If the image is in a shambles today, the villains are the administrators
Eventful in the full meaning of the term, India’s hockey history in the Olympics presents an enchanting vista of men, matters and memories.
A complex canvas that confounds critics, chroniclers and connoisseurs alike, hockey’s impact on the nation’s psyche is phenomenal.
Nothing exemplified this more than the wave of anger and anguish that swept across the country when India missed a berth to Beijing 2008 for the first time in eight decades.
A careful study of the components that constitutes the vibrant fabric of history will reveal three segments; the period before and after independence with the third pinpointing the degeneration triggered by the introduction of synthetic pitches.
India’s Olympic journey began on March 17, 1928, at Amsterdam. Delhi’s Michael Gateley, outside-right, scored the first Olympic goal against Austria.
Golden era
That moment ignited an incandescent era that lasted till 1956 in Melbourne. A six-in-a-row gold medal reads like a fantasy.
Until the Games were disrupted by war cutting two more possible gold medals, India’s mastery was undisputed. That era conveyed to the world how a sport can be transformed into a realm of art.
Ball possession, short passing and delectable dribbles capped by spectacular finish left the rivals dumbfounded on the field.
Dhyan Chand led the charge in three successive Olympics. He authored a national ethos. India’s displays during that phase elevated the whole aspect to a plane of aesthetic delight.
If Dhyan Chand represented the sum and substance before the war, there were quite a few claimants for the hall of fame from independent India.
Balbir Singh (Sr.), the triple Olympian (1948-56) who led the team to the top of the podium at Melbourne, became a jewel in the crown in his own right.
Iconic image
But contribution of stalwart captains such as Kishen Lal (1948) and K.D. Singh (Babu) (1952), goal-keeper, R. Francis (1948, 52, 56), mid-fielder Leslie Claudius, deserve an honourable mention in the history. Claudius with four Olympic medals (three gold and one silver) retains an iconic image even today.
Randhir Singh Gentle remains in memory for ever because of the penalty corner match-winner against Pakistan in Melbourne in 1956. This goal ensured India’s sixth gold medal.
Another name that stays on the mind is Naseer Bunda, the lone scorer for Pakistan to unseat India from the Olympic pedestal for the first time in Rome in 1960.
Then there is Mohinder Lal who etched that defining moment in Tokyo with a penalty stroke to wrest the gold back. That Olympiad established Prithipal Singh as an outstanding penalty corner hitter.
Until that time, the hockey glory was confined to the sub-continent. But, indisputably, the emergence of Europe and Australia as major forces was getting increasingly visible.
Modern hockey, a euphemism to power gaining over touch and tap perfected by the Asians, aggression and athleticism overpowering artistry and aesthetics, along with alarming alterations in the rules triggered a catastrophic metamorphosis. The churning up process was anything but a source of comfort for India.
Changing equations
Dramatically, the power equations changed. Germany’s triumph in 1972 at Munich, New Zealand’s in 1976 at Montreal, which witnessed the birth of synthetic turf, pressed alarm bells. A bronze at Munich and a seventh slot at Montreal (1976) signalled the downslide.
The gold in Moscow in 1980 was no consolation. It was achieved against the backdrop of the U.S. boycott that kept top hockey teams out of contention.
Since then, the podium is beyond India’s reach. Swinging in rating from six and seven after narrowly missing the semifinal berth at Sydney in 2000, India’s image touched the nadir by the failure to make the grade to Beijing.
Gross mismanagement of the resources and vast talent pool, improper planning, and complacency have all combined to destroy the edifice built assiduously by the sweat, toil and sacrifice of hundreds of players since 1928.
If the image is in a shambles today, the villains behind are the administrators. The persisting fracture of the administration from the sixties amazes every hockey aficionado.
Keywords: Indian hockey, 2012 London Olympics
I would like to ask Mr.Thygarajan what the "alarming alterations in the rules" he referred to may be.
I find the interpretation and application of the Rules to be very different from the published Rules of Hockey published by the FIH.
I would point in particular to the Obstruction Rule (ball shielding with the body to prevent a tackle attempt). Stick-work is unnecessary when all a player need do to retain possession is turn his back and interpose his body between the challenger and the ball.
The constant forcing of foot contact in the circle followed by the award of a penalty corner is dismaying, when only intentional foot/ball contact is an offence.
And then there is the dangerously played ball, the concept seems to have vanished, with umpires (but not the Rules) declaring that an 'on-target' shot at the goal cannot be dangerous play - resulting in defenders being 'targeted' with raised shots and penalised if hit.
The subtlety is gone, hockey has become a game for thugs.
Thanks to everbody in 'Hindu' to bring such articles on ' Hockey' 'Satyendra Nath Bose" etc.
India has a lot of talents. whether it be sport, science , medicine, money matters etc
only diplomatic administrators do not allow it to come out. Rather they suppress it. Indians who come out of India do very good.
Mr. Thygarajan, You wrote "along with alarming alterations in the rules". I would be interested to know what rule changes you consider 'alarming'.
There is now no Off-side Rule and although dangerous use of the stick is forbidden, the 'Sticks rule' which prohibited even approaching the ball with any part of the stick above the shoulder, is now gone. The disappearance, of "A player shall not raise the ball at another player" in 2004, was alarming in view of the emergence of the drag-flick as first shot at a penalty corner and I think the deletion of 'forcing' as an offence, in 2011, was madness.
The Obstruction Rule (ball shielding with the body to prevent a tackle attempt) is still in the rulebook, but it was destroyed in the period 1993 - 2004 with an interpretation that has since been withdrawn but is still applied by umpires. The present Obstruction Rule, which was last amended in 2009, is almost completely ignored. There is the key, stick-work is not needed the body can be used.
Thanks to Mr. Thygarajan for mentioning some of the great hockey stalwarts like Dayan Chand, Kishen Lal and K.D. Singh (Babu), goal-keeper, R. Francis, mid-fielder Leslie Claudius etc., WHO WERE ALL TRAINED AND GROOMEDand played DURING THE BRITISH RULE of the Indian subcontinent, and therein, lies the quintessence or secret of the success of pre-independent India. In the present day India you will not find one Francis or a Leslie, who have all but evaporated or disappeared from the Indian landscape. The GOI took control of every blessed thing from the miserably run Railways to disgustingly humiliating Sports (where they certainly don't have any business) only make a mockery of India's capabilities,. As stated tartly and very bluntly, “If the image is in shambles, today the villains are the administrators”
Dear Mr. Thyagarajan,>Just a note to dsay that I have always read your articles with interest. Your columns are always candid and to the point, but written with a sense of honesty and good humour.
I have been in close contact with the Indian National Coach, and I'm sure that he is doing a fine job for India.
I have but one wish, and that is that the "politics" surrounding the two "bodies" (IHF & HI) would resolve their differences for the good of hockey in India. They are holding the game to ransom in their country. They should let go of their ego's, and India will then climb back to be among the top hockey countries.
Ask the cricket management/players to contribute to hockey success. They
can take it into their own branch if needed.
Indeed, we were champions. If rule changes and synthetic turfs
heralded a change in power, it's no consolation to the current
generation of cricket and football lovers who have only seen their
hockey team as second grade at the world stage. Why would we care
about the 'oh-so-glorious' past if we have much better results coming
in from other sports today. As aptly put in the article, it's the
administration which is a major turn-off for the to-be hockey
enthusiasts. Over past 2 decades, even if Indian hockey has achieved
something, it has been very easily forgotten by the fans in the face
of extremely distasteful and frustrating governing of the sport.
It seems that the only thing that can revive hockey today is a medal
in London Olympics. It may after all force those who hide behind the
garb of inattentiveness from the nation, to force a stable governing
body after taking a bitter pill of sacrificing their egos. It's hard
not to fall in love with the game, hope it has a great future.
Please Email the Editor