Cricketing lessons for hockey: Part I

Millions in India cherishes cricket. So, we do. While wishing Indian cricket team for its long-awaited World Cup victory, its time to look at the lessons the sports throw for us.

Till a decade ago, every victory or defeat in cricket will invariably evoke umpiring controversies. Cricket umpires have to take decision on each ball bowled and each run scored or missed; it proved heaven for losing teams to justify their defeat.

Recent World Cup again proved how the cricketers have overcome the shortcomings. With referrals in place, with support of array of CADs, so many otherwise potential controversies have been grave-yarded then and there. When a team won or lost, there is no review later.

Cricket video referrals are antecedent to hockey, meaning hockey had it
before cricket introduced.

But the difference is, hockey does things on its own peril ways while cricket does it professionally.

Video referrals are not in place for most major tournaments that includes Qualifiers, CWG and high-profile Azlan Shah Cup. In fact the parent body, the FIH, extends a begging bowl to organizers to organize video referrals!!

Even its use is arbitrary. Take for instance, a gentleman sitting in the comforts of a air-conditioned room, all of a sudden find a fault with a player and next day come up with some level x offence, and has all powers in the world to suspend a player for three matches of an event which has only 7 matches to be played. This happened to Shivender Singh, our own Juvraj Singh – who excels in all departments of the game- during the last World Cup.

Can such stupidity happen in Cricket? Decisions of the matches should be taken then and there during the match, not leisurely 12 hours after the match. Decisions taken after the match, if unavoidable, should only be in the form of monetary penalty. Like, as they do in cricket, cut in the match fee etc.

Now, again hockey is a poor man’s game, meaning, one has to play for the sake of the game, sacrifice for the country, all the while nobody in the global, continental and national bodies will ever pay a paise to players that too based on some criteria like matchwise!

Any game can be complex in its rules and regulations. Modernity demands simplification and use of technology helps to achieve that. Hockey’s technology is preferential, whimsical, not even applied in major international tournaments.

Therefore, hockey can never hope to be a professional sport in the mould of cricket or football, even on a long shot.

A goal awarded, or can be undone even after next moves have taken place. We witnessed such stupidity quite often — in 2006 Azlan Shah; Amsterdam Junior World Cup (bronze match), a series of penalty corners can be awarded to any team even after final hooter.

Hockey must be the lone sport in the world to play for long time after the expiry of its stipulated play time (70 minutes time). Never get confused with injury time of football, what we have in hockey is different situation. A match can still be won or lost after 70 minutes!

Hockey has a lot of shortfalls to call itself a professional sport – the FIH only made things further horrible.

Like in hockey, money for the world body comes from India with respect to cricket.

But the ICC, unlike FIH, does not kill the golden goose, but earns rightfully and openly.

Contrarily, the FIH even goes to the extent of controlling Indian domestic hockey. Can the ICC every think of setting parameters for Ranji Trophy? Ratnagar Shetty (BCCI CEO) would have skinned them alive if the ICC even would send a such a signal.

The FIH did not make public of 2010 World Cup sponsorship details. Have they gained or lost, we don’t know, officially. But in cricket, everybody knows every sponsorship detail.

For an instance, both Hero Honda and Sahara are sponsors of Team India and 2011 Cricket World Cup. Every Indian knows how much pie it cost them.

The same organizations, which are transparent in sponsorship matters, are also hockey’s sponsors. Why don’t we then know their sponsorship details?

Now one can easily guess who is hiding the facts from the public, the FIH or the sponsors?

Honestly speaking, cricket is played in far less countries than hockey, is more complex in rules and regulations than hockey. What made the difference is, how the parent bodies worked to work their way up.

Now it looks out place to even compare cricket with hockey, and it is injustice to cricket.