Junior Indian hockey team selection - favouritism pervades?

A few years back on a hot, sunny afternoon in Mumbai, I saw the eventual champions Indian Army play Southern Railway. The Indian Army team had the game sewn up with a 4-1 lead. What caught my eye was the play of a 20-year-old youngster named Mangesh, playing for the losing team.

Notwithstanding the fact that he had already scored the first goal for his losing team, what astonished me was his play, full of life and energy from minutes 50 – 70, resulting eventually in a PC and the resultant goal.

He had started off as a midfielder, but at the tail end of a tiring game, he was playing as a lone striker, making long loping flank-to-flank runs to relieve pressure off his beleaguered team-mates. His energy level was astonishing. Imagine my surprise when the redoubtable Munir Sait, based in Chennai, who was scouting talent then, informed me that he is able to practice only on a few occasions with his team in Chennai, since he lives in his village. Here was a man with innate endurance ability. A natural!

Did we see him invited to a tryout? Has any national coach/selector seen him play to help him develop his natural talent? Coach Nobbs complains of fitness. Is Mangesh not a prototypical hockey player needed by him and his trainer? There are so many such Mangeshes are there in India. And is India not a democratic equal country, where it doesn’t matter whether you come from a village or a big city? Whether you’re a Prime Minister’s son or an ordinary labourer’s, everybody is entitled to an equal opportunity.

On the flipside of the coin is Talwinder Singh, a perennial favourite of the powers that be and current junior Indian player. His claim to fame? Playing for India in a crucial match in 2011, red-carded for violence against host team Malaysia, a match which India deservedly went on to lose. A most dastardly act which, besides hurting the team, made them playing short handed. This young man, instead of being censured, is repeatedly in the India squad, being given a hockey stipend of Rs.10,000/month, just because he comes from a particular state, and possibly is a favourite of a particular selector.

His coming from the Surjit Singh Hockey Academy in Jalandhar, the hometown of the retired selector, is not the only qualification, hopefully! Maybe his knowledge of the home conditions and the Junior World Cup pitch is an advantage. Maybe he’s an outstanding player, even better than the many junior players who are already playing for the senior national side! Maybe, at 19, he will be able to control himself better than at 17!

Do coach Greg Clark and Baljit Saini, know about this incident? What about high-performance director Oltmans? Is he in the loop? Has he been made aware of a potential disaster on his junior team? Is there a report/dossier on this player? Will this factor be considered during the final phase of selections in deselecting/selecting this player. What kind of example will he be to others around him if he can get away with this?

And where is the sanctimonious FIH in all this? They, being the ultimate arbitrators of our sport of hockey, are responsible for “the proper conduct of the sport on the pitch” as indicated in that affidavit to judge Chawla before the Competition Commission of India. Was there a discussion, sanctions, memos to the parent association, expression of dislike for this action? They are very knowledgeable about this matter, so they cannot feign ignorance.

Are we going to hold them and the selectors responsible for “another stick on referee/player violence” in future? How about just a small whisper to the Hockey India guys? Can you please tell your selectors, “Avoid this. It is in your best interest”? FIH/ Hockey India, have you guys cleared this selection with your risk management department lawyers?

Selection of players for tryouts/national team is rudimentary and downright defective.

The above two anecdotal incidents highlight why India consistently fails at the national level. Wrong selection.“Favourites” selected on arbitrary criteria are continuously propagated, à la the Sandeep Singh saga. These players are the only ones being “shown” to the national coaches and selectors. Here is corroboration from no less a source than legendary hockey player Dhanraj Pillay – in an interview with Sandeep Saxena of Sportstar, alluding to the same -

Question: Gregg Clark, in his capacity as the India junior coach, was present in the stands during the Nationals. How useful will the South African’s inputs be for talent spotting?

Answer (Pillay): Coming to talent-spotting, Affan was in the India junior camp, but was dropped when the juniors were sent on a tour to Holland. He should have been there, instead of becoming available to represent Air India in the Senior Nationals. I hope Mr. Clark has changed his mind about Affan’s potential after seeing the junior player excel against the seniors in the Nationals. Junior India player Arman Qureshi was among the best performers in Pune. India’s best should get chances – whether experienced or not. The selection of players should not be affected by ego clashes between officials.

Coach, not the selectors, should select the team.

Since he has to deal with the personalities on the team, since he takes the blame when his team does not pan out, a similar question can be raised by us. How come Talwinder but no Affan and no Arman? There is certainly ground for a healthy difference of opinion. True. And if it is the coach’s selection, then all discussion and armchair quarter-backing will stop. That is his prerogative. But a team selected by some individuals who ultimately will not share in the responsibility of a failure, who just watch the highlights of a tryout session, are not afforded the same leeway. They can only be used as tiebreakers in the event of a coach’s selection dilemma between two equally good players.

Selecting the same favourite colts again and again—— are criteria the same for all?

If the probables/tryouts list is examined, it always shows the same players again and again, with just a few cosmetic changes. Talk swirls around the fact that we need a solid pool of players forming three teams, so that there can be adequate competition. Maybe we missed the definition of competition. Maybe competition really means the same players competing against each other! As rightly pointed out by Justice Chawla, CCI, Hockey India as a regulatory body has tremendous powers of control on all hockey players in India, being the sole decision-maker as to who should represent the country.

There are currently 30 junior players on the Hockey India probables roster, receiving a stipend of Rs.10,000/month (1.2 lakh/year). Isn’t it necessary to make sure that that a player is deserving of this? Does he not have to meet certain criteria? Does he not have to stand out amongst his peers? Has this probable been truly compared with the same criteria to some of the others that didn’t make the cut? Or is it done on a three-day arbitrary sham tryout just to justify a preordained selection? And how many of these favourites have been rewarded for reasons other than hockey ability?

Certain states seem to monopolize the India team roster – is that fair?

About 600 players played on the junior nationals tryout tournament. About 300 of those could be regarded as very weak from weak teams and so justifiably omitted. (It seems presumptuous to believe that all players from a weak team are weak, but for the sake of argument, let us accept it).

One team, Punjab, won the championship but did face close games in their campaign. Yet, the statistics show that out of 300 remaining players, they have a monopoly of players that made the final selection. In the current junior team that toured Holland, 10/18 (60%) were from Punjab. The runner-up team, Odisha, had 3/18 (16%), and the rest of the states combined for 24%.

Yet, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra did well too by reaching the semi-finals. It is inconceivable that they and the rest of the quarter-finalists had no good hockey players that met the required criteria. What is glaring is the omission of players from the military, who should be, with their rigorous fitness schedule and discipline as well as their service to the nation motto, natural fits for modern coaches who place such a premium on fitness. Bihar Regimental Centre, Danapur and MEG Boys Academy are two institutions that readily come to our mind as hotbeds for emerging“fit” talent.

Add to this the fact that the current favourites on the Hockey India probables list did not play this tryout competition. They were away in Holland on national duty. So there really was no true comparison.

A similar picture shows up when you consider the probables on the distinguished Rs.10,000/month list of Hockey India. Punjab has 15/30 [50%]] representation. If the senior team roster is examined it is a similar story. 6/12 [50%] junior players from Punjab are on the national senior team. Yet they keep failing on the national team level. Is it not time to find out reasons for these statistics? Are they truly the best in India or are they considered the best for reasons that do not pass the smell test? Is this favouring of players from a particular state justified on solid grounds?

Extended camps propagate ‘favourites’ mantra

An extended camp shields the “favourite player” from risky club competition that might undermine his favourite status. A disastrous campaign in the tryout national tournament may undermine a player’s status. So under the guise of preparation for a foreign tour, a comfort zone is created for this “favourite player”, a point which can be debated both ways, positive and negative. But more importantly, it creates a scenario where influence peddling can become of paramount importance, both for the player and the people selecting the player.

Funny situation – limited exposure for coordination with fellow juniors.

There are currently 13 junior players on the probables for the senior national team. In fact, most of the midfield playing on the senior national team is comprised of junior players. They have not had an opportunity for nearly 7 months to interact with other juniors. With the Asia Cup around the corner, their services are needed for this tournament. These 13 will definitely be amongst the premier players selected to play the JWC tournament this winter. They will have just two months to interact with their colleagues – not an insurmountable situation. But it does produces some discomfort.

Lessons and remedies

A true selection, on transparent criteria, is the need in the current hour.

The coach should select the team, not the selectors.

Team selection needs rigid criteria and all players need to be subjected to them.

Players outside the comfort zone of “favourites” need to be scouted and at least brought to the tryouts.

The reason for predominance of players from one state needs to be thoroughly examined and investigated, particularly in the light of the failures of the same at the national level. Extended camps need to be jettisoned in favour of two-week camps prior to tournaments and continuous preparation of probables. As regards fitness, team play and tactics, these need to be done at the club tournament/practice level.

The JWC is a tournament that will shape the future of a nation’s hockey generation for years to come. It needs to be given equal importance, on par with the senior team.