Indian athletes don't get their due abroad

Laishram Sarita Devi's 0-3 defeat at the hands of South Korean rival Jina Park in the 60kg category semi-final of the Incheon Asian Games is not the first time contentious decisions have been seen in big games.

Boxing fans will recall the infamous title clash bout at the 1988 Seoul Olympics, when USA's Roy Jones Jr, who was leading 86-32 against his South Korean opponent Park Si-Hun after three rounds, lost the bout, after three out of five judges declared him the loser.

While Park apologised to Jones after his unexpected title triumph, it was found in an International Olympic Committee (IOC) probe that all three judges, who decided against Jones, were wined and dined by South Korean officials.

The IOC is yet to give a gold medal to Jones despite the fact that the boxer belongs to the US, a country that has a history of backing its athletes vigorously.

Similarly in Sarita's case, an overturn of the contentious verdict is highly unlikely. Soon after her loss, the Indian contingent lodged a protest against the referee, only to see it rejected.

To take the matter further, the IOA or the newly elected national body - Boxing India - will have to fight a costly legal battle for an overturn at the Court of Arbitrary for Sports in Laussane, Switzerland.

That could be a futile exercise since the CAS generally doesn't overrule decisions of referee/judge panels of International sports bodies.

Indian boxers have witnessed unexpected decisions in international competitions in recent times. Part of the reason is because Indian referee/judges are under suspension and hence absent from international competitions since the last two years.

The presence of a referee and/or judges from a country enhances its clout in sports competitions.

With the suspension on the Indian Federation partially lifted post-elections last month, our referee and judges can officiate in competitions, ensuring "injustices" like Sarita's could be minimised in future.