EDITOR’S NOTE: The author of this column presents a different view. The author agrees that ‘Hockey suffers because of two federations fighting at the top’. But at the same time, the author argues that hockey’s suffering is bound to increase when a single federation is put in place without a clean vision or a road map for the future’. The author weaves reasonably facts and figures to prove certain points we normally miss. His conclusion — competition drives high performance and therefore let the federations compete with each other and let ‘Hockey’ flourish — is worth a read. Read the article completely before readers take their view
Why the Hockey Federations compete with each other?
Following exposure of malpractice in IHF on News channels, when IOA derecognized IHF in 2008, almost everyone sang one song: Indian Hockey will go on the right path.
Four years on, Indian Hockey, the sport per se, is witnessing some optimism but its politics and administration remains unchanged.
Now the refrain is: Single Federation is the panacea for all the ills of Indian Hockey.
The reasoning is: Administration can be managed better.
Unfortunately, as usual, we all fail to look beyond the immediate!
Before de-recognition of IHF in 2008, wasn’t there a single federation? What good was it doing to the game?
Realistically speaking, leave aside a slightly comfortable life for the players (which will anyway end soon after a ‘unified body’ is formed) there isn’t even a single reason to believe that the game will progress if there is a (re-packaged) single federation!
Here are a few on-field events post IHF de-recognition:
• Hockey India was formed. Brasa was appointed the coach, and by the time he left, all Indian fans mumbled, “Thank you, Mr. Brasa for what you did.”
• The concept of PHL, Nationals, shelved for long by IHF, was suddenly brought out of the box by them only. IHF is now conducting U-18 and U-21 Nationals, religiously.
• IHF came up with the idea of WSH – an idea widely believed to do good for Indian Hockey. Quite opposite to IHF’s aversion to foreign coaches, the WSH has many foreign coaches coming to India. Recall what they did to Ric Charlesworth, as early as 2008?
• World Cup came to India. Had IHF been there, with its history of sour relations with FIH, they would have arm-twisted FIH, leaving little chance of India hosting the World Cup. Indian performance at the World Cup in front of home crowd cemented the idea that only a foreign coach can do well to Indian Hockey.
• Micheal Nobbs came in with a long-term contract to Indian Hockey. Until recently, contract-based coaches were a dream to Indian Hockey. Today, people are saying, “Thank you Mr. Nobbs.”
• Olympics Qualifiers came to India and thankfully, at least today, our Men team has a ticket to London.
As one can observe, with adamant IHF in place, none of the above would have happened had the affairs of 2008 carried on. IHF had gone to a new low with no Nationals, no PHL, zero LIVE telecasts of matches, poor visibility of the sport, no corporate willing to shell-out money for Indian Hockey, hire and fire coach policy, massive bullying of players; the list of their crimes is endless.
Post FIH de-recognition, in the past few years, the same IHF suddenly became alive putting enormous pressure on all quarters of Hockey to re-recognize and re-instantiate them at the national level. They, now, for once in their existence, are talking big for Hockey (WSH).
This change wouldn’t have come about had there been no Hockey India. Had there been no competition amongst the federations, IHF would have had another former Olympian (Indian) coaching our lads. Where would have Hockey gone, is anyone’s guess.
However, one must remember, this is politics and neither IHF nor HI is pious.
Hockey India, a mere dummy in the hands of FIH, is carrying forward many crimes committed by IHF – bullying players, zero grass-root development of Hockey, low-level politics, bogus elections; its list is nowhere less than that of IHF.
So, what happens if the two federations merge to form a single governing body at the national-level?
The rule-book and the constitution remaining the same, the same ‘merged body’ will soon become a ‘reincarnated IHF or HI’ very soon.
For a merged body to work efficiently and to do collective good of Hockey, one should have a strong constitution in place that diversifies the power, brings in more voters, bring in performance-based incentive mechanisms, will have proportionate representation of the state federations, will be more transparent and accountable in its functioning.
Bite this: A state federation that has an electorate of 900 members has 1 vote in the national level politics and so does a federation who has hardly 15 members!
One may recall, on this flawed premises only, IHF thrived for long – whatever one did, one could never beat them because they mastered their numbers. HI story is also the same.
So, either have a strong body that has an exhaustive constitution or let the two federations go the way they are going now.
Very interestingly, one may admit, in this politics-power competition, Hockey is benefitting the most. Fans are happy, fraternity gets to talk about ‘Hockey’, corporates are taking interest in Hockey affairs and eventually the (Men’s) team –where the focus has been – is performing much better than it was in 2008.
The huge pressure of the players to take sides should go, undoubtedly. They should be able to make a choice without any compulsions, whatsoever.
However, a re-modeled ‘unified body’ is NOT the solution in the ‘interest’ of Hockey – it’s only in the ‘interest’ of power-mongers of Hockey, both national and international.
As few may know, FIH attempting to settle the IHF-HI issue is NOT a ‘generosity gesture’ or because of their love for India. As per media reports, FIH has been cornered by IHF in the International Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). With the risk of huge sums to be paid by FIH to IHF as penalty looming large, suddenly, out of nowhere, FIH is interested in solving HI-IHF quarrel!
Sadly, there is no logic to convince that ‘unified body’ will serve as a long-term panacea for Hockey.
Politicians will change only when their electorate demands a change. For this to happen, an exhaustive constitution and a strong electorate is the need of the hour.
Till the time this doesn’t happen, statements like, “I am not answerable to media or anyone else,” will be the order of the day.
Yes, Hockey suffers because of two federations fighting at the top but the suffering is bound to increase when a single federation is put in place without a clear vision of the future.
Competition drives high performance. So, for now, let the federations compete with each other and let ‘Hockey’ flourish.