How to better govern sport

The suspension of India by FIFA underlines deeper problems with sport administration

The decision by football’s world governing body FIFA to ban the All India Football Federation (AIFF) puts Indian teams out of international competitions, and jeopardises the U-17 women’s World Cup scheduled to be held in the country in October. It also puts the spotlight on larger problems surrounding sports administration in India, and several well-intentioned but confused attempts to resolve them.

Multiple international organisations — FIFA and the International Olympic Council among them — have been accused in the past of pushing for better governance among members even as they fought to protect entrenched interests.  (AFP File Photo)

All sport across the world was run on an amateur self-regulating model for most of the last two centuries. It was a time when patronising sport was a philanthropic exercise. But as modern sport became a multi-billion-dollar venture, with global audiences and customers, and high stakes for players and patrons, it became important to bring in professionalism and transparency, and to ensure an end to monopolies. Some federations self-corrected, but many simply introduced cosmetic corporate governance norms in their bitterly protected domains. Multiple international organisations — FIFA and the International Olympic Council among them — have been accused in the past of pushing for better governance among members even as they fought to protect entrenched interests. This is not to say the system does not work at all. And the pitch has been queered in what is essentially a battle between one group pushing for “good governance” — in India this sometimes takes the form of court-appointed administrators — and another for “autonomy from outside influences”, and both believing the two are mutually exclusive.

For Indian sport, which has been a laggard on reforms with a handful of administrators ruling federations for decades despite poor results, the need to clean house was important. The national sports code, which capped tenures and brought in some fair play rules in elections, was an essential step in ensuring change. But in many cases, it just brought in another set of people who got caught up in the boardroom rather than on the field of play. So while world bodies see the shift as an assault on their domain, and invoke bans and suspensions, the problem really is not of the system but of intention. Running sport is about putting the focus on players — in terms of facilities, opportunities, training — rather than on somehow staying in power. Resolving the FIFA conundrum is critical given its urgency, and the Indian government is in talks with the world body to find a way out. But the larger way forward is to find a balance between autonomy and good governance, and understand that both are possible.