NEW DELHI, Oct 13: The Union Sports Ministry and National Sports Federations are set to review India’s performance at the 2026 Asian Games, with the meeting expected to examine the reasons behind the country’s reduced medal tally and identify areas requiring improvement ahead of future international competitions.
India finished fourth in the overall standings at the Aichi-Nagoya Asian Games in Japan, securing 85 medals, comprising 21 gold, 27 silver and 37 bronze. Although the contingent maintained its position among Asia’s leading sporting nations, the final tally was 21 medals fewer than India’s record-breaking 106-medal performance at the 2023 Hangzhou Games.
The review comes amid questions about whether the country’s growing investment in elite sports is translating into consistent results across disciplines. According to reports published ahead of the meeting, officials intend to assess performances by individual athletes and national federations, the effectiveness of preparation programmes and the impact of injuries on India’s campaign.
The discussions are also expected to cover expenditure under the government’s Target Olympics Podium Scheme (TOPS), which provides financial and other support to athletes considered capable of winning medals at major international events.
Medal tally puts preparations under scrutiny
India’s fourth-place finish demonstrated that the country continues to make progress in several sporting disciplines. However, the decline from the previous Asian Games has prompted officials to look beyond the overall ranking and examine how individual sports performed.
The 85 medals included strong contributions from shooting, archery, athletics, wrestling and other disciplines. At the same time, several athletes who had entered the competition with medal expectations were unable to reach the podium.
The difference between the 2023 and 2026 totals is significant because the Hangzhou campaign had established a new benchmark for Indian sport. That achievement raised expectations that the country could sustain its momentum and expand its medal-winning capacity at subsequent continental competitions.
The latest result has therefore renewed attention on the quality of training, international exposure, coaching support, sports science and competition planning available to athletes.
A medal tally alone cannot fully explain the strengths and weaknesses of a national sports programme. The level of competition varies between disciplines, while injuries, draws, individual match-ups and the form of opponents can influence outcomes. Nevertheless, a detailed review can help determine whether disappointing performances resulted from circumstances beyond an athlete’s control or from shortcomings that could have been addressed before the Games.
Officials are expected to examine such factors while assessing the performance of athletes and federations.
Questions over funding and athlete preparation
One of the major issues expected to feature in the discussions is the utilisation of public funds for elite athlete preparation.
Reports ahead of the review indicated that the Sports Ministry had spent more than Rs 700 crore preparing athletes for the Asian Games over a three-year period. Officials have expressed concern about the return on investment where athletes receiving substantial support failed to achieve expected results.
The proposed assessment of TOPS funding is particularly important because the scheme is designed to help India’s leading athletes prepare for the Olympics and other major international competitions. Support can include training arrangements, equipment, coaching, overseas exposure and other requirements related to performance.
The objective of such assistance is not simply to provide financial resources but to create conditions in which athletes can compete effectively against the best in the world.
A review of expenditure could help establish whether the support provided was appropriate to each athlete’s needs, whether training programmes were implemented as planned and whether the selected competitions offered sufficient preparation.
However, funding decisions also need to account for the different requirements of individual sports. An athlete in shooting may need access to specialised equipment and regular international competition, while a track athlete may depend on strength conditioning, recovery facilities and technical coaching. Team sports require a different approach involving tactical preparation, coordination and competition time.
A meaningful assessment would therefore need to examine the relationship between expenditure and the specific demands of each discipline rather than relying solely on medal counts.
Injuries emerge as a key concern
Injuries are another issue that has attracted attention ahead of the review.
Reports citing ministry sources indicated concern about athletes declaring injuries after reaching the Games. Such developments can disrupt competition plans, particularly when substantial resources have already been invested in travel, accommodation, training and support staff.
Injuries are an unavoidable part of high-performance sport, and their occurrence does not automatically indicate a failure in preparation. The challenge for sports administrators is to distinguish unavoidable setbacks from situations in which medical monitoring, workload management or rehabilitation could have reduced the risk.
Athletes competing at elite level often face demanding training schedules, and the period immediately before a major event can be particularly difficult. Training too lightly may affect competitive readiness, while excessive workloads can increase the likelihood of physical problems.
Sports science teams, coaches and medical personnel must therefore work together to monitor fatigue, manage recovery and assess whether an athlete is ready to compete.
The review could provide an opportunity to examine how these responsibilities are divided between federations, coaches, medical teams and government-supported training centres.
It may also help determine whether injury information is communicated early enough for officials to adjust travel plans, replace unavailable athletes where regulations permit, or reconsider medal expectations.
Shooting and badminton under examination
The performances of individual disciplines are also likely to receive close attention.
Shooting was among India’s major medal contributors, with 15 medals reported during the Games. Yet officials may still examine whether the discipline could have converted more opportunities into gold medals and whether preparation can be improved further.
India has invested considerable effort in developing its shooting programme, including access to specialised facilities and international competitions. The next step is to determine how consistently that preparation translates into podium finishes when athletes face pressure at major events.
Badminton, meanwhile, reportedly returned only one bronze medal, a result that raised questions given India’s established presence in the sport.
The discipline has produced major international champions for India, and expectations remain high for players competing in singles and doubles events. However, the strength of Asian badminton means that even established players face intense competition from countries with deep pools of elite talent.
A review of badminton should consider the standard of opponents, match preparation, fitness, player availability and the development of younger athletes. It should also examine whether the domestic competition structure is providing sufficient opportunities to test emerging players against high-quality opposition.
The contrasting outcomes in shooting and badminton illustrate why a sport-by-sport assessment is necessary. A large medal contribution does not mean a discipline has no weaknesses, while a disappointing total does not necessarily mean its development programme has failed.
Federations face responsibility for long-term planning
National Sports Federations play a central role in identifying talent, appointing coaches, organising competitions and preparing athletes for international events. Their decisions can directly affect how effectively public support reaches competitors.
The review is expected to examine federation-level planning alongside individual results. This could include how athletes were selected, whether training schedules were followed and how effectively coaches and support personnel coordinated their work.
A key challenge is maintaining continuity between major tournaments. Preparation for a continental competition should contribute to longer-term development rather than becoming an isolated campaign focused only on a single medal tally.
Federations also need to create pathways through which younger athletes can progress from junior competitions to senior international events. A system that relies too heavily on a small group of experienced competitors may struggle when injuries, declining form or retirement affect those athletes.
Talent identification, regular domestic competition and specialist coaching can help broaden the pool of medal contenders.
At the same time, athletes need clear performance targets and transparent selection policies. These measures can help ensure that support is allocated according to sporting potential, demonstrated progress and the requirements of each discipline.
Building on the successes
Despite the disappointment surrounding the lower medal total, India’s fourth-place finish should not obscure the achievements of athletes who won medals or reached the latter stages of their events.
The country secured 21 gold medals and maintained a substantial presence across several disciplines. Those results provide a foundation on which sports administrators can build.
The priority now is to identify the practices that worked well and determine whether they can be replicated elsewhere. Successful training systems, effective coaching arrangements and well-managed athlete support programmes may offer lessons for disciplines that struggled.
The review could also help set clearer priorities for future competitions, including the next Asian Games and the Olympic cycle.
India’s sporting ambitions depend not only on spending more money but also on using resources efficiently, supporting athletes consistently and developing stronger institutional accountability.
The outcome of the review will be important if it leads to practical changes in preparation, medical support, coaching and federation management. For athletes, the ultimate test will be whether those changes improve competitive readiness and help convert potential into results at the next major international event.