Interview with Pullela Gopichand: "There were people who said that I couldn't be a coach since I had my own fair share of issues."

Gopichand receiving the Dronacharya award in 2009 from then President Pratibha Patil

Out of your four awards, which one gave you the most satisfaction?

Probably the Arjuna Award, being the first one. But I’ve never really looked at awards in that way, probably since I got the awards consistently – the first one in 1999, then 2000, then 2005, and finally 2009. Since I didn’t have to wait for any award for too long, maybe that’s the reason I don’t work for them. Of course, when you look at them, you feel very proud and happy, and if I hadn’t got them I probably would have been a little demoralized, but it has also been a good push for me.

The Dronacharya Award was important for me to establish myself as a coach. Especially as a former player who was good and is now able to also produce good players – from that standpoint it was important.

The All England would perhaps be my biggest prize; the Olympic medal for Saina was also a pretty big moment. Having said that, government recognition, especially when you put it on paper can be very helpful; there are rewards for the academy, for the coach and also for the players.

In India and elsewhere, the All England has a bigger aura than even the World Championships. Is there any reason for that, because even internationally the Championships are held in lower esteem?

See, the World Championships came into existence in 1991, while the All England has a history. When you look at old timers, the All England is the only tournament. So for many of us in India, we would relate badminton to Prakash Sir’s victory at the All England. For us, the All England is big and today, the Olympics for me would be number one, as also for many others. The World Championships perhaps is not so big for another reason – it’s held almost every year instead of once every 3 or 4 years. I wish they would do it at least every second year, or maybe every second year after the Olympics.

The All England on the other hand has a history and people relate to it. That’s the reason why the All England is a bigger draw in our country. I wish the World Championships was there every four years, so that once you’re a champion, you’re world champion for 4 years. Every year there is one, and also you give a bronze medal for third place; it doesn’t really carry that same value because it happens too often.

So you’re saying that today’s players still consider the All England and the Olympics to be the most coveted of the tournaments?

I don’t know, really. The Olympics, yes, for me is definitely number one by a huge margin. And I think most of them also consider that as important.

Another challenge for you as a coach must have been to manage the commercial interests around these players. How do you manage these stars?

It is difficult; there is a gap in terms of thinking, which is difficult to bridge. You cannot run away from reality, and it is not just a player issue but also a societal issue. So even today, when I go out to a restaurant, if something feels too expensive and not worth it, I don’t’ encourage buying it.

But I think it is more of a generational thing, so I don’t really intervene too much on that side and believe that since each of us is different, I leave them to make their own choices.

What I think is good is that at least the Sainas and the Sindhus don’t look at it that way. Saina as such is a very ‘want to win’ kind of girl; whether it is money or whether it is tournaments, she wants more and more. Which is good, that greed is good; she is willing to push herself more and more, that is why you see her playing one Super series after the other. And that’s good, because it keeps her motivated.

So they’re not happy just winning the small ones, they’re always looking at the big tournaments.

Will we see players lasting beyond the age of 30 in the near future, as we see in other sports?

Perhaps, but in India, our society is a little different with family playing an important role. So I don’t know about motivation levels after 30. And I think prize money does not become an issue unlike in Europe and other countries.

It depends though, because the new generation might look at it differently. For us, it was primarily about playing for pride, but for youngsters today, it could be about the money. So they will probably look at it that way. When I lost, I felt I had lost a little pride, which is why I retired after the All England.

If I was playing for money, I probably would have continued playing. When you play for money, you play from contract to contract. Maybe you play a 1-year contract, then you play for IBL, where you get a few lakh rupees, and equipment sponsors then pitches in with some. So if you play for a year, you make around 30 lakh – more than 2 lakh a month – which is pretty good money. 10 years ago that wasn’t the case, but that’s the scenario today. So these players might behave differently from the way that we did.

How’s the relationship with Yonex?

They supported me at a time when nobody else did, so I respect them a lot and that’s why I don’t compete with the new brands.

You mentioned the formats. Earlier we had best of 5, now we have best of 3, earlier we had 15, now we have 21. For you personally, which was the best format?

I personally liked 21, because it probably tested the player a whole lot more. 15 was too direct, too much of endurance involved, and wasn’t spectator friendly.