India wants to become one of the world’s biggest sporting markets. It is bidding for the 2036 Olympics, has been awarded the Commonwealth Games 2030 and is increasingly positioning itself as a destination for global sporting events. But there is a problem that stadium construction, bigger sponsorship deals and packed arenas cannot solve on their own, the problem of the air outside them.
Danish badminton star Anders Antonsen has put that problem back in the spotlight after saying he would be willing to pay the mandatory $5,000 fine again rather than play the India Open in New Delhi if the tournament remains in the winter pollution window. Antonsen had skipped the India Open earlier this year because of Delhi’s air quality and paid the fine imposed for missing the BWF Super 750 event.
“Every year, when I see the calendar, I am like, okay, they are just instantly giving me a $5,000 fine,” Antonsen said when asked about the possibility of playing the India Open again. “The pollution during that season is pretty insane. I don’t think it is the right move for the BWF to host the tournament in January or February in Delhi.”
For a country trying to build a larger sports economy, the number is worth noticing. $5,000 is not an enormous cost for a player of Antonsen’s stature. The fact that he is prepared to absorb it rather than compete in Delhi is what makes the episode significant.
At the ongoing BWF World Championships in Delhi, however, the Dane praised the conditions and said the air was fine at the time of the tournament. “As far as the conditions go, the hall is pretty and practice facilities are good,” he said. “I pulled out of the India Open due to air pollution. I know there is a big difference in pollution season by season. Right now, it’s fine.”
The issue is not whether international athletes want to come to India. Increasingly, they do. The question is whether India can guarantee the conditions under which they are willing to come back.
India’s sports ambition is getting bigger
India’s sporting ambitions have expanded well beyond cricket.
The country has hosted the FIFA U-17 World Cup, Commonwealth Games, Asian Games, major badminton tournaments, Formula 1 in the past and a growing calendar of international events. It has also built a sizeable domestic sports economy around the IPL and franchise leagues in football, kabaddi, badminton, basketball, hockey and other sports.
The next step is bigger. India has been chosen to host the 2030 Commonwealth Games, while its bid for the 2036 Olympics represents a much larger ambition. The government and sporting bodies have also spoken repeatedly about turning India into a global sporting hub.
That creates an unusual contradiction. The more international sport India attracts, the more frequently its environmental weaknesses become part of the sporting conversation.
A tournament can have a world-class indoor arena, sophisticated broadcast facilities, global sponsors and thousands of spectators. But athletes still have to travel through the city, train, warm up and recover in the surrounding environment. For endurance athletes, the problem is even more direct.
This is not the first time athletes have struggled with Delhi’s air
Cricket provided perhaps the most dramatic example in 2017.
During the third Test between India and Sri Lanka at what was then the Feroz Shah Kotla, Sri Lankan players wore anti-pollution masks while fielding. Play was interrupted as players struggled with the conditions, with Suranga Lakmal and India’s Mohammed Shami both vomiting on the field. Reuters reported that Lakmal had to leave the field after becoming sick, while Sri Lanka coach Nic Pothas said his players were in discomfort.
“Our people in discomfort, I think it speaks for itself,” Pothas said at the time as per a Reuters report. He also captured the dilemma faced by professional athletes.
“The rest we cannot control. We’re professionals, we stopped talking about it, it is not going to make any difference talking about it,” Pothas said. “The bottom line is we got to play a test match.”
The episode became a global talking point because it was difficult to separate the sporting contest from the conditions in which it was being played.
The BCCI subsequently acknowledged that pollution needed to be considered when scheduling matches in Delhi during winter. Acting BCCI secretary Amitabh Choudhary said the scheduling issue “can be considered in view of the situation encountered” during the Test. The problem, however, has not disappeared.
The economics of an athlete saying no
Antonsen’s decision exposes a part of the sports economy that is rarely discussed. A global tournament is built around a chain of commercial commitments. Broadcasters pay for rights. Sponsors spend the bucks for visibility. Organisers get to sell tickets and hospitality. Host cities invest in infrastructure. Hotels, airlines, transport companies, restaurants and local businesses benefit from visiting athletes and fans.
But none of that works without the athletes. For an organiser, moving a tournament away from a major city can affect venue availability, broadcast logistics, sponsorship commitments, hotel capacity and ticket demand. For an athlete, the calculation is different.
The choice can be between travelling to a tournament that carries ranking points and prize money, or accepting a fine and losing the opportunity to compete.
Antonsen’s $5,000 decision demonstrates that health and environmental conditions can acquire a monetary value in the sports ecosystem. If more athletes begin making similar calculations, governing bodies and organisers may eventually have to account for that risk.
Delhi’s problem is particularly complicated
Delhi is one of India’s most commercially attractive sporting markets. It has a large population, strong corporate presence, major transport links, established hotels and venues capable of hosting international events. An India Open in Delhi therefore makes obvious commercial sense.
The city also has one of the most persistent seasonal air-quality problems in the country. That creates a scheduling dilemma. The same period that can be attractive for the international sporting calendar can coincide with some of the worst air-quality conditions in the capital.
For indoor sports such as badminton, the answer is not as straightforward as simply saying the event is played inside an arena. Athletes still spend time outdoors travelling between hotels, training facilities and venues. They also have to prepare physically in conditions that extend beyond the competition court.
Antonsen’s current comments make that distinction clear. He has praised the World Championships setup in August while objecting to the India Open’s January-February timing. This is increasingly becoming a calendar problem rather than simply a venue problem.
The problem becomes bigger for endurance sports
Badminton players spend a large part of a match indoors, but the concern becomes even more obvious in running and other endurance events.
Marathoners cannot avoid the air. Their sport requires sustained high-volume breathing over long periods, making environmental conditions an integral part of the competition itself.
That is why air quality has become an issue for international road races and Olympic endurance events in several cities.
Haile Gebrselassie, one of the greatest distance runners in history, withdrew from the marathon at the 2008 Beijing Olympics because of pollution concerns. The Ethiopian, who had asthma, said at the time: “The pollution in China is a threat to my health and it would be difficult for me to run 42 km in my current condition.”
It is an old example, but the principle remains relevant to India as the country seeks to expand its international sporting calendar. A city that wants to host a marathon is not merely selling a start line and a finish line. It is selling an environment in which athletes can perform.
The 2036 question is bigger than Delhi
This is where India’s sporting ambition meets a broader infrastructure question. If India wants to host more global events, it will have to offer organisers a portfolio of cities rather than relying on the same handful of established markets.
Delhi’s air quality does not automatically make the capital unsuitable for international sport. The current BWF World Championships themselves demonstrate that athletes can compete successfully in the city when conditions are favourable. Antonsen’s own comments underline that point.
But India’s sporting infrastructure strategy could increasingly require environmental seasonality to become part of venue planning. That could mean scheduling outdoor endurance events in cleaner months, shifting some winter competitions to cities with more favourable air quality, improving indoor air filtration and monitoring systems, and making AQI part of event contingency planning.
For organisers, those measures come with a cost. For India, however, the cost of not making them could eventually be greater.
Sport is becoming another test of India’s air-quality problem
The 2017 Sri Lanka Test showed what happens when poor air quality becomes impossible to ignore during a match. Antonsen’s decision shows a different stage of the same problem: an athlete making a financial calculation before even arriving in the country.
That is a more complicated challenge for India’s sports economy. A player walking away from a tournament means lost competition, but it can also mean a question mark over the event’s international appeal. If sponsors and broadcasters are buying access to global stars, their participation becomes part of the value proposition.
For a tournament organiser, an empty seat is visible. A top-ranked athlete deciding not to travel can be less visible but potentially more consequential. And India’s sporting ambitions are moving in the opposite direction.
The country wants more international events, more global athletes, more spectators, more sponsors and eventually the world’s biggest multi-sport events. That makes clean air less of a public-health issue sitting outside the sports economy and more of an infrastructure and competitiveness issue within it.
Antonsen is not saying he does not want to play in India. He is saying he does not want to play in Delhi in a particular season. For a country selling itself as the next major destination for global sport, that may be the more important message.
The question is no longer whether India can build enough stadiums to host the world’s best athletes. It is whether it can create cities and calendars in which those athletes want to keep coming back.