Printed Article: Times of India

Hockey must stay national game’

NEW DELHI: Does cricket’s recent success deserve the ‘national game’ tag? Conversely, should the tag be taken away from hockey because the sport h
as been in terminal decline?

Move over hockey, says Pataudi

Former Indian cricket team skipper MAK Pataudi’s assertion that it is time the government took away hockey’s pre-eminent status has found few takers among even the cricket fraternity, not to mention ex-hockey stars and the sports ministry.

The verdict is a unanimous ‘no’. Hockey should remain our national game, but the government should provide the sport fresh financial impetus, other than a clean administration. That doesn’t take away from the fact, however, that cricket remains the most ‘popular’ sport.

“It’s time that we make cricket our national game and take that away from hockey,” Pataudi told a TV channel on Thursday, echoing the sentiments of many who feel the most ‘popular’ and the most ‘successful’ sport deserves the ‘national game’ tag. “There is no doubt in my mind that this is probably the best team India has produced in a long time especially in home conditions,” Pataudi, whose father Nawab of Pataudi Sr. was, ironically, also part of the hockey team in the 1928 Amsterdam Olympics but did not get a chance to play, added referring to MS Dhoni’s squad.

Interestingly, being the national game does not entail any legal standing or financial benefit for the sport. It’s an informal, honourable tag bestowed by the government and hockey is also not among the official national symbols. I Sriniwas, joint secretary in the sports ministry, clarified, “The national game tag is more of a tradition. Both cricket and hockey are quite popular games. You can still see a lot of frenzy when India play Pakistan in hockey, quite similar to the ones associated with cricket. Popularity certainly is not an issue, may be performance is.”

Among cricketers, former India captain Bishan Singh Bedi and ex-Test player Anshuman Gaekwad have offered cogent arguments opposing Pataudi’s view. “There is no debate here, everyone knows which is the more popular sport now,” Bedi told TOI, “but we are not talking about current popularity. Indian hockey dominated the world for so many years that in a historical context it deserves the ‘national game’ tag. India are not yet the world’s best cricket team. They have never dominated as hockey once did. There is no need to change the tag. But yes, urgent steps should be taken to revive hockey. There is no need to devalue a glorious sport by taking the tag away.”

Ashok Kumar, former India hockey captain and legend Dhyan Chand’s son, was furious at Pataudi’s assertions. “This is rubbish,” he said, “How can one talk about removing hockey’s ‘national game’ status? It’s an honour bestowed on the basis of performance over the years. I don’t think any other sport in India has produced results at the highest level like hockey. A slump in performance does not mean you make some other sport the national game. If basketball or any other team does well, will it then be made the national game?”

Indian hockey’s golden period was from 1928-56, when they won six successive Olympic gold medals. They also won the 1975 World Cup in Kuala Lumpur besides two more medals (a silver and a bronze) in previous editions. The last Olympic gold, however, came in 1980, and the team failed to qualify for the Beijing Games last August. “The fact is hockey still remains our best bet for an Olympic gold in a team sport,” said Gaekwad, “Cricket needs to raise its performance, especially away from home. Under the circumstances cricket needs to achieve much more to deserve the ‘national game’ tag. The government should look into hockey urgently.”