Indian badminton nationwide coach Pullela Gopichand has ignited a debate along with his comment that middle-class households ought to rethink pursuing sports activities critically. His assertion drew blended reactions — whereas some disagreed, others, together with investor Dilip Kumar, backed his viewpoint.
In a submit on X (previously Twitter), Kumar harassed the cruel actuality {of professional} sports activities. “Gopi is correct. The truth is brutal — lower than 1% of aspiring athletes make it huge, and even those that do are left with little safety as soon as their careers are over,” he wrote. Evaluating sports activities to startups, he added, “Sports activities, like startups, have an influence regulation distribution — 10% of gamers make 90% of the cash. Everybody else is a statistic.”
Kumar identified that underdog success tales create a deceptive narrative. “We like to learn and watch the underdog story — the child from nowhere who makes it to the highest. However that’s survivorship bias. For each one success, there are tens of 1000’s who educated simply as onerous however obtained nothing. The actual query is: why does sports activities need to be a raffle?” he mentioned.
He famous that outdoors the highest 1%, most athletes wrestle. “You don’t get sponsorships, you don’t have monetary safety, and as soon as your profession ends — often in your late 20s or early 30s — you’re left scrambling for what’s subsequent,” he added.
Kumar contrasted India’s sports activities system with developed nations the place structured leagues, faculty scholarships, and post-career alternatives present stability. “Should you don’t turn into an Olympic champion, you may nonetheless earn a residing as a coach, analyst, coach, or minor league participant. The system doesn’t discard you the second you’re not within the high 1%,” he mentioned.
He in contrast this to different profession paths, arguing that an engineer who fails at a startup can nonetheless discover a job, however a failed athlete typically has no backup. “That’s why in most nations with out robust sports activities ecosystems, success in sports activities correlates with wealth. You’ll be able to’t afford to be an athlete except you may afford to lose,” he acknowledged.
Kumar mentioned the issue lies within the system, not the athletes. “Proper now, telling a poor child to pursue sports activities is like telling them to purchase lottery tickets as an funding technique. Till we modify that, Gopi’s phrases will stay true. And that’s a failure — not of the athletes, however of the system.”
He emphasised {that a} robust sports activities construction advantages society past simply producing champions. “An excellent sports activities system doesn’t simply create champions — it creates a nation of resilient, disciplined, and aggressive individuals. And that’s the inspiration of actual improvement,” he wrote.
Drawing a comparability with cricket, Kumar highlighted its well-established ecosystem. “It has a full-stack ecosystem — academies, home leagues, sponsorships, and post-retirement careers. A child doesn’t need to be wealthy to begin. They don’t need to win a World Cup to make a residing. There’s a pipeline — district cricket, Ranji, IPL, commentary, teaching, endorsements. Even a mid-tier participant can earn nicely,” he mentioned.
In distinction, he identified the dearth of comparable buildings in different sports activities. “Now take a look at each different sport. The place’s the construction? The place’s the fallback? Should you don’t make it to the Olympics, you disappear. Cricket didn’t turn into an business accidentally. It was constructed. The identical must occur for all different sports activities,” he wrote.
Kumar concluded with a name for systemic reform: “Not everybody needs to be a gold medalist — similar to not each cricketer performs for India. However they need to nonetheless have a viable profession.”
