Vietnam Women's Sepak Takraw ASIAD Gold: Special Treatment Policy and the Equity Equation

When the final whistle echoed through the arena in Nagoya, Japan, the three women of Vietnam's national sepak takraw team embraced each other. They had just won the gold medal at ASIAD 20 – a milestone called "historic" in the nation's sporting landscape. But the story does not end at that moment of glory. Behind the medal lies a complex web of special treatment policies, a financial puzzle, and silent questions about equity within the team. Nguyen Thi Thu Trang and Nguyen Thi Khanh Ly – two athletes under Hanoi's payroll – along with their unnamed third teammate, achieved this feat. According to Decree No. 349/2026/NĐ-CP, each athlete winning an ASIAD gold medal receives 280 million VND in state bonuses. But that figure is just the beginning. The notable aspect lies in the special treatment regime: each athlete will receive 20 million VND/month until the next ASIAD – approximately 48 months, totaling 960 million VND. Combined with the bonus, each person receives about 1.24 billion VND from the state budget. For three athletes, this amounts to 3.72 billion VND – "nearly 4 billion VND" as the press calls it. But the story does not stop there. Hanoi, through Resolution No. 82/2026/NQ-HĐND, decided to award an additional 140 million VND per person to the two athletes under the city's payroll. Furthermore, they receive a special treatment allowance of 33.5 million VND/person/month for 48 months – equivalent to about 1.608 billion VND per person. In total, each Hanoi athlete receives about 1.748 billion VND from the city alone, plus 1.24 billion VND from the state, totaling approximately 2.988 billion VND. Meanwhile, the third athlete – not under Hanoi's payroll – receives only 1.24 billion VND from the state. The gap between the two Hanoi athletes and their remaining teammate reaches 1.748 billion VND per person. A disparity so large it seems unbelievable within the same national team, for the same gold medal. Coach Hoang Thi Thai Xuan also receives special treatment: 50% of an athlete's entitlement, approximately 620 million VND from the state budget. This is a detail rarely disclosed clearly in the media, indicating a well-codified system. But it does not stop there. The Vietnamese sports delegation also awarded 200 million VND as a "hot bonus" – an immediate cash award at the event. And there is another amount from the federation and sponsors, the exact figure undisclosed. Looking at the overall picture, each Hanoi athlete could receive a total of about 3 billion VND, while the remaining athlete receives only about 1.44 billion VND (including the hot bonus). The gap of nearly 1.6 billion VND between members of the same team raises a big question about fairness. One could argue that Hanoi's special treatment policy aims to encourage local athletes, but when it creates such a large disparity within the same collective, it may cause silent fractures. The third athlete – unnamed – might feel unfairly treated, even though she also shed sweat, tears, and blood on the court. This story also reveals a deeper issue: athletes' dependence on state and local budgets. Unlike professional sports in Europe or America, where athletes' income comes from sponsorship contracts and club salaries, Vietnamese sepak takraw athletes rely almost entirely on policy. This creates instability: if policies change or budgets are cut, their income could disappear overnight. Moreover, the special treatment regime lasting "until the next ASIAD" – 48 months – is a long-term promise. But that promise depends on budget cycles and decisions of governing bodies. If policies change or budgets are reallocated, athletes could face hardship despite having brought glory to the nation. Notably, this story is published with a headline emphasizing "nearly 4 billion VND" – but that figure only represents the state budget portion for three athletes. The actual total each Hanoi athlete receives is much larger. This reporting approach, while technically accurate, inadvertently hides an important part of the financial picture. Another issue worth raising: does the special treatment policy truly reflect the value of the gold medal? In countries with developed sports systems, athletes winning Olympic gold typically receive large bonuses from governments and sponsors, but they also have stable income from professional careers. In Vietnam, with an average salary of about 7 million VND/month, the 1.24 billion VND bonus is a massive figure – equivalent to more than 14 years of average salary. But it also shows athletes' complete dependence on policy. The story of the sepak takraw gold at ASIAD 20 is not just a story of sporting glory. It is a story of a meticulously designed special treatment policy system, of disparities within the team, and of big questions about fairness and sustainability. As we celebrate the victory, let us also look at the silent spaces behind it – where issues may be hiding that need to be addressed. Does the third athlete – the unnamed one – feel honored or resentful? Will the long-term treatment regime be implemented as promised? And will future athletes look at this example to pursue professional sports careers, or will they hesitate before the instability and injustice? The sepak takraw court is not empty – it is stripping bare what the noise of victory once concealed.