Not A Country For Old Men?

“You can tell that the Olympics are coming up because Hockey is in the news,” was a comment made by a friend in the past month in Australia.

Sadly their words were correct, as every four years on the eve of the Olympic Games the sporting media remember that Australia has two hockey teams, and that both have historically been very successful on the world stage.

In fact coming into the Paris Olympics Games the Australian men’s team, the Kookaburras won the FIH Pro League for the second time, which to those who do not follow the sport closely would make them one of the favourites for the gold medal. After all, this is supposedly the competition to be playing in as it features the top ranked teams in the world.

The truth may well be a little different especially in an Olympic year.

Due to the FIH’s new World Ranking system, where ever game played is worth world ranking points 2023 saw Australia drop out of the top five for the first time since 1975. (Perceptions Must Not Define You) As funding in Australia is based on a number of key performance indicators, and world rankings are one. It was essential that Australia won games in the Pro League in 2024, as they had to climb back amongst the top four in the world or they could lose financial investment.

While other teams were clearly holding things back leading into the Olympic Games, and were most likely not that bothered as to where they came in the final standings of the Pro League, Australia was – as to be fair is always their approach – going out to win. Many far wiser than this writer are questioning how much of their game Australia has revealed leading into the Paris Games, and how much some of their key competitors have kept in reserve?

Regrettably this is one of the flaws with the Government funding model, and also the sport’s reliance predominantly on Government support.

As has been the case since the 1960’s, as covered in Australia’s Hockey Grail there is an expectation every four years that Australia will win a medal in Hockey at the Olympic Games, and that it is most likely going to be gold.

The Women’s team entered the Olympic Games in 1984 and won Gold at their second attempt in 1988, and then in 1996 and 2000, while the men have still just one solitary gold medal to their name from 2004.

Incredibly these are the only medals that the women’s team has won at the Olympic Games, and they have not won a medal since the Sydney Olympic Games in 2000. This resulted in their funding being heavily reduced following Tokyo. Should they return from Paris without a medal one would expect that a complete review of their high performance program would urgently take place. (Should Hockey Sisters Be Doing It For Themselves?)

Sadly, once again leading into the Paris the team hit the media for all the wrong reasons with one player lodging an appeal when they were not selected for the Games. This was yet more bad publicity for the sport, and one feels it could have been avoided. The question that still is being asked is why, when following their own review into the Women’s High Performance program the High Performance Director is still based in Melbourne when the recommendation was that they needed to be where the High Performance program is, in Perth?

To assume that Australia will win gold is foolish. There are very few individual athletes at an Olympic Games who you can ever say are assured a gold medal, Ed Moses, Michael Johnson, Usain Bolt would be amongst a very elite group where that may have been the case. In team sports it is a completely different situation. Possibly the USA Basketball in 1992, the famous “Dream Team” would be the only team afforded such status. Although many in India would argue that their Hockey team in the 1930’s was a shoe-in for gold.

Australia’s coach Colin Batch has only made three team changes from the squad that came home with silver in Tokyo three years ago, after losing to Belgium in a shoot out.

This is the same amount of personnel changes that Belgium made for Tokyo after they lost the 2016 Olympic final to Argentina. In Tokyo they went one better and took home their first Olympic Hockey gold medal. Does the same fate await Australia?

There are some who are saying that Batch’s team for Paris is ‘too old’ to achieve what Belgium did in 2021, but the average age of this Kookaburras team is actually less than Belgium’s in Tokyo. Australia’s average age heading into Paris is 28.3 whereas Belgium’s in Tokyo was 28.9.

In fact the past two Olympic gold medal winning sides have had an average age of 28 which has tended to be a shift from the average ages historically.

The following table is based on the ages of the players listed as receiving gold medals at the various Olympic Games. These are the ages that were officially recorded, even though some players ages have been questioned over the years. Also the squad sizes have varied over the years with the changes in the game and what the IOC has agreed to.

The youngest winning side was interestingly when hockey first appeared at the Olympic Games. England won the gold medal with Ireland coming second, and Wales and Scotland third. There was no play-off for third place. The IOC has over time recorded this as being three medals to Great Britain. Great Britain can also lay claim to the oldest team to win gold at the second Olympic Hockey tournament in Antwerp, where again only four teams competed. This Games coming just after the first World War many young men where simply unavailable.

Remarkably, only two gold-medal winning teams have won without fielding a player aged 30 or over, and they are Pakistan in 1984 and Germany in 2008.

Maybe sports science is the reason why we have seen the average age rise in the past two Olympic cycles, maybe it is the use of rotating substitutions that has meant that older players can play on longer, but whatever it is the figures from the last two Olympic Games quash the argument being made by many that this team is too old to win gold. However, they are the oldest Australian team to participate at the Olympic Games just pipping Graham Reid’s group in 2016 (28.06)..

While obviously everyone wants to see Australia medal there are concerns about what will happen post Paris. If Colin Batch’s team comes home with another medal, and especially if it is gold one would expect him to be offered an extension as head coach. If they fail to medal Hockey Australia is likely to be looking for a new head coach.

The concern is in relation to the next generation coming through. With very few changes made to his squad at the the end of last year, and no players being pulled up from the under 21 squad, understandably if as expected there are a number of players opting to retire after Paris there is going to need to be a very quick rebuilding process. Colin Batch has given game time to players in the Australian development squad but will that be enough? The under 21 program has regrettably seen funding cut which has meant less camps and games, which also means less time to learn for these young players aiming to be the next Kookaburras.

Once again the fact that every international match is now worth world ranking points and Australia’s funding is in partly based on that, this is a real conundrum. It certainly brings into question once again if there are any long term benefits to Australia participating in the Pro League, a competition where it is claimed the costs per team are around $1.5-2million a year for prize money of $50,000. Is this really underpinning the future? (Acting in The Best Interests?)

While a gold medal would be fantastic the Board of Hockey Australia has to still look ahead, and ensure that such an outcome does not result in them simply papering over the cracks, and that the long term future and reputation of the sport and it’s national teams does not suffer.