THE furore and public debate subsequent to Milkha Singh's refusal to accept the Lifetime achievement Arjuna Award still continues unabated. For those who have interacted with him after his refusal and for those who watched him on 'The Big Fight', a debate anchored by Rajdeep Sardesai on Star News, the pent up emotion and sense of being ridiculed which the 'Flying Sikh' exhibited clearly justifies his decision. When viewed with stark objectivity, his gutsy decision has thrown open the much larger problem plaguing our Award selection process. And it is for highlighting and revealing this issue that we need to thank people like Milkha Singh.
There have been only two people who have refused Government awards. One, of course, is Milkha Singh while the other was the highly vocal and intense Michael Ferreira.
In 1981, shortly after his second World amateur title, Ferreira was offered the Padma Shri by the Government.
His reply to the telegram informing him of his selection for the Padma Shri explained the philosophy behind his refusal.
"My achievements in billiards are in no way lesser than that of Sunil Gavaskar in cricket. If he is given the Padma Bhushan, then I also deserve the Padma Bhushan. The Government must treat all sport equally."
His reasoning was logical. The public can make one game and one person more popular than others, but the Government should not get swayed by the popularity of a sport and must remain objective in selecting Awardees and honouring its sportspersons.
It requires enormous courage and conviction of purpose to refuse Government honour. Only people with the weight of achievement like that of Milkha Singh and Ferreira can take such a bold decision.
In fact Ferreira's refusal was far more daring as he was at the height of his billiards career at that time. Two decades ago his decision perhaps induced some introspection in the Ministry of Sports and into the Committee looking into the selection of Awardees.
To the Government's credit, it offered him the Padma Bhushan in 1983 after he won his third World amateur title.
Twenty years later, there was an urgent need to force the Committee to look within and come up with some reforms which would make the selection procedure for the Arjuna Awards more transparent, effective and unbiased.
The sporting fraternity needs to thank people like Michael Ferreira and Milkha Singh for their boldness and for their ability to raise larger issues in our sporting environment.
The fact is that with increased cash being offered to the Award winners and a host of other privileges like free train travel, out-of-turn housing allotment etc., the sportsperson is also active in lobbying for the Awards. I am not suggesting that there should be no cash incentive for the Arjuna Awards. In fact, I would be only too happy if the cash award is increased to Rs. 10 lakh. In a profession which does not reward too many of its participants, there is an urgent requirement to uplift the lifestyle, remunerations and cash incentives for those who strive for years in achieving excellence in their respective discipline.
So please increase cash incentive, please offer free air travel next, but also please ensure that you keep the relevant sportsperson out of the selection process. Do not make him apply for an award. Let only the Federations send the list of achievements of various athletes to the Selection Committee. Let there not be recommendations by Federations. Lay down objective parameters for the Award selection. This profession, unlike others like film, art, law etc., lends itself to being judged in black and white and with total objectivity. Why do not the powers that be use that objectivity? An athlete's performances can be gauged by looking at a piece of paper.
If there was objectivity then we would not have had cases of the Lifetime achievement award being given to so-called athletes who have allegedly never consistently participated in National level events, let alone International events. There can be few actions more unsporting than getting the Award through hectic lobbying and political contacts. The unsporting act is committed both by the person lobbying and by the person who grants the favour.
The fact is that the Ministry of Sports has put its foot in its mouth this time. Hopefully, the public debate that Milkha Singh's refusal has generated will encourage some soul-searching and hopefully the selection process will become more transparent and objective for future generations.
Let the Award actually represent a Lifetime of achievement and not a lifetime of lobbying.
Comments
SHARE