Hockey can’t be a great marketing property

Yes. Unlike Cricket, hockey peaked in pre-television/economic reform (free market) era in India. Indian hockey team have won 11 Olympic medals (8 Gold, 1 Silver & 2 Bronze) between 1928 and 1980, thrice finished in the top 3 in World Cup between 1971and 1975 and 12 medals in Asian Games between 1958 and 2002.

How many of these wins have we watched on television? If only half these medals were won post-1985, when significant number of households in India had access to TV sets and with economic reform kicking in, maybe hockey would have had a different story to tell. It would have had a whole new generation growing with it.

Cricket peaked in India post-World Cup win in 1983 and more so after wining the Benson Hedges Cup in 1985. Indian households were able to watch both these victories on television. The first time they were exposed to live cricket on television and rest is history. BCCI managing to successfully host the 1987 Cricket World Cup in India (first time it was hosted outside England) not only helped the game to scale new highs in terms of popularity but also led to emergence of India as new cricket power.

Hockey’s failure is also to do with lackluster administrators. They never had charismatic/able leaders who could think big and market the game better. Hockey lived on the past glory. As a game hockey has all the ingredients to make it a marketable sport. Short format, fast pace, mesmerising skills and so on.

Like Soccer, it’s a very exciting and marketable sport. In the current state of affairs, very few marketers will invest in the game and no broadcaster will be interested in acquiring the rights for the game. The future of hockey lies in managing to get a able leader who can help put the house in order and a team which can win World Cups and Olympic medals. The rest will follow.