3rd Prize	JAPAN　 （JPN) KOREA　 (KOR) PHILIPPINE (PHI) CHINESE TAIPEI (TPE)

So, where did India finish in the Chinese Taipei city?

Fortunately, the ASTF was very prompt in replying to a request for details of the 2012 Asian championships, today (Sept 3, 2014).

The results showed that India had played consolation finals in both men and women’s sections having lost in the first round in both sections, to Mongolia in the men’s and to People’s Republic of Korea in women’s. India beat PRK in men’s consolation final and beat Nepal in women’s.

How can a National Federation, recognized by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, and the IOA, as claimed by it on its website, be giving a false standing of its teams on its website?

One does not know what the IOA would have stated in its proposals to the ministry about soft tennis. But surely, in this age where you tend to believe what is stated on the website of a federation, this is shocking.

Post-script-

What is soft tennis? This is how the Asian Soft Tennis Federation website describes it-

Soft tennis is a kind of tennis which was developed in Japan on regular tennis.　Soft tennis　is　similar　to　regular　tennis　with　some　common　aspects　but　with　also　some　differences.　The　main one being the use of much softer rubber balls. Hence the name “soft tennis” As the game uses these soft balls certain unique features have developed, such as a lighter and more flexible racket with a lower string compression. Unique techniques and game manoeuvring also make the best use of the softness of the ball. You can hit the ball hard with a good and comfortable feeling and will find it easy to control the ball. With a soft ball, light racket, low string compression and reduced speed of the ball after bouncing on the court, everyone, irrespective of sex and age, can enjoy the game of soft tennis. This is summed up by our catch phrase “Soft Tennis for Anyone and Everyone”.

IOA begins numbers game for Asiad

There is a familiar ring to the ‘numbers game’ that is being played out in New Delhi these days in respect of India’s contingent for the Asian Games in Incheon, Korea. This is a four-yearly phenomenon and the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) invariably ends up the “winner” in this intriguing game with the Sports Ministry.

Not disheartened a bit by the modest returns from the Glasgow Commonwealth Games, where India’s medal haul slumped somewhat _even allowing for the fact that there were several events which provided medals to the country in Delhi in 2010 that were scrapped this time_the IOA has proposed a jumbo-sized 942-member contingent for the Incheon Games.

“More the merrier” has remained the favourite theme for the IOA through decades and despite widespread criticism in the past about the manner in which it goes about the task of finalizing its contingent and the eventual results returned in the games, the IOA has stuck to its policy of appeasing all National Sports Federations (NSFs), keeping in mind the vote bank that comes in handy during elections.

Then there is the question of “political equations”. Those NSFs that can tug at the ‘political strings’ will gain compared to those that may not have such clout.

A classic example in the Asian Games context could be cycling. A 13-member Indian cycling team expectedly drew blank in the Commonwealth Games. They might have been sent to gain exposure in the run-up to the Asian Games or else might have been proposed by CFI since almost every other federation was fielding a team, mainly on the argument that the organizers were going to foot the bill any way (How much the Government of India spent eventually on the contingent has not been disclosed yet).

Since cycling is not a medal-winning sport for India, the media focus stayed away from Indian cyclists in Glasgow. The Indian results are, however,  revealing if not shocking as shown below, right at the end of this piece.

Does cycling have a case?

A nine-member team has been proposed by the CFI for the Asian Games, comprising the same members who finished miserably in Glasgow.

It is true cycling does not have adequate infrastructure facilities in India and the sport has been neglected for long. But should that mean a team is entered for multi-discipline games where the standards would be expectedly much higher than what the Indians would have encountered?

Among the sport that the Sports Authority of India (SAI) may not recommend for clearance to the Sports Ministry could be ten pin bowling, fencing,  modern pentathlon, rugby and triathlon, PTI reported the other day quoting SAI DG Jiji Thomson. The report also mentioned football and table tennis as having been lined up for the chopping block.

But cycling?

That is where political clout should matter.

The CFI is headed by Mr. Parminder Singh Dhindsa, Minister of Finance and Planning, Punjab Government, and son of Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa, former Union Sports Minister, now Rajya Sabha MP, and Akali Dal leader. Senior Dhindsa had headed the CFI in the past.

What happens to cycling in the Asian Games context could be just one of the questions here.

Fencing, ten pin bowling, modern pentathlon, rugby and triathlon, to name just a few from the long list that the IOA has submitted, could be having as little chance as cycling of earning a medal in Incheon for India.

Fencing, Ten Pin Bowling join the queue 

Fencing did not earn anything better than a 33rd place among men and 14th place among women in the last Asian championships held at Suwon, Korea in July this year. But the IOA has recommended  men and women’s squads.

 In ten pin bowling, every Indian except Shaik Abdul Hameed (ranked 20th) is below 61 among men in Asia. There is no Indian woman ranked in the top 100 in the continent. Yet we have a team for the Asian Games.

India lost all its matches in men’s and women’s in the last Asian Games in sepak takraw. Still when the ‘four-year itch’ starts, we just can’t stop thinking of entering the team again.

The story is the same in several disciplines. But then, a free ride is always an enjoyable proposition. The bigger the component of athletes, the bigger the complement of coaches and officials, that has been the underlying philosophy of the IOA all these years.

It is not that everyone wants to go abroad. It is a matter of prestige. If you are an athlete you should be in the Indian team for any big event that is happening. And if you are an official, your standing will go up only if you manage a few trips.

If India crossed the century mark at the 2010 Commonwealth Games at home, the total medals tally at the Guangzhou Asian Games that followed happened to be only 65 including 14 gold medals.

This time the question after a none-too-impressive collection of 64 medals including 15 gold in the Glasgow Games, could be how many can the country win in Incheon.

Quite often you hear athletes complaining that they had been “dreaming” of this participation for four years and that all their “hard work” would be down the drain if they do not go. Of course there would be disappointment, but that disappointment is more for the country when the games begin and the Indians start losing or bringing up the rear.

On the other hand, you hear NSFs bringing in the argument that their athletes need “exposure”.

Exposure in Asian Games?

Exposure at multi-discipline games for the sake of exposure would be foolish. Exposure at Asian championships level or smaller international meets, even through bilateral exchanges should be fine.

A recent statement from the Malaysian Sports Minister is of some relevance here and should be an example for Indian sports administrators as well as politicians.

Multi-discipline games will have to be treated as events that attract a fair amount of media attention and thereby affect a country’s prestige and standing. Just because a country might have spent some money on training a team in preparation for an event like this should not eventually mean that unless that team competes in that event the money would have been wasted.

Take the Indian example. The Government spends money every year on priority disciplines as well as non-priority disciplines, whether there is Asian Games or Olympic Games. Of course extra money is sanctioned for teams preparing for big events especially in priority disciplines.

China had 647 athletes, 316 medals in Doha

China entered 647athletes in 37 sports in the Doha Asian Games in 2006 and topped the medals tally with 316 medals, 165 of them gold. Awesome!

At the same games, India had a 400-plus contingent competing in 31 sports and took 54 medals including 10 gold to end up eighth on the medals table.

This time the IOA has proposed 662 athletes, in 33 of the 36 sports disciplines included in the Asian Games programme, leaving baseball, cricket and karate. The BCCI refused to field a team while the IOA ignored the claims of a National federation in karate which had the affiliation of the world body recognized by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and submitted an entry late in the day (after a trial conducted by it) which was rejected by the Olympic Council of Asia. How baseball was left out is not known.

No great insight into Indian sports is needed to assess India’s medal chances in the forthcoming games. A large majority of the sports that the IOA has proposed are there to show that they too have higher ambitions, they too have athletes capable of competing at higher levels and they too can win the odd bronze medal. If the sport cannot even be shown as good enough to compete at the Asian level, then interest in it will wane, funding will come in a trickle and the sport might just fade away.

Coming as it always does shortly after the Commonwealth Games, the Asian Games do show up Indian sport, the medal collection in weightlifting and wrestling come down, that in shooting gets reduced to single digits and overall the sense of well-being projected by the CWG gets shaken.

And this is where the SAI and the Government should be careful about not adding also-rans, those teams that end up with ‘played-three-lost-three’ records, those athletes who stand no chance of figuring in the top six, forget about earning a medal. At least not on Government expense.

In 2006, the IOA had created quite some confusion for the organizers in Doha

in a similar situation as is available today. Then also the Government had cut the contingent size, dropping a few team events.

Finally, almost everyone managed to go, the IOA pulling out teams in basketball, fencing and sepak takraw. Incidentally, sepak takraw has been proposed this time, too, despite the fact that the Indian men and women lost all their matches in the last Games in Guangzhou in this sport.

There is a provision in the National Sports Code by which the Government can refuse to allow a team to use the term ‘India’in an international competition.

Will the Government fall back on the “no cost to Government” formula while clearing a few teams and athletes who might not measure up to any standard? Or will it stop some teams from participation, something that has never happened?

Eventually when a “no cost” formula is worked out, the federations extract substantial funds from employers, most of them Government organizations or Public Sector Undertakings.

 Indian cyclists at CWG 2014

Track events

Men

4000m team pursuit-India 4,31.714 (finished 6^th and last in qualification)

1000m time trial- Amrit Singh 1,06.903 (13^th), Amarjit Nagi 1,08.117 (14^th), Alan Baby 1,10.579 (16th and last) (The odd man out was Jesse Kelly of Barbados who came in between the Indians,  otherwise a ‘clean sweep’ for the last three places!)

Men’s team sprint (qualifying)-7th . India (Alan Baby, Amrit Singh, Amarjit Nagi) 49.233 (8^th was Barbados, 9^th was Bangaldesh)

Men’s sprint (qualifying)-Amarjit Nagi (22^nd),Amrit Singh (23^rd), Alan Baby (25^th), 28 cyclists in all.

40km points race-Heat 1. Shreedhar Savanur  DNF,  Heat 2- Amit Kumar and Sombir finished with zero points to be 14^th and 15^th overall among 17 cyclists

Keirin-Heat 1 Amarjit Nagi finished last,Heat 2 Alan Baby finished last,Heat 3 Amrit Singh finished last but one. In repechage Amrit Singh and  Alan finished last again, Nagi managed to come ahead of one Barbados cyclist

20km scratch race- Heat 1-Amit Kumar DNF, Sombir DNF, heat 2 Savanur DNF

Women

3000m individual pursuit-Sunita Yanglem (17^th/19) 4,07.614

500m time trial-10. Deborah 36.611, 11. Mahitha Mohan 38.869, 13.Kezia Varghese 39.387 (one Jamaican ‘spoilt’ the sequence for Indians coming in at 12th).

Sprint (Qualifying)-10. Deborah 12.483, 11. Mahitha Mohan 13.059, 12. Kezia Varghese 13.162

(13th and last was a Jamaican)

25km points race-Sunita Yanglem DNF

10km scratch race-Sunita Yanglem DNF

Road races

Men

168.240km

Shreedhar Savanur, Sombir, Amit Kumar, Arvind Panwar, Manjeet Singh, all five DNF

(only 12 riders finished in all, 127 riders did not finish)

Individual time trial 38.4km-37^th/56 Sombir  59,10.76

Indian women did not compete in road races.