Yesterday's settlement between the establishment and players notwithstanding, Indian hockeyu00a0will continue to beu00a0a subject of ridicule. Here'su00a0 how things went awry for the national sport

Does it ever happen anywhere that those who have brought the greatest Olympic glory to the nation should ever remain the most dammed? Yes indeed, the hockey players in India are the children of a lesser god. The volcano erupted in the form of a most effective showdown against the administration but the lava has been simmering and churning within for long.

There has been so much that is flawed with the way Indian hockey has been run over the years that a full catalog will run into pages. Here's how Indian hockey has been ruined despite the gallant role enacted by the players:

India's Bharat Kumar (extreme), Arjun Halappa (centre) and Sandeep Singh leave the field after their loss to New Zealand at the Melbourne Commonwealth Games in 2006. PIC/AFP

Misplaced conception

Where there should have been great pride and joy in administrating the best team in the world, one has gradually seen the power-crazy top brass getting haughty and despotic to the point of treating those who play with utter disdain. It is a measure of the players' commitment that they have by and large taken insults without as much as even a murmur.

Balbir Singh (Western Rly), a star player in his time, was humiliated and bandied out of the team after India's failure to make the Olympic final for the first time at Mexico in 1968, His fault? He went to the Pakistani camp to congratulate the ultimate winners of the gold medal. Similar treatment was meted out to Pargat Singh after Barcelona 1972 and Dhanraj Pillay (along with five other players) after only the second Asian Games gold at Bangkok in 1998.

Wrong men in right places

Undemocratic and dictatorial functioning in the Indian Hockey Federation is nothing new. It has been going on for years. Those who help in bringing in votes are rewarded with the managership of the Indian teams going abroad. This preferential treatment percolated to the latter day appointment of coaches and assistant coaches as well. Such appointees have put more burden on the players as careerists officials indulged more in sight-seeing and shopping than Indian team's assignments.

Reluctance to ring in changes

For one of the leading countries in the game, the establishment has been somewhat reluctant to embrace major changes that were taking place, like the induction of artificial surfaces. Even countries like Pakistan and Malaysia beat us to it. From all accounts, the World Cup in Mumbai in 1982 should have been played on astroturf, which came to the country much later.

Our coaches were hardly sent abroad to get the feel of the new surface and also the implementation of changes in the laws of the game.

Officials clinging to their chairs

KPS Gill may have set a record of sorts for occupying the presidential post for a decade until he was pushed out by the Indian Olympic Association. K Jyothikumaran as secretary was even more disgraceful for as long as it lasted. During their tenure the relations between the players and the administrators was at its worst.

Coaches hired and fired

There were perhaps more coach-changes than player-changes in a little over a period of two years, with no less than a dozen, including a couple of foreign ones, being appointed at different times. This was done without any rhyme or reason. For example, when Joaquim Carvalho had done a remarkable job of helping the team to win the Asia Cup and do well in other tournaments, he was removed. The momentum of a great revival which looked in the offing was thus broken.

Lack of trust and faith in the players

One of the reasons that India did not make the final of the 1968 Mexico Olympics was the lack of brilliance on the wings, which Pakistan had in plenty. Ali Sayeed was not played at all. The reason for it was shocking. The team management did not have faith in him for obvious reasons. This lack of trust led to a lot of frustration amongst the players.

Favouritism in selection

One recognises the fact that you cannot have an ideal team, what with views on the performance of players being at variance. But when the most undeserving get in because of his affiliated unit's clout in the IHF, it does upset the balance of the team.

Frustration amongst the players

Every young player nurses an ambition of representing his country for which he strives from his early days. But the first thing he loses after being selected is his smile. Many players gave up playing international hockey before their time on account of the shabby treatment meted out to them, with the axe falling on them constantly. The likes of Darryl D'Souza and Viren Rasquinha are just the more recent examples.

Scaring away sponsors

A total lack of co-operation and not a little corruption has been the main reason why more sponsors did not come into the game. The present sponsors are already fed up with the attitude of the new regime that is being promoted as Hockey India. Where are the ex-players and true hockey experts, they ask.
u00a0
Faulty formation ofu00a0 Hockey India

The new regime being promoted by the Indian Olympic Association is unnecessarily making a fetish of the old dictumu00a0 of one-state-one-association. How can Mumbai ever be pushed out as a recognised unit? After Punjab, it is Mumbai that has given the highest number of players to the Indian team. If any serious and first-class hockey is ever played in whole of Maharashtra, it is only in Mumbai, which has had the distinction of organising not one, but three all-India tournaments. It is like pushing Mumbai cricket team out of the BCCI.

The writer has covered hockey over five decades