The Tribune: Need for right mix

Indervir Grewal

Marijne’s fast, attacking India were halted by world’s best in the Hockey World League; team needs strategic maturity to scale another level

India’s second Hockey World League Final bronze medal in three years did not come in ideal circumstances. From six matches, India won only two – for the third place, they beat a beleaguered Germany, seven of whose players were hit by illness. The win followed an anticlimactic loss in the semifinals – their much-anticipated clash against Olympics champions Argentina was marred by waterlogging on the pitch.

In this format, the “real” tournament starts at the quarterfinals, and India won two of their three knockout games. But in two of their three knockout matches, coach Sjoerd Marijne would not have been able to make an accurate assessment of the team’s performance. Even so, the tournament served as a great learning experience for the team and new coach. These lessons can be significant because 2018 is an important year in terms of tournaments. “It was my first tournament with the team at the highest level,” said Marijne. “It gave me the opportunity to see the team and the players, their strengths and weaknesses, what changes we need to make.”

Fast-breaking India

Marijne has brought a liveliness to India’s game. Under Roelant Oltmans, the team took its time to build attacks by moving the ball around. India became a side that liked to dominate possession, even against higher-ranked teams.
But right from start, Marijne has talked about fast, one-touch hockey. It was first seen in the Asia Cup, where India showed urgency in attack. After one or two passes at the back, there was a tendency to move forward.

But India’s new style is predominantly about counterattacking. India’s most effective weapon is the pressure created by the forwards and central midfielders and their success in making regular interceptions. The speed of their counterattacks, with one-touch or two-touch passing moves, was a surprising factor for their Asian opponents in Dhaka.

Tough lessons

India’s dominance at the Asia Cup raised curiosity about how they would fare against the world’s top teams. In Bhubaneswar, India’s first opponents, Australia, had a slow start, and their missed passes and missed traps played into India’s hands. The early pressure led to interceptions and chances from counterattacks.

However, once Australia regained their composure, they managed to pull India back. Before the tournament, Marijne warned the Indian players to improve their intercepting skill. “Because if we can’t, we will always be world No. 6,” he had said. At the HWL, India learnt this the hard way. After the initial hiccup, Australia slowed the pace, held possession to deny India counterattacking opportunities. England did the same, though in both the matches, India did get a few chances. But it was Germany who reiterated Marijne’s point with masterful discipline in the pool match.

One-track

India’s fascination to play fast and attacking hockey stems from their latest motto of playing to win. Oltmans was sacked because he wasn’t “result oriented”. The new attack-minded game means India look for fast breaks with attacking, incisive passes. However, attacking constantly leads to losing the ball quickly. Playing against lower-ranked Asian teams, India were able to apply pressure and regain possession with considerable ease. But Germany, whose players have great ball-holding ability, made India pay for losing possession. For almost all of the last quarter, India did not see the ball. After the match, Marijne said that “too much energy was lost (by his team) to get the ball”. “When they did, they tried to go forward quickly, which is our style,” he said.

Defend better

Losing the ball quickly also meant that India had to defend more. The recent shift to zonal defence not only aids India’s new strategy of attacking on the counter, but it has also made India a better defensive unit, though they still need to improve a lot. After the pool match against Germany, Marijne admitted that India “didn’t get enough interceptions” because the “players didn’t get close enough to the opponents”.

Also, letting opponents dominate possession means letting them control the game. There is a danger of being pushed back too deep. India still show susceptibility when the pace of the game is varied. The Indian players’ attention levels fall with a forced lull in the game, and they tend to deviate from the game-plan. If India don’t score first, when they take the other team by surprise, they tend to concede. It hurts their counterattacking strategy. In Bhubaneswar, India scored first thrice in six matches. But they couldn’t protect their lead for long.

Finding balance

Even against the depleted Germany in the third-place match, India didn’t look to dominate possession, despite taking a one-goal lead. India could have run the already tired Germans ragged. But they didn’t, and a lapse in concentration led to the equaliser. Even at 2-1, India went for their attacks, losing the ball often.

Fast, one-touch hockey doesn’t mean that the team must always look to move forward. India can play one-touch or two-touch hockey to rotate the ball around faster like Germany, who are known for their unsettling quick-passing game. In Bhubaneswar, it seemed that India tried to force the issue at times when they were frustrated by their tactically better opponents. That led to a high number of missed passes.

India can be successful with this style — counterattacking is favoured by even the top teams for its surprise element in today’s compact hockey. But the top teams can also vary their game according to different situations. India struggled for most parts against England and Germany, but the few times they built their attacks, they created scoring opportunities.

Tactical acumen

Looking at India’s slide during the pool stage, former Australia player Simon Orchard wrote, “Unfortunately the India men are getting worse at hockey #HWL2017”, on his Twitter page. After Netherlands coach Max Caldas argued that the tournament started with the quarterfinals, Orchard wrote: “…the difference is you guys are capable of much better. India I’m not sure are. Time will tell…”

Despite doubts, India improved considerably against Belgium. After the win, Marijne said that India were disciplined throughout, unlike in the pool matches. “We were structured, better in one-on-one defending and calm when we had the ball. Even though Belgium had more possession, we held the ball well,” Marijne said. “We controlled the game, made them play at our speed.”

The tournament would have helped Marijne realise that Indian players struggle to adapt to varying tactics. Indian players take a longer time to mature because they learn about different modern strategies only after getting into the national camps. As India lacks a proper system, coaches at the grassroots level don’t develop players’ creativity and decision-making ability, and training is not done keeping in mind the pressure of match situations. In comparison, European players – such as 21-year-old Belgian Victor Wegnez, named the best young player at HWL Finals – are already mature when they are 20-21 years old.