The union sports secretary Injeti Srinivas clarified on Saturday that Saketh Myneni was “no less deserving” than Rohan Bopanna after being selected for the Arjuna award despite questions being raised about the merit of his inclusion.
There has had been controversy after Bopanna’s name was not sent by the All India Tennis Association for the honour. The 2017 French Open Mixed Doubles champion felt slighted as Myneni’s gold and silver at the 2014 Incheon Asian Games got more traction for being awarded with the Arjuna Award.
“In tennis, we already had an application [in Myneni], who is by no means less deserving and one can’t make one’s own judgement [as to who is deserving and who’s not]. [Myneni] made India proud at the 2014 Asian Games. That performance got him marks and his case was entitled to be considered,” Srinivas shared.
Srinivas, who is also the director general of the Sports Authority of India, admitted that Bopanna’s achievements weren’t ignored but due processes had been followed.
“Rohan Bopanna’s achievements, nobody can ignore that. He has had the highest achievements but there is a process. So somebody has to nominate you, you need to sign an application, whether that system is best, is debatable,” Srinivas observed.
“For example, in case of Padma awards, you don’t send applications. It’s more by selection and here you make an application, give evidence of your achievements, that gets examined very carefully and a decision is taken. So in Bopanna’s case, there was no nomination and there was no application,” Srinivas clarified.
Srinivas also admitted that no system could be fully objective, but that there was always room for improvement.
“As much as we try, it is practically impossible to make the current system totally objective. If we could have such a system, then you would not need a committee. You would just rank them on the basis of marks assigned to them and declare the winners,” he said.
“Do you know any award that was given by government and withdrawn by the court? If not, which is the case, then it’s a good enough proof that we have a robust and fair system in place.”
On Friday, 2006 Commonwealth Games gold-medallist Akhil Kumar had raised questions about the credibility of Dronacharya Awards with one athlete giving multiple recommendations.
“Look, the rule that we have for Dronacharya award is that any national coach, who spends 240 days a year in any national camp, is eligible for Dronacharya Award nomination,” stated Srinivas, trying to put the matter in perspective.
He went on add, “Now, in a career span of an athlete, he comes across various coaches at various points in his career. Now it also becomes a moral and social obligation for that sportsperson and the sportsperson ends up recommending multiple names. Am I saying that’s correct? Certainly not.”
Srinivas also countered the recommendation of the Prime Minister-appointed Olympic Task Force of having more professionals in the SAI rather than bureaucrats. A career bureaucrat himself, Srinivas observed, “Certainly, you need to [have] professionals. But then who is a professional? A professional is a person, who has the domain expertise, who is capable of delivering what he has to deliver. There’s no argument on that.”
Finally, he went on state, “But to generalise on bureaucrats and professionals, I will not be able to answer that. There could be lot of bureaucrats with domain expertise, who know what they are supposed to do and deliver.”
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!