Ask any Indian Hockey fan why there was 41 years between their hockey team winning an Olympic medal and the chances are most will tell you that the switch from a grass pitch to an artificial surface was a huge contributing factor. Many believe that the birth of the artificial surface was a deliberate ploy to reduce the dominance of the teams from the subcontinent, namely India and Pakistan, and give the European nations a better opportunity of success.
Such views are hard to shift. Just as the South American football nations were convinced in 1966 that there was a deliberate plan to prevent them from achieving success at the FIFA World Cup that year hosted by England. Both Argentina and Brazil returned home convinced that they were victims of officiating that favoured their European opponents. After all, four of the six tournaments leading into 1966 had been won by South American teams. Italy was the only other nation to have won.
Of the 14 tournaments since and including 1966 South American teams have won five World Cups. So upset were the South Americans by their treatment and the perceived bias by the Europeans that they put forward and made sure that one of their own was elected President of FIFA. Joao Havelange would remain in that role from 1974 to 1998. Havelange was then elected honorary president of FIFA in 1998, but resigned in 2013. The resignation came when it was proven in court that he and his son in law were involved in corrupt practices to the tune of CHF41m.
With no Hockey World Cup until 1971 the Olympic Games were the pinnacle in the sport. From their first appearance in 1928 India had won every hockey gold medal up until 1960, when the recently created Pakistan beat India in the final. From 1928 to 1972, 10 Olympic Games, India and/or Pakistan had played in every single Olympic Games Gold medal match. The year 1972 saw the first time that another nation claimed Gold since 1920, when West Germany defeated Pakistan 1-0.
The Hockey World Cup commenced in 1971 and was won by Pakistan. Once again India and/or Pakistan played in each of the first five finals up to, and including 1982. Only the Netherlands broke their dominance beating India on penalty strokes in 1973. Pakistan won three titles and India one.
Interestingly the last Olympic Gold medal win prior to India’s bronze in Tokyo from these two teams came in 1984 prior, the last bronze medal from either side came in 1976. The last World Cup win was in 1994. Neither nation has contested a final in either tournament since. As with football there was an undercurrent that the Europeans were making decisions that benefitted them. In 2016 Dr Narinder Batra was elected the first Asian President of the International Hockey Federation.
In 1976 at the Montreal Olympic Games the surface on which Hockey was played changed. In 1973 the then President of the FIH visited Montreal, as the host city was struggling to find a suitable venue at which to host the tournament. The other problem was the climate that was causing the hosts problems in terms of preparing a pitch to international standards. The Mayor of Montreal suggested that they look at using artificial turf. The IOC approved the option and after a demonstration event held in Toronto, Rene Frank, the President of the FIH approved the surface.
From that day on artificial turf became the preferred surface.
What has always lent weight to the arguments from the subcontinent that this was a plot to halt their dominance was the fact that the 1976 Olympic Gold medal match did not include either India or Pakistan. The first time that had happened in 48 years. Pakistan would win bronze, Australia silver and New Zealand their one and only Olympic gold in the sport.
It should be pointed out that up until this point in time Women’s hockey was not an Olympic sport, that would commence in 1980. However the Women’s hockey World Cup had commenced in 1974. The Indian women came fourth and would also come fourth at the 1980 Olympics. Unfortunately their form would fall away after that and their next Olympic appearance was not until 2016. The Pakistan women’s team has never competed at either event.
When one looks at the dominance of the teams from these regions it is easy to understand why these beliefs are so strongly held. Artificial pitches are expensive and India was not the wealthy nation that it is today in the 1980’s so to have such pitches installed was a major hurdle in both countries. Twenty years on from Montreal, in 1996 India could only afford ten artificial pitches, while many of the more affluent but less populated European nations were boasting far more.
However are these pitches now in fact contributing to a far bigger problem in the sport outside of India?
As we have seen in the United Kingdom, some club sides who shared facilities with local schools are now having to try and find a new home after the school opts for an all purpose artificial turf. The problem is a very real one in Australia too.
Australia’s first artificial pitch was constructed in 1978 in Perth at what is now known as the Perth Hockey Stadium. Prior to that the men’s premier grade games were often hosted at the Western Australian Cricket Association ground. With two pitches either side of the main cricket square. In those days the women’s and the men’s competitions were run separately from each other. They also had independent clubs, meaning that few if any men’s clubs had a women’s team.
There are many who will argue that the game was healthier in these times. There were few calls on equality as each gender ran their own affairs.
Yet there was a strong push from the Government who were giving funding to many sports, not just hockey to have both the women’s game and the men’s under one banner. In Western Australia a merger between the Western Australian Men’s Hockey Association and the Western Australian Women’s Hockey Association took place in 2003 and the same happened across the nation.
In many cases these mergers not only happened from an administration of the sport as a whole point of view, but also resulted in clubs merging.
Understandably the clubs now wanted their own facilities and their own artificial pitches. They wanted these to be near their club rooms, so that they could continue to keep that club unity, and also generate much needed funds from the bar and the canteen.
Today the artificial turf pitches have become a major issue. Councils would rather have an artificial turf pitch that can be used for multiple sporting events rather than just for one sport. Then there is the issue of inserting an artificial turf in an area that has tended to be a grassed public open space. If you are going to spend the required money on such a surface it is going to have to be fenced off, not only on match days due to the danger, but also when no games are played so that it is not damaged. Local residents do not want that and many councils see the fencing off of areas of open space as a no-no.
Currently a number of clubs are negotiating with their councils for artificial turf pitches. Many in their proposals have stated that the survival of their clubs is dependant on these pitches being approved. This is not just cheap rhetoric, but a reality.
The merge that happened after 2003 has seen monster clubs emerge. Clubs that have 40 to 60 teams playing every week. Even if they happen to have two artificial pitches there is no way that they can accommodate all of these teams at home at one time. As a result the clubs are fracturing.
Mini clubs are emerging within the big club. Teams do not return to the clubrooms for a drink after the game, they opt to head to a nearby bar. Club fundraisers no longer see players from every grade attending, often individual teams will organise their own events.
Come the end of season dinner or ‘wind-up’ you are seeing only the top grade teams in attendance. The lower grades having their own awards ceremonies and often at a venue not connected to the club. Most of the clubs host an awards night to recognise both the men’s and women’s top sides, but then there is sometimes an undercurrent of discontent in the order of the events; the women feeling that they are playing second fiddle to the men.
A club is supposed to represent the coming together of a group of individuals with a common purpose. Or is an organisation constituted to play matches in a particular sport. While the clubs still have that common purpose in terms of all their members wanting to play the sport, the togetherness that makes being part of a club so great seems to be slipping away.
The fact that some teams are playing on artificial turf and some are not is a major contributor. The fact that some of the teams are using an artificial turf not close to their club rooms is also a contributing factor. The cost of installing, and maintaining an artificial turf is another consideration, and a big burden on a club.
If hockey fives is to become the future of the sport as some will have us believe, suddenly there will be the expectation that clubs have purpose built artificial pitches for five-a-side hockey. (At Sixes and Sevens, or Should That be Sixes and Fives?)At present there are no such pitches in Australia and it is understood that no consideration is being given at this point in time for the construction of any, even though the FIH is planning a Hockey Fives World Cup. Is this a case of trying to run before you can walk?
The other problem facing the sport is with clubs having so many teams underneath that one name you limit your ability to grow the sport. You also restrict your ability to develop players.
It does not matter how many under age teams you pick for state representation or how many clinics you host, it is at the clubs that most of the development is achieved. Here young players see senior players play and are given the chance to train with and then play alongside them. That is where they learn. The current issue with the artificial pitches means that many of the young players never get to watch the first team play, so they never have that connection.
Western Australia used to be the dominant Hockey state in Australia. For example in the Women’s National Championships between 1938 and 1967 only three times did Western Australia not win the title. In the men’s competition from 1962 to 1987 there were only six times they did not win the title outright, and on one other occasion they shared it.
Is it a coincidence that the generations that have come through since the merge of clubs have not achieved the same success as those who have gone before? The Australian Hockey League was regrettably replaced by Hockey One in 2019, but ran from 1991 to 2018. Western Australia won nine men’s titles and six women’s titles in that time. However, the last men’s title was in 2011. The Women’s AHL ran from 1993 – 2018, and the Women’s team’s last success was in 2010.
Is it the size of the clubs holding back development, or is it the disconnect happening with clubs being splintered due to the locations of an artificial turf to play on?
When hockey was booming in Western Australia there were far more schools playing the sport. Since the dawn of the artificial turf that participation has dropped as it has tended to be only the private schools that have been prepared to invest in an artificial turf pitch. So suddenly less children are playing the sport or if they are playing, the chances are they are not playing as much, as they are only playing for their club.
Another problem facing the sport is that other sports are growing in terms of participation numbers and clubs, and they too are demanding space in which to play. Australian Rules Football with declining participation numbers is fighting tooth and nail to keep the grounds it has and stop football gaining that space. So Hockey clubs are really up against it, unless they can find a benevolent and sympathetic council.
There is no doubt that everyone will have an opinion. (On The Surface) What is interesting is that when the artificial pitches came into being the view from India and Pakistan was that they had been created to level the playing field in World Hockey. The Australian men’s hockey team has not been outside of the top three in the World Rankings since the 1970’s, the women have also been consistently in the top five. The new World Ranking system may well see that change, but a shrinking talent pool due to clubs becoming fractured and the artificial turf issue may also have an impact.
These are difficult times to be administering the sport. The national team needs to have success to feed the interest of future generations. Yet much needs to be done at club level to make it more sustainable, while also increasing participation and raising standards of play. Clearly a new strategic approach is needed, or despite some very generous individuals and companies keeping the clubs afloat, some may well reach breaking point in the next ten years.
