In 2007, Joaquim Carvalho was given the target of Olympic Qualifier. He won us Asia Cup before flopping us as at the all important acid test at Chile. Target not attained.

A year later, a cock in the Joaquim’s domestic team Mahindra and Mahindra, Harendra Singh, too did the same as that of his former coach. Target not attained.

Harendera’s target was Asia Cup. Not for the heck of golden hattrick, but to garner some valuable points in the FIH Ranking Chart and thus arrest further slip.

However, Harendera won us a bonus but failed to get us the wages.

In other words, he got us the inconsequential Azlan Shah Cup and failed us at the Asia Cup.

This Kuantan story yet again quantifies in qualified manner that in India acts remain the same though actor differ. It seems there is something is fatally wrong with our coaches – Olympian or non-Olympian variety.

Doing well in target tournaments is the lone yardstick that defines the contours of countries’ destinies.

Our destiny, therefore, stakes straight at our face – at Chile in the recent past and then at Kuantan.

Whatever the articulation of coaches, the fact is if Joaquim brought us an ignominy in the realm of Olympics, Harendera’s team in Asian domain. As a fall out, we slipped our lowest in the FIH Ranking.

It is for the first time India — only country to have won a medal in every edition so far — had to return empty handed.

In 2005 and 2006, whenever the question of finding successor to Gerrard Rach and Rajinder Singh Jr. came up, Harendera came out with his own logic. “I should be given an independent charge at least once”, he argued.

Harendera wanted to take a team of his choice to 2006 or 2007 Azlan Shah Cups. His logic was backed on the results he produced as Junior India coach, and then never getting a chance to handle senior Indian team independently. Many bought his argument, though none gave him what he wanted.

He, despite being a non-Olympian in this Olympian obsessed land landed in the hot seat about ten months ago. This is a long period for any coach – strictly in Asian context.

In the end, it is sadly observed the type of results that had been given to the beleagured country was hardly different from any other Olympian-trained Indian teams. Harendera might be able to put forth reams of reasons for the unexpected Kuantan fiasco — which should have equally stunned him as well — those are as useless as blackboards to many of our players.

It is silly and stupid to argue layman like things. “Oh had that goal gone inside, we would have been rated differently”, ‘We were unlucky’, “x and y missed, otherwise we deserve to be in the finals”, “This team is good”, type of things.

The fact was Harendera castigated Indian defence tour after tour and here in Kuantan he changed his gear to teams’ mindset and forwards’ lack of vision. What to believe now?

The irony of the whole thing is the team speaks of poor scoring, when it has one of the greatest scorers of India, Dhanraj Pillay, as the team manager

This writer had only two opportunities (still among the fortunate few to be so in the media) to witness Harendera’s boys in action – Punjab Gold Cup and Asia Cup.

The team scored lot many goals in the former. Some system and free flow was apparent in Chandigarh. Kuantan was quite the opposite. The team never looked like winners, out of sorts, rustic and even lethargic.

I wish to elaborate the problem of this team in the context of the contest against Japan for the 5th place decider.

I invite those in India, who are interested in hockey, to watch this match video. Japan was a team with six debutants. They made monkey out of India. India put up a pathetic show except those last five minutes when Japan went all out to equalize and then caved in. But for Dilip Tirkey, the things would have been different even on the scoreboard. Indians were so lethargic that the sparse crowd nodded disapprovingly. It was unbelievable to see the Indians playing like a C grade team; no cohesion, no hurry in moves, so pathetic parting of ball, everything looked like a ritual, no soul in the game, it was an eyesore to the hilt. If this was what training, I feel, Indian team does not need one at all.

What was further unbelievable was the mood of celebration, sense of achievement with both the coaching staff and the players after this match. I can understand, for argument sake, the players’ mood but not the coaches.

India won the match 5-1, and the score misleads. Play badly but win. It sometimes happens as was the case on that Friday. In stead if the team plays well and loses, this will be rare. Latter gives consistency, and that is what we lack historically and therefore we expected something from Harendera. It was not to be.

When will Indian coaches learn to analyse matches beyond the scoreline? There is an urgent need as never before for the Indian coaches to read the chapter “Always look Behind Result” in Ric Charlesworth’s The Coach, Managing for success.

Did we roam the globle from Argentina, Australia and New Zealand except Iceland and Antipodes, just to finish fifth at Asia ?

Neither China nor Korea had any tours in preparations for the Asia Cup, still delivered tellingly at Kuantan. China did not lose to India, Pakistan and Malaysia, the three teams who are habituated to waste public money.

When I was trying to explain the importance of performance over the scoreline – of course I should have never spoken instead should have taken up writing — I was asked bluntly, “You want us to play well and lose”, so losing is acceptable to you, not winning.” I was a bit embarrassed the manner the reply was delivered. In hindsight I understand the psyche of most people who live in the part of the world where I chose to live. They talk like this, bulldoze like this, trying to be hero when there is none. Because they are good at public articulation, deliverance never an item in their dictionary.