By Nantoo Banerjee
India, the world’s most populous country and seventh largest by geographical size, has historically underutilized sports as a tool for international influence. Sports diplomacy uses athletic events and figures as soft power instruments to build trust, bridge political divides, and shape global perceptions. More than 100 nations now leverage sports strategies to bypass rigid diplomatic blockades, turning competitions into a game changer for international relations. While cricket functions as an informal diplomatic lever covering mainly a handful of former British colonies, a broader systemic neglect of multi-sport ecosystems, grassroots infrastructure, and Olympic disciplines has limited India’s global soft power potential. Cricket monoculture is a key factor behind the oversight. It killed most other earlier sporting initiatives, including hockey and football.
India was the most successful country in Olympic field hockey history, winning 8 gold, 1 silver, and 4 bronze medals. The men’s team won six straight gold medals from 1928 to 1956, plus additional golds in 1964 and 1980. Today, the Indian men’s national field hockey team is ranked lowly at the 8th position in the world. In 1928, India won its first Olympic gold medal by beating the Netherlands 3–0, led by legendary goal-scorer Dhyan Chand. India defeated Great Britain 4–0 in the final to claim its first-ever gold as an independent nation in 1948. The men’s field hockey team secured their eighth Olympic gold medal in 1980 by defeating Spain 4–3 in a tight final.
The 1950s and 1960s were the golden era of Indian football, during which the team was a dominant force in Asia and earned the nickname “Brazil of Asia”. India last played in the Rome Olympics in 1960. The Indian men’s football team won gold twice at the Asian Games: first in 1951 in New Delhi (defeating Iran 1–0) and second in 1962 in Jakarta (defeating South Korea 2–1). At the 1956 Melbourne Olympics, India finished fourth and became the first Asian team to reach the Olympic semi-finals. Neville D’Souza scored a famous hat-trick against Australia in the quarter-finals. India finished as runners-up in the 1964 AFC Asian Cup, marking their best-ever performance in the tournament. Pradip (PK) Banerjee, Chuni Goswami, Tulsidas Balaram and Neville D’Souza were among the legendary Indian footballers during the period.
India qualified for and competed in the 1960 Summer Olympics in Rome, marking their last appearance in the Olympic football tournament. Drawn in a tough Group D, India put up a respectable fight: they narrowly lost 2-1 to Hungary, secured a memorable 1-1 draw against France, and lost 3-1 to Peru. At present, the Indian men’s national football team is placed 138th in the FIFA Men’s World Ranking. The decline of Indian men’s football on the global stage stems from deep-rooted structural, financial, and cultural missteps. While football remained popular only in a few Indian states such as Bengal, Kerala, Goa, and in the North East, mainly due to local passion, heavily-funded cricket quickly gripped the national fever. Media rights and sponsorships—led by properties like the IPL—anchored the bulk of commercial valuations. A cricket monoculture using intense commercial and public fixation left other sports underfunded, under-televised, and struggling for public recognition.
Today, India commands only around three percent of the global sports economy and ranks 18th in the Global Sport & Soft Power Index. Its total sports market is valued between $19 billion and $31 billion. India houses about 18 percent of the world’s population but yields a disproportionately smaller fraction of global sports revenue. Sports account for roughly 0.1 percent to 0.9 percent of India’s GDP, trailing far behind Western economies where sports constitute close to three percent. India allocates approximately 0.1 percent of its GDP to sports and physical activity. Direct central government budgetary spending via the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports hovers well below 0.08 percent of GDP, though the Union Budget allocation reached a record Rs.4,479.88 crore ($540 million approx.) for 2026–27. India’s total sports economy is valued at roughly $19 billion to $21 billion when factoring in broader manufacturing, equipment, participation, and commercial sectors, though core media and sponsorships account for over $2 billion. Cricket makes up roughly 89 percent of India’s total sports commercial and media revenue. Outside of cricket and a few individual medalists in shooting, wrestling, javelin, tennis and badminton, Olympic sports struggle for consistent funding.
India’s national spending on Olympic sports is significantly lower than that of China, the US, Japan, and South Korea, both in absolute budget terms and on a per capita basis. India allocates roughly $530 million (approx. ₹4,480 crore) for its annual sports ministry budget, whereas China’s state-led sports spending reaches tens of billions of dollars annually. China spends over $30 billion annually across central and provincial government schemes, outspending India by roughly 6 to 200 times depending on the specific tier of grassroots or elite funding measured. China’s per capita allocation is multiple times higher than India’s fraction of a dollar per person. In the US, public Olympic funding relies differently on private entities, corporate sponsorships, and donor-funded bodies like the US Olympic & Paralympic Committee (USOPC) rather than on a direct federal ministry, yet total commercial and private ecosystem spending dwarfs India’s outlay. Though geographically smaller, both Japan and Korea maintain structured, high per capita public and corporate funding that consistently yields dense medal returns relative to population size.
Unfortunately, India relies primarily on elite-focused interventions like the Target Olympic Podium Scheme (TOPS) and not using the sports route as a soft power to influence the world. A massive share of the broader national sports economy and private attention in India remains heavily skewed toward cricket rather than Olympic disciplines. India must broad-base its sports activity and raise sports spending to become a top sporting nation. Grassroots funding and non-cricket disciplines are facing significant underinvestment and systemic neglect compared to global powerhouses. The practice needs to change. India must aim to break into the top 10 sporting nations globally, transforming the country’s athletic ecosystem through structured grassroots development, increased financial backing, and upgraded sports science infrastructure to emerge as a global power house to influence the world. (IPA Service)
