All We Want For Hockey Is…

As most of us know, in sport as in life things evolve.

It is hoped that this evolution will result in a gradual change for the better or an improvement over time.

While some evolution is natural, it just happens, on many occasions along comes a person or a group of people who feel that they must make changes. Often this is to give the impression that ‘they are making a difference,’ and therefore justifying their position. Often, they make these changes simply because they have been given the power to do so. Like the renaming of a coaching program that is already well established and in the consciousness of all.

Why do such a thing? How are you going to manage that cultural change and explain the reasons why you have made that change? What is the long-term goal? Is this money well-spent on rebranding?

In 2018 there were rumblings that certain individuals wanted to revamp the Australian Hockey League. It was clear that fans of the game as well as players and coaches were not being given the whole truth as was made clear in Whose Idea Was It.

Yet a year later even though the recommendation had been not to change the sport’s national competition from which national squads had historically been selected, those in power at the time went ahead and Hockey One was launched. One can only assume now that they were sold a dream, that they did not carry out due diligence on what was being proposed.

As this competition, which has just completed its fifth season, has not delivered what was promised, some are even saying that it is undermining the performances of the national teams.

One thing that should concern all is that many of those playing in the competition are not convinced it is for the best and have lost interest in it. For obvious reasons those who aired these views with this writer requested that they remain anonymous for fear of losing their chance to represent their country again.

While many have said that it needs to be scrapped and the national championships return to one of the various formats that were tried within the AHL, others have said that it can remain but it needs some serious changes if it is to succeed and not end up hemorrhaging the game to a level where it cannot be saved.

Five years in now is a good time to look at Hockey One and make the hard call on what needs to happen.

In 2018 a Hockey Australia document stated that Hockey One – it had not actually been given a name at this stage – would be “the catalyst for hockey in Australia becoming a professional sport where players receive payments to play in the competition.” Seven years on and we have players and umpires on social media digitally begging for people to financially support them to play in the competition. If that is not detrimental to the game, what is?

On top of that the umpires received a letter from the full-time employed CEO of a competition that runs for just 8 weeks reminding them that they are “Volunteers” and would not be paid. Ouch!

Of course, if these umpires like the players have international aspirations they need to be seen umpiring in the nation’s top competition, or the International Hockey Federation (FIH) will not consider them to be one of the officials on their international roster.

Is it fair that they should be having to pay to be a part of the competition to advance their careers?

Once again this is not a good look for the sport. It certainly doesn’t encourage the best officials to be a part of the competition. However, they have no choice if they wish to be considered for international events. Which makes it look like the league and Hockey Australia have them over a barrel and are abusing that power.

Needless to say, both players and officials have been asking why does a competition that only runs for 8 weeks need a full time CEO? Does it need its own Executive Board?

Those who have looked at the structure of the competition and the management of it have also aired a view held by many which is that it appears that the Hockey One board is the place former Hockey Australia Board members go when their term in office has expired.

Further scrutiny raises the question as to why would you have on this board an individual who is employed in a rival sport as General Manager Business Operations? Is there not a conflict of interest simply being privy to certain information about the League?

More importantly what experience do some of these individuals have when it comes to running, and marketing a national league competition? Having made some calls to check on the validity of one’s claims it was found that they had in fact embellished their experience in one area.

One of the reasons that many within the sport are beginning to become a little frustrated is the cost of the new competition, and the fact that in many states those playing socially every weekend have seen fees rise to offset this cost.

Then on top of this they are expected to buy tickets to watch the games and take their families; so are having to pay twice!

The public and those in the sport were told back in 2018 that this was to be a franchise-based venture. It is not. (Franchise Sport in Australia, Does It Really Exist? ) Running the teams is costing the State Associations vast sums of money. Money that they simply cannot afford. Money that could be better spent on development. These costs are being passed on to the average hockey player who plays the game socially and recreationally.

If they are being forced to support the elite level the least they should be given is a 50% membership of the Franchise and voting rights.

One of the major complaints levelled at Hockey One is the timing of the competition.

It comes directly after domestic competitions in each state have just been concluded. A time when many, after six months of hockey are looking to take a break from the game, some opting to go and play a summer sport.

The crazy thing is the timing should not be the issue that it appears to be.

Yes, in Australia summer and winter sports start on 01 October and 01 April, but why does hockey have to adhere to those rigid dates?

Hockey is in a unique position in that the pitches on which the top-level play are dedicated Hockey pitches, so they can play on them all the year round, as no one else is using them.

Surely with a little effort and some thought a time could be set aside when junior state championships are played, and Hockey One could also be played in a much more abbreviated format, which would reduce costs?

As has been suggested could the state premier competitions take a break mid-season to allow these competitions to take place? This would also allow players to return to their clubs and not disrupt that team’s performance as is currently happening when they lose players to State representative teams.

Where is the incentive to bring young players through and into the first team if when you lose those players to a State U18 or U21 tournament it sees you lose five first team players?

It makes sense to address this now, as if as has been suggested Hockey Australia wants the clubs to pay the national players to play for them, in no-time you will end up with a similar position football found itself in, where clubs will not release players for international friendlies or other matches.

Working out a calendar that benefits all levels of the sport is essential and will determine the future. Yes, it will take a bit of effort and some hard conversations, but if egos can be left at the door such a move could be one of the most beneficial things to the game in years.  

Hockey One was supposed to showcase the cream of Australian hockey. No longer did players have to remain in their own state, they could play for any state to try and put themselves in front of the selectors.

Yet Australia is a very parochial place, and one of the reasons many cite for not supporting their state’s Hockey One side is that they say they simply “cannot identify with it.” They do not like seeing players from interstate coming in and taking the place of a local player. So how much research was done into this when the league was set up?

If this research had been carried out the league would not have so many people saying the same thing, and that they do not like to see players from another state playing for their team.

Rightly or wrongly in the AHL if you wanted to be considered for selection to the national teams then you had to play in the competition.

In Hockey One this is not quite the case, which is irritating some. Selection should be an even playing field, and all players judged over performances in the same period.

What has upset some is that some of those in the current international squads have been excused from having to play all six matches; implying that they are being judged on reputation rather than performance. Not surprisingly there is some resentment amongst those pushing to be a part of the national team.

Aligned with the timing of the competition is the fact that the FIH has opted to make the Men’s and Junior World Cups biennial. This has meant that twice in the first five editions of Hockey One those selected for the Junior World Cup have missed the final matches of Hockey One, games that would undoubtedly benefit their development.

For the men there is also the Sultan of Johor Cup in Malaysia, which is arguably the best under 21 tournament outside of the Junior World Cup, and has been seen as a key part of the preparation for that event. So, these young men missed the beginning of Hockey One and the end if selected for the World Cup.

The public is being told that the cream of Australian Hockey is playing in Hockey One, but quite clearly the next generation of talent are not.

Then there is the fact that these games are being held on a home and away basis. Three games at home and three away, with games played on Friday nights, Saturdays and Sundays.

Many young players are just starting out on the employment ladder, some are still at university, and they have said that their employers and lecturers are becoming less understanding when they ask for a Thursday and/or Friday off, or Monday off to go interstate and play in a competition that has little or no visibility within the nation’s sporting consciousness. With little or no coverage in newspapers on in sports segments on news channels it is understandable that they can see no worth in their students or staff playing.

It is important to remember that those who are talented and are selected for international matches with either youth teams or development teams, are also having to go to those same lecturers and employers during the year to ask to have time off to play.

For some of these young men and women it is a case of no work, no pay.

As one employed under 21 player revealed, having taken time off to play hockey they had no annual leave left for a holiday.

Is that right? It shows dedication on their part, but players need a break. They need time away from the game to recharge or they soon become stale. Such a situation is likely to see many start to begrudge the time the sport takes and walk away.

Interestingly, several parents of players in this age group shared similar stories that their child no longer had any leave for personal use. In fact, one advised that their child was forced to take leave without pay to play, and that they had then had to supplement the lack of earnings.

What this highlights is how vital it is that Hockey One delivers on its promise that the competition was going to result in “a professional sport where players receive payments to play in the competition.”

Payments have been received by some players, often players who have been brought in from overseas to attract fans. Although once again the marketing around these players to maximise their impact has been wanting to say the least.

However, now there is a feeling amongst those at the highest level of the game in Australia who receive a pittance for their dedication, that they believe that such monies should go to Australian squad players first.

Of course, if these teams were true franchises with independent owners, you can understand the owners making such a call and looking to leverage the overseas players to pull in sponsors and supporters. As they not franchises and are essentially owned and run by the State Bodies, one feels that the Australian players have a more than valid argument.

Certainly, those running the game should be very relieved that the players union or representative body doesn’t have sharper teeth.  

All these things become little niggles to players and over time can become bigger issues.

In 2019 the FIH Pro League also commenced, and Australia signed up to be a part of this competition. Once again fees were raised for Hockey players across the land to help cover some of the costs. Hockey One was seen as being a mini version of the Pro League, ambitious, not thought-through and ultimately expensive.

Some in high performance have highlighted the impact on Australia’s performances at International level.

The first FIH Pro League was completed in June 2019, and Australia won the men’s event while the women came second. The first Hockey One competition started in September 2019.

Since then, in the FIH Pro League the Kookaburras have finished: 2^nd, DNP – due to Covid restrictions, 7^th, 1^st and 6^th.

The Hockeyroos have finished: 5^th, DNP – due to Covid, 3^rd, 6^th, and 5^th.

At the Hockey World Cup Australia’s men came fourth and at the Olympics won Silver and came 6^th.

The women came 3^rd in the World Cup and at the Olympics came 5^th on two occasions.

The Junior sides in two Junior World Cups have seen the men come 6^th and 11^th. The women come 5^th and 7^th.

These experienced individuals are convinced that making such radical changes to the game in Australia have caused what appears to be a decline in performance. Is it fact or just a coincidence? Or are some of the issues created due to Hockey One has started to undermine the focus and collective vision needed to succeed at the highest level? 

Certainly, at the top of the game there is a feeling amongst some in that group that there are rules for some players, and different ones for others. That is never a healthy environment whether it be true or not. If there is such a perception the coach must address it and convince all that it is not the case.

However, the biggest question of all is whether Hockey One is honestly sustainable in its current format and whether it sits in the right place in the sporting Calendar?

Aligned with that question is whether it is time that Australia withdrew from the Pro-League? Certainly, it would appear that near neighbours New Zealand have not regretted such a move.

Sadly, many of those administering the game are only hearing what they want to hear. They are not even aware of some of the issues being raised by those involved in the league. That is a very dangerous position to be in. Some would even go so far as to say that it is narcissistic behaviour; something not uncommon in sport and on Executive Boards. These are behaviours where the individuals have an air of grandiosity, a need for admiration, but have a complete lack of empathy. It would appear that many key people involved in Hockey One, especially the players who are the most important component, believe this to be the case.

Hopefully before next year’s event there is a comprehensive review, however, do those in charge have the courage to admit that they got this wrong? What concessions would they be prepared to make without feeling that it was going to damage their ego?

Changing the window when it is played would be a start, and completing it in a shorter period of time, would save the State Associations thousands of dollars and remove many of the issues for those playing in the competition. It would also help clubs keep players, as the hike in fees has seen many lose players in recent years.

As Indian Actress Sonali Bendre once said “The point of human evolution is adapting to circumstance. Not letting go of the old, but adapting it, is necessary.” If only those who ignored the advice given in 2018 had heeded these words. Is it too late now?