I love my post!

Bosses remain at the helm eternally - By Neeru Bhati :: The Week: "When India came fifth at the Azlan Shah Cup tournament in Kuala Lumpur recently, K.P.S. Gill, president of the Indian Hockey Federation, said, 'I am not despondent with the results.' The nation was, but Gill has always disregarded public opinion. As someone who has been at the helm of Indian hockey for the last 12 years and looks set to continue in the saddle for four more years (subject to the High Court validating his election), Gill is an ideal example of an Indian sports administrator remaining in the hot seat for a long time. The others include Suresh Kalmadi, Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi, Jagdish Tytler and V.K. Malhotra. Yet, the results during their tenure have been far from memorable. For instance, in the last 20 years, India has won only two bronzes and one silver in the Olympic Games.

So, why can’t the tenure of these non-performing bosses be limited to a maximum of two terms? The government has this clause in its guidelines, but the National Sports Federations (NSFs) are, after all, autonomous. Says K.P. Singh Deo, president of the Rowing Federation of India: "We are democratically elected office-bearers. If a sportsman can contest the general elections as many times as he wants, why should there be a limit in federation elections?"

The obvious reply: accountability and results. If a federation is not producing results, the boss should be held accountable. But federation elections are usually manipulated. So, despite the presence of government observers, the non-performers come back with bigger margins.

Randhir Singh, secretary-general of the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), says you need a longer tenure to make an international impact. "By the time you start making some headway, two terms are already over," he says. "Today, India is going to host the 2010 Commonwealth Games. We have already organised the Asian and Afro Asian Games. This is because there is an Indian presence in international sports bodies." The fact is that if India were to perform consistently and win medals, the country would automatically be taken seriously.

Another reason for bosses lasting so long is that not many sportspersons get involved in the administration. Either they find it difficult to come in or they are not hardened enough for the politics. In 1998, former All-England champion Prakash Padukone got involved in the running of the Badminton Association of India, but he quit within a short while.

The free run could be coming to an end. Recently, three state governments—Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan—passed ordinances regulating sports bodies. Expectedly, the IOA and other sports bodies under it are up in arms. While the state governments contend that they took the step to regulate the state associations, Dasmunshi said, "This is a direct interference in the working of autonomous sports bodies."

The NSFs receive financial aid from the government to hold national championships in all major sports, to fund the training of sportspersons, to hire coaches from abroad and to send teams to international tournaments. Yet the federations do not have a sense of accountability.

It is mandatory for federations to submit Long-Term Development Programmes (LTDP) for a four-year period. There are regular review meetings between federation representatives and sports ministry and/or Sports Authority of India officials. "Every time there is an LTDP meeting, federations ask for more money," says one sports ministry official. "When we ask about results, they talk about autonomy."

The federations give an audit of government money spent, but do not give details of money acquired or grants given by international organisations like the International Olympic Committee or FIFA. Some federations, like those of hockey and football, get income from selling telecast rights. "We have no idea how much money these federations get from outside and how they spend it. They only give us accounts of money we give and still complain about not getting enough," says a sports ministry official.

The government has now directed the Comptroller and Auditor General to audit accounts of all federations getting grants of over Rs 1 crore a year.

The sports ministry is going to have a system of relegation and promotion. The disciplines are divided under the heads priority, general and others. "Depending on the results we will demote or promote disciplines. This will affect their grants and funds," says a sports ministry source.

The solution, some say, is to make the sports bodies more professional like in Australia and England. While there is government involvement in these countries, they have ensured that the federations are not only accountable, but also transparent. The English sports federations get funding from the national lottery while the Australian Sports Council has a clear business plan. Says Randhir Singh: "There is no such thing as a professional or non-professional administration. You can possibly have a chief executive for day-to-day affairs, but you need to have an elected group to run the organisation."

There have to be changes in India’s sports system, but it requires political will. Otherwise, we will have to remain content with a lone Olympic medal now and then."