The Asian Champions Trophy victory and cash awards
S. THYAGARAJAN
The politics and polemics of cash awards are nauseating. Every time our hockey team wins a cup the topic springs up.
Predictably, the triumph at Ordos has generated a debate, degenerating into accusations and acrimony.
The status of the Asian Champions Trophy is yet to be defined. It is not on par with the Asia Cup or the Asian Games.
Hockey India (HI) became a laughing stock. Its offer of Rs. 25,000 to each player was rejected. HI could have refrained from making that announcement. It was unprepared for the players’ response. The players’ stance provided enough fodder for the media to go hammer and tongs at the administration.
The Sports Ministry, the governments of Punjab and MP chipped in with generous rewards forcing HI to cut a sorry figure. The HI’s helplessness was clear. It just could not afford more.
Discomforting questions
That admission raises many discomforting questions over HI finances. Its incomes, primarily, are from affiliation and tournament capitation fees. How much the administration benefited from staging the World Cup remains a grey area.
Whether the players got what was promised is also in the realm of guess. Before the World Cup, the players staged a protest in Pune. That ended with a photo-op for the IOA president Suresh Kalmadi to broker a truce. Part payment was made.
To compare hockey with cricket is rubbish. Cricket administration is miles ahead. Its professional marketing strategy is extraordinary. Whatever baby steps the IHF and now HI took have failed miserably or left midway.
Successful marketing demands a structured programme of events and expert handling of them. The BCCI has layers and layers of competitions, national and international. The returns are enviable.
Is HI capable of projecting one international event per year to garner resources by way of ticketing, TV rights, sponsorship and donations?
Payment agreement
Also wanting is a well-defined and documented system of payment agreement. Over the years the administrators got away by successfully creating divisions within the players to escape the reality of rewarding the successful team.
In the current environment such lethargy is unacceptable, even unethical. But what can be achieved if the administration lacks accounting transparency or fails in the area of marketing the sport which has a high potential?
Most federations rely on government’s munificence, be it in conducting camps, financing travel and accommodation and doling out cash awards. The officials only masquerade in felicitation functions, mouthing platitudes in media interactions.
With a spectator base, hockey can well be marketed provided there is a will. Several meaningful suggestions have been cold shouldered. The move to play an India-Pakistan Test series in the UAE never took off. Such an event would definitely have enriched the coffers for both as did the annual cricket festival in Sharjah for the sub-continental powers.
The developments after Ordos teach HI many lessons. They have distorted its image as a unit to run the sport professionally. More importantly, they have re-emphasised the imperatives of framing a workable marketing strategy to make capital out of the appeal the sport enjoys within the country.
Hockey India should avoid such embarrassing moments in future.