In the football World Cup, an Indian corner on a foreign field
Every time a football World Cup draws close, a tale is retold, with new embellishments. Back in 1950, India qualified for a World Cup but had to forgo the chance as the players, used to playing barefoot, weren’t used to wearing boots. The story is a reminder, however, of days when India was on the global football map. These days, the country takes vicarious pride in celebrating those of Indian heritage representing other nations on the field. Like Qatar’s Tahsin Mohammed Jamshid, whose father once aspired to play for India but could not find the ecosystem his son grew up in. He packed up his dreams and went to West Asia, like many of his generation in northern Kerala. Or New Zealand’s Sarpreet Singh, whose parents migrated from Jalandhar. Or those of scattered Indian descent like Australia’s Nishan Velupillay and Congo’s Samuel Moutoussamy.
India is not producing high-class footballers or qualifying for global tournaments not because of genetics or mindset, or even a sporting culture, but because of the infrastructure — the lack of a systematically meritocratic environment, of a robust league. In a conducive backdrop, India’s football, too, can grow. But until recently, the Indian Super League was shrouded in uncertainty; the I-League is in a shambles; the old nurseries have dried up.
Countries once far behind India have raced past it and are now light years ahead. But Indian football, which FIFA bosses like to call a sleeping giant, can still wake up. It requires vision, planning, coaching efficiency, and rigorous execution. Just easing the passport rules will not bear long-lasting results. Until then, however, the 1950 story will be retold as a tale of regret and a hollow boast.
- 1Sports governance in India has increasingly drawn constitutional and judicial attention, with courts intervening in federations under their writ jurisdiction in Articles 32 and 226. In 2022 the Supreme Court appointed a Committee of Administrators for the All India Football Federation, a step that risked a FIFA ban for 'third-party interference' before fresh elections resolved it. Sport falls largely to the States under the Seventh Schedule, but central schemes and the proposed national sports governance framework show growing Union involvement.
- 2India hosts the world's largest diaspora, estimated by the United Nations at around eighteen million people, a vast pool that other footballing nations have tapped. Yet India's policy choices limit this: the Overseas Citizen of India card confers residency-type rights but not citizenship. Comparing how Qatar, New Zealand and Australia integrate Indian-origin talent illustrates the link between migration policy, soft power and sporting success.
- 3A central legal barrier is that India does not permit dual citizenship; under Article 9 of the Constitution, voluntarily acquiring foreign citizenship ends Indian citizenship, and the Citizenship Act of 1955 governs the rest. FIFA's eligibility rules generally require national citizenship to represent a country, so diaspora players holding foreign passports cannot simply switch to India. This explains the editorial's scepticism that merely 'easing passport rules' could deliver results.
- 4India's persistently low FIFA ranking, hovering around the 120s to 130s, reflects decades of under-investment relative to nations that have surged ahead. Government programmes such as Khelo India and the Target Olympic Podium Scheme channel funds into sport, but football's grassroots leagues remain weak. The social return on robust sporting infrastructure, from youth employment to public health, makes this an economic as well as a sporting question.