Chennai: It is difficult to fathom the factors that facilitated the exit of Els van Breda Vriesman from the helm of world hockey.
The international community is yet to come to grips with the plausible causes on which the opposition cashed in on in the FIH Congress last Saturday at Los Angeles to unseat a dynamic president who dominated the scene for eight years.
Was it her pro-India stance a frailty that floored Els? There is a school of thought that Els was too obsessed with streamlining Indian hockey.
True, she spent a good deal of time trying to fine-tune administration here and projecting herelf as a ‘messiah’ to preserving ethos of Indian hockey.
When the FIH unfolded plans for a special project during the last World Cup at Monchengladbach in front of the International Olympic Committee President, Jacques Rogge, eyebrows were raised over why look at India as a special entity.
The explanation that the eight-time Olympic champion required focus to arrest its slide in stature appeared somewhat convincing. But the scepticism persisted more on account of the financial commitment involving the IOC and FIH.
While a section hailed the moves of Els and her lieutenant, Bob Davidzon of the Netherlands, to inject an element of professionalism and sophistication in administration as path-breaking, opinion was divided whether the FIH was stepping on the toes of some Indian administrators.
The pace at which ‘reforms’ were commissioned, and thrusting the Australian icon, Ric Charlesworth, as coach, had a cumulative effect in accentuating the already prevailing confusion in the aftermath of the poor showing of the national teams (especially the defeat against China in the Doha Asian Games).
Criticising IHF
The FIH boss was unsparing in her criticism of the IHF, targeting its chief, K.P.S. Gill in every forum.
When the IHF was disbanded by the NOC, in the wake of India’s failure to qualify for the Beijing Olympics, there was a strong feeling that Els orchestrated the whole exercise, ensuring the formation of an ad hoc committee that received the FIH nod immediately.
If there is a view today that Els burnt her fingers endeavouring to clear the cobwebs of Indian hockey, then it may be genuine. An element of poignancy can be added as it is understood that India is reported to have voted against Els in the hope of getting its nominee as a vice-president in place of Annabel Dillon. If the pro-India factorwas one chink in Els’s armour in Los Angeles, some observers wonder whether she is a true democrat or an autocrat. One commentator compares her to Margaret Thatcher!
It is a fact that Els succeeded in translating her ideas and opinion into a ‘consensus’ within the administration. Her flair for quick decisions, even if they touched the contours of controversy, was interpreted as a streak of dominance. Another section views her tenure of eight years reason enough to give way to new ideas from a fresh incumbent.
One source argues that Els should have read the mood when Peter Cohen, the secretary-general, withdrew his nomination after the contesting candidate, Leandro Negre, visited Australia, seeking support, and also when the European HF solidly backed him.
The rise and fall of Els will form an eventful chapter in the history of International Hockey Federation.
(S. THYAGARAJAN, THE HINDU)