The only way to improve is to review performances and identify where you could have done better.
The recent FIH Women’s and Men’s World Cups hosted in the Netherlands and Belgium have both been labelled as a success by the sport’s governing body and many who were in attendance.
Credit must go to all involved behind the scenes, but especially to the players, coaches and umpires without whom the two events would not have had the drama that made it memorable to those who participated or watched. So, congratulations to all.
Also it is important to acknowledge all the volunteers who would have worked in the background.
However, now that the dust has settled on the victories of Germany and Argentina it is pertinent to point out that while the event may well have been a success there were also a number of issues that came to surface that cannot be ignored if the game is to move forward in a positive way.
One of these was the lack of promotion and visibility of the FIH’s showcase event, which has already been covered in The Band Played On But Is It Time For The Lifeboats?. In many countries If you were not a hockey follower you would never have known that Hockey was hosting a World Cup.
To make matters worse those who follow the game and subscribe to the FIH’s Watch Hockey App went on social media and shared publicly their frustration that having paid to watch the tournament they were in fact unable to watch games. Some stated that when they tried to log in again, they were asked to subscribe again! When they contacted Watch Hockey some have claimed they never received a response, others have said that it took over seven days.
Whoever is responsible for this platform within the FIH should have some explaining to do. How can this happen on your blue riband event? How can the customer service be so tardy when dealing with your core audience?
This should have been tested time and again to ensure that these issues did not occur during the event. Many organizations would not wait for an explanation and would simply show the person responsible the door.
That aside the one glaringly obvious conclusion from the tournament and reading conversations online is that the rules of the game need a serious overhaul.
As one former international, who has transferred into coaching said, but requested they remain nameless, “the rules committee at the FIH should resign en masse. If not, they should be sacked as they single-handedly are killing the game. They feel it is their job to make changes every year just because they are a committee, but the changes they make are simply window-dressing, or more like job justification. I have tried to talk to some of those on this committee over the past five years and it is like talking to a brick wall. They all need to go.”
That may sound harsh, but during the World Cup feelings were running hot as interpretations of the rules varied. That in itself is not good for the sport. The strength of sports with a large following lie in the fact that their rules are easy to understand by all.
The spin off from the rules issue is the pressure this puts on the umpires.
Remember that these are not full paid officials. This is not what they do for a job and herein may lie another problem.
As the teams, support staff and players have become more professional in terms of financial support the Umpires have been left behind.
There were some ugly moments for the sport as a result of umpiring decisions during the final stages of the competitions, which were obviously not good for the sport or more importantly those involved, players, teams and officials.
Yet this should not have come as a surprise, and surely the FIH were prepared for such a possibility of this happening?
After all it is common knowledge across world sport that since the Covid Pandemic the abuse of officials has risen dramatically.
While this surge in abuse has been seen in grassroots sport it has also been a factor in the higher echelons of sport.
In the USA 20% of High School referees/umpires quit between 2018 and 2021 because of abuse, that equated to 30-35% of their official’s pool.
In the UK 10,000 referees walked away in a five-season span. After being surveyed 50% ranked verbal abuse as the main reason for walking away.
Experts, psychologists and the sports that have investigated why this abuse has suddenly increased pinpoint several causes.
“The Pandemic Pause,” is one. This is where during the pandemic when sport was suspended many officials decided that the low pay and high stress levels were no longer worth it and walked away to spend their time in other more rewarding ways.
Psychologists believe that society as a whole since covid has seen a trend of “diminished patience levels, poor self-regulation and general anti-social behaviour.”
A third is a lack of respect for authority, or those in power. As we saw during the Pandemic many of our leaders did not adhere to the lockdown rules imposed on the masses. It appeared as if the rules did not apply to them, and as a result the general populus has less respect, trust or faith in those in authority.
In the English Premier League bookings doubled after the pandemic. The number of coaches sanctioned or sent off was the highest it had ever been, this was not just in England but also in other leagues across Europe, and the same behaviours have been witnessed in other sports.
The current levels of abuse it has been reported go beyond simply questioning a decision. There is verbal abuse and intimidation. There are threats of and acts of physical violence carried out on officials as they are targeted after the game has been completed.
One of the areas where harassment has seen an incredible spike is online. Digital harassment has reached unprecedented levels. Again, as some experts have pointed out, those sports who think that social media is just a marketing tool and see this as their main form of promotion are the most likely to come unstuck in this space.
FIFA for all its faults has had to invest in upscaling its automated social media protection tools to flag tens of thousands of social media posts targeting and abusing officials. FIFA has the money to do this. How many other sports have those same resources? Suddenly you understand the comments made by those experts about sports focused on marketing through these channels. They are going to be seen to cop more abuse than others unless they have a similar investment.
So, what was put in place to protect the officials in case this happened at the World Cup? What would happen to the perpetrators?
Throughout the tournament just like at the FIFA World Cup there were many who had little faith in the video umpire system. Even going so far as to claim it was being used to manipulate results as was the accusation at the FIFA World Cup.
There is no doubt that the system in Hockey, which was at one time seen as one of the best, needs reviewing and almost a complete overhaul.
First up if the Video officials are not going to be provided with the highest level of equipment and replays from which they can zoom in on a passage of play then the video umpire should not be in play. After all the game survived for nearly 100 years without it.
You cannot expect people to do a professional job and make crucial decisions if they are not given the right tools. Again, it is unfair on those asked to carry out the task.
Yes, this would require a bigger investment, but that is where the board and management of the FIH, the Confederations and National Associations must stand up and be counted. They need to make a decision that benefits the game and protects the officials. The buzz on social media during the world cup questioning decisions was not good for the sport.
When the Video Umpire system first came in the sport used umpires who had retired or were close to retirement. Umpires with experience in the game. Umpires are forced to retire at 47 years of age, then they are put out to pasture. Why not tap into those years of experience and use it in the video box? This must be a better option that rotating on-field umpires through that role. Some who openly hate taking on the role.
As some have shared with this writer, they did not take up umpiring to be in a box watching video back. They want to be down on the pitch. One umpire at one tournament was told that they were on video duties as they were ‘the best communicator.’ Flattered as they were, they too wanted to be on the pitch officiating.
Which raises the question are we getting the best or most focused and dedicated umpires in the video booth?
Once again there was a situation at the World Cup that should have been avoided after Belgium had an equalizing goal disallowed after a video referral in their semi-final against the reigning Champions and hosts the Netherlands.
Justine Rasir of Belgium was suspended for her side’s subsequent bronze medal match for the comments she made on live television at the end of the game against the Dutch.
This writer has worked in broadcasting and the media for over 35 years. He has at times been asked to get a rise out of a coach or a club owner in an interview pre- or post-game. Why? The reason is simple; it is like clickbait. If there is a reaction, then it will attract viewers and makes a great sound byte to promote future games and coverage.
Let us get one thing clear most broadcasters are only interested in their broadcast, and doing what is best for that. After all that is their business.
Where hockey showed its naivety was allowing any post-match interviews with the Belgian players or coaches in the immediate aftermath of the match. Once again, it resulted in more bad publicity for the sport.
As Anthony Mackaiser a respected former Media Manager with the Springboks rugby team stated on Podcast 97 the media manager must control the narrative. They must be aware of the questions that are going to be asked and give the players the responses. They are there to promote and protect the team, the players and the brand.
So, who was responsible for preventing this interview from an FIH perspective? Surely, they would have been aware that there was likely to be an emotional response from a team that has just missed out on a World Cup Final?
Equally, where was the Belgian team Media Manager to prevent this happening?
Rasir stated that she had said ‘no’ to the interview initially, but kept being badgered to do it.
If there is a commitment to a team to put a player forward at the end of the game did the Belgian’s put forward the right person at that time? If there is a fine that can be imposed for not giving a player to be interviewed in such a situation surely it is better to cop the fine? Is that not why people have the title of “Manager?” To make decisions, the right decisions when needed.
The World Cup raised a great many issues around the world, like does the delay for penalty corners break the flow of the game, is the protective gear being hurled from the field a good look?
Another was why is Hockey still having the teams that have been eliminated from the tournament stay behind and continue to play for final placings? Is this still necessary today? Would it not save on costs by eliminating these matches?
If when you ask these questions and an administrator responds with ‘because that is the way it has always been,’ you know that you have the wrong person in that role. Just because that is the way it has always been done does it make it right? Is it the best option available?
If alternatives were tried, why didn’t they work? This is the important information as these facts will assist in making informed decisions which may or may not be for the better.
Another legacy of the past is having those competing nations provide the umpires; although this is not as black and white as it used to be.
At the recent world cups there were 16 teams in each competition. There were 32 Umpires from the competing nations, with some countries having more than one umpire. Eight of the competing nations had no umpire representation, and there were 5 neutral umpires from countries who had not qualified.
While it is to a degree subjective, were these the best umpires? Even within the umpire community there are some who question the appointment of their colleagues not only to the event but also to key games later in the tournament. Like players understandably there is competition.
What is sad is to hear is how there is an underlying belief that there is a clique and that certain appointments in the past and even to some degree now, are not based on merit or performance.
There are umpires from nations who are unlikely to ever qualify for a World Cup or an Olympic Games who feel that their pathway is blocked no matter how well they do or how hard they work. That is not good. As one young umpire said to this writer, ”I am not sure how long I can stick at it if I do not get the opportunities.”
Possibly there needs to be more transparency about the selection process? Clearly there needs to be better communication, that will hopefully happen with a new person taking on the role of Umpire Management at the FIH.
What many forget is for an umpire to be chosen to officiate at a World Cup, years of hard work and sacrifice have gone into them reaching that milestone. There is plenty of training alone, time away from their families, and time invested on being the best that they can be.
As we saw at the World Cup abuse of the officials reached another level, possibly unseen in the sport before.
It is worth noting that all these officials only received a EUR60 per diem while at the World Cup, oh and three umpiring shirts and three polo shirts! Surely, they should be given more recognition than that? After all like the players officiating at the sport’s biggest event is an achievement and something to be proud of. Even a small memento that says they officiated at a World Cup, as a thank you would surely go a long way?
Not surprisingly some are asking if the abuse is worth it for so little reward?
An internet search found a guide for businesses as to what to pay their staff in terms of per diems when travelling for work in every continent, and even specific to some countries. With accommodation taken out of the equation here the recommended rate for the Netherlands and Belgium for meals and incidentals was EUR140. So, the umpires were getting lower than 50% of what is perceived as the norm. Is that really acceptable?
As one umpire shared, they do not expect to make money from attending such an event, but many have taken time off work to officiate at an event like this so it should not cost them money. Yet it did. How many other Hockey tournaments do they find themselves in the same position, where simply getting to the airport in a taxi costs more than they receive?
Why are these things not budgeted for by the FIH, Confederations and National Associations? Is it incompetence? Or a lack of knowledge and professionalism?
What is equally worrying is that some of the up-and-coming umpires, not unlike some of the teams have had to pay their own way to officiate or play at a tournament. This should not be happening in the sport, and shows that it is still very much an amateur sport.
Surely the FIH needs to look at raising funds so that they can offer qualifi8cation funding to assist these nations in attending just as FIFA and World Rugby do. This comes down to working out your priorities, it should be about making it as easy for all the teams and officials to get to the event without having to worry about finding the money to cover the cost?
If you are running a World event it must meet World Class standards on every level.
Finally, the World Cup should have been all about the players and the nations competing. They should have been the sole focus. Yet during the event we had announcements on a myriad of things being promoted from the FIH Board meeting during the World Cup, an Athlete’s Forum meeting, a National Associations Summit as well as promoting Diversity and Inclusion Day. All things that surely could have waited until after the event? Would they not have gained more interest as stand-alone announcements?
The key takeaways are that the sport needs to look at the whole umpiring landscape. The rules Committee needs to be looked at and questions asked if the sport has the right people involved, and whether there need to be wholesale changes here to achieve the best outcomes. There is no doubt whoever you talk to the rules need to be made simpler so that the umpires are protected and suffer minimal abuse. This and previous committees have failed in this task, and as many believe, have actually made things worse. It is obvious that with simpler and clearer explanations of the rules there is likely to be more consistency, which will make it easy for all to understand, especially non-hockey followers.
The review process also needs an overhaul and if the money is not going to be invested to give the umpires the best vision to make informed and correct decisions then it should be shelved. Hopefully if this investment is not forthcoming, we see the umpires simply decline to be a part of the Video referral process for their own well-being.
Even if it means that video referral is only used at major tournaments, as long as it is being done properly then most would be in favour of that. The game survived without it for decades, and as in football the last thing the sport needs are accusations that the review system is being used to obtain the outcomes that will be best for the sport in terms of filling stadia.
Or worse that it could be related to gambling.
The excuse will be that this all costs money, money that the FIH does not have. Then it is time for the FIH to cut its coat according to its cloth. Even if that means the organization cutting back on spending related to non-essential travel.
The events at the World Cup brought to mind the words of F Scott Fitzgerald in the Great Gatsby, when Gatsby introduces the narrator Nick Carraway to a gambler Meyer Wolfshiem at a restaurant in New York. Gatsby casually mentions that Wolfshiem is the man who fixed the 1919 World Series (the infamous Black Sox Scandal). “It never occurred to me that one man could start to play with the faith of 50 million people, with the single mindedeness of a burglar blowing a safe.”
When people start questioning decisions in sporting contests the damage can have a long term lasting effect on the sport and those involved. Could hockey survive such a scandal? That is why these issues need to be looked at and changes made urgently.
