Indian hockey to face harsh truth in London

V Narayan Swamy, TNN

BANGALORE: Is the time ripe to go overboard with India’s achievement quotient or put their game through the sieve to check whether the national team has actually acquitted itself well? The 44 goals that India scored in the six-nation Olympic qualifiers come as a big reason to rejoice, while corroborating chief Michael Nobbs’ observation that the country is back to its attacking ways.

The penalty corner conversion rate too is flattering and the intensity and pace that the players maintained throughout the nine-day contest heart-warming. But behind this veil of comfort are harsh truths that India will face as they ready themselves for the London Olympics. With just five months to go, the problems may have to be addressed soon if the team has to make an impact among the elite teams.

For one, the defence continues to present a sorry figure with veteran Ignace Tirkey being called upon time and again to get the country out of a hole. The final against France was no exception with Sandeep Singh or VR Raghunath caught hopelessly upfront and Ignace and goalkeeper PR Sreejesh trying to keep the French tide at bay.

That France did not mount too many forays came as a blessing. But the lone goal that they scored had the Indian defenders hopelessly out of position. The long balls into the defence were still a worry. This had Sardar Singh going back to his role during the Jose Brasa days, manfully helping Ignace out in the deep defence before continuing upfront as a schemer.

The pass-back was evident among Indian defenders but that was only to buy time or slacken the pace rather than construct a move. In fact, India’s reliance on the press and the emphasis on counters was so evident that they hardly needed to piece together an attack the classical way. But that, in a way, also portrays how monotonous the game can get. It also is a pointer to how India can be bottled up if their opponents at the Olympics are sharp enough not to yield a counter.

Of the lot, only Sardar and outside right SV Sunil looked menacing together. Sardar always looked dangerous as he weaved in, so was Sunil as he stepped up the attack in tandem with Sardar but their teammates inexplicably preferred to play in this duo’s shadows, leaving India with too few men who could actually think on their feet on the field.

With Tushar Khandker and Danish Mujtaba on the left moving too quickly inside, footfalls on the flank were conspicuous by their absence. The right flank too was sparingly used, particularly around the midfield, giving the impression that India tended to over-exploit their strengths in the middle.

The bottomline was that these runs led to goals and so nobody, including Nobbs, felt the need to change the strategy midstream. In London, such routines may not have the same impact. Blasting the ball inside and branching out at the 23-metre line can be less productive against a tight defence than using the flanks and angling one’s way in. With the Indians’ physical build no match for the powerful Europeans, tight marking can be offset to an extent by spread-eagling the defence.