Exactly a week ago, last Sunday, September 24, a quite startling demonstration took place in the United States. Player after player in the National Football League (NFL), the biggest and richest sports league in the world, objected to a statement made by their President Donald Trump over the issue of respect for their flag. Some of the players 'took a knee' - that is went down on one knee in protest - during the playing of the US National Anthem before a game. Others didn't emerge from the dugout until the anthem had finished playing, more locked arms with each other along with support staff and team owners.
It had started with one of Trump's weekly offerings on September 22, when he said he would like NFL owners to take note of the athlete who "disrespects our flag" and get that "son of a b****" off the field" and thereby "fired."
The 'disrespect to the flag' requires a bit of background. In September 2016, during NFL pre-season, Colin Kaepernick, a 28-year-old San Francisco 49ers quarterback first sat down during the playing of the US National Anthem and then in his next game, went down on one knee. He wanted to show his support of the Black Lives Matter movement and said, "I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way."
As the season rumbled on, Kaepernick was both supported by many, including athletes across sport, military veterans and policemen and as stridently opposed by others. His jersey was the top selling across teams in the NFL and he was also voted as the NFL's most disliked player.
A few weeks ago, NFL defensive lineman Michael Bennett had talked about being harassed by the Las Vegas police. Yet nothing had drawn the NFL playing community to stand together in such a scale than Trumps contemptuous words - son of a b**** . Basketball giants LeBron James and Stephen Curry also added their voices with several teams from schools and colleges across the USA doing the same.
Kaepernick's support of the Black Lives Matter movement had, during the course of a weekend, morphed into a protest against Trump's language and his narrowing of the definition of patriotism/ nationalism and devotion to flag and anthem.
India has seen its own redefinitions of nationalism/ patriotism/ flag-&-anthem-worship in recent years. It is however, extremely unlikely that India's sporting community would in in any way challenge or even question, the popular definitions of what nationalism/ patriotism stands for. The reasons are many: athletes are by and large apolitical, at least in public. Their lives are defined by expressing and executing athletic prowess, their identities are tied into representing a larger 'nation', popularly symbolised through flag and anthem.
Besides every Indian athlete, regardless of whether high-profile cricketer or unknown judoka, is very dependent on the government and the political establishment of the time. For the cricketer, it could be access to state honours, preferential treatment out of legal difficulties and future favours - say, the acquisition of land to set up academies, schools or other business ventures. The judoka is even more dependent during his or her career, for government assistance through funding and facilities - coaching and training and solid support in case of arguments with ruling bodies.
The United States sporting ecosystem is far more sophisticated, wealthier and free of dependence on or involvement of the government. This gives athletes far greater leeway to examine or contest political power should they choose to do so, like Kaepernick did. Athletes like him remain rare, because in American pro sport, the men controlling levers of power and athletes' careers can still financially cripple lives. (Like they did to Muhammad Ali in the 1960s, stripping him of his professional licence for refusing to fight in Vietnam.) At the end of the 2016 season, Kaepernick opted out of his 49ers contract and this season, has not been signed by any of the NFL's teams.
It is not that Indian athletes do not take a stand on larger social issues, but it is usually for good, government-backed social causes - for the girl child, or anti-tobacco, safe driving etc. Maybe they just don't want to get caught up in it during their careers or maybe it affects their commercial deals.
Former Australian captain Ian Chappell made an important point during Moeen Ali's "Save Gaza" wrist band ruckus. Chappell, who is one of Australia's special representatives for the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, pointed out that an athlete should pick larger socio-political causes with care, ideally after their careers. Or else they would have dozens of people and causes, all valid, trying to get their attention and take their eye off the ball. Later, in post-retirement life, Chappell believed, they will be able to contribute more meaningfully.
There a few cases of Indian sportsmen - not directly involved in politics - standing up for a social/ political issue larger than themselves or their narrowish athletic universe: in 2008, footballer Bhaichung Bhutia turned down the invitation to carry the Beijing Olympic torch on its journey through India as a gesture of his solidarity with the Tibetan cause.
In 2012, Yuvraj Singh and Suresh Raina were vocal in expressing their anguish over the horrifying rape of young medical student Jyoti Singh on December 16 in Delhi. Earlier this year, Gautam Gambhir called out against social media trolls attacking Delhi university student Gurmehar Kaur for her anti-war stance and later promised to finance the education of the daughter of a Kashmiri policeman killed by militants. Wrestler Yogeshwar Dutt, unlike other sportspeople, is unafraid of offering an opinion about social and political issues on his twitter handle.
Yes, Indian athletes are always careful of sharing their opinion even on controversial subjects concerning their sport. Many fear official recrimination or an adverse impact on their playing careers or their future commercial opportunities coming to a screeching halt. This habit usually lasts well past their playing careers. For example, other than Bishan Bedi, it's hard to remember retired cricketers taking a stand or expressing their opinion on any prickly public issue.
Yet, even with so many pre-conditions, there are some vital even if politically-neutral issues that athletes and their social media managers could easily take on. It may be too much to expect tennis players and badminton players to metaphorically "take a knee" for a National Sports Code which could basically sack the head of their federation. Even if that code gives athletes greater representation and bargaining power in the administration of their sport. Yes, that's how tight straitjackets are.
But just thinking aloud, how about something real? Something that they must encounter on a daily basis? Say, off the cuff - the vile language used on social media? Not the usual sports fans "banter", just the proliferation of profanity and bigoted/ racist/ misogynistic comments that people fling on fellow athletes, winners or losers, rivals, teammates even just fans from rival countries?
Something like Virat Kohli did for his girlfriend Anushka Sharma - but only for a wider section of people on Twitter or Facebook? With a hashtag that passed on a message to their fans - if not #washyourmouth, then at least #notfromourfans. What's the worst that can happen? A bit more trolling? The best case scenario? The devoted 'fans' and 'supporters' to take a breath and think a rational thought.
Often in the US, athletes are told to "stick to sport" by a section of their fans who want to disengage from the real world and its issues that make them uncomfortable. Well, in India, athletes tend to "stick to sport" and while we understand why, maybe they could take the first few steps beyond their boundaries. Then they would understand the scale of their public power.