Sardar Singh, India’s hockey captain, did not travel to London for the Champions Trophy. Rested for the first time in years, he worked instead on his conditioning ahead of a six-nation tournament in Valencia, which will serve as India’s final tune-up before the Rio de Janeiro Olympics.
India, who finished last in a field of 12 at the London Olympics four years ago, have made steady progress since, but allegations surrounding Sardar threaten to sour the feel-good mood in a camp that is nursing hopes of that most elusive piece of metal – an Olympic medal.
Earlier in the week, a 21-year-old British national of Indian origin alleged that she was “assaulted, threatened and raped” by Sardar at a five-star hotel in Delhi two years ago. She had accused him of this earlier, but a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Ludhiana police (in northern Indian state of Punjab) had not filed the First Information Report (FIR), asking her instead to approach the police in the neighbouring state of Haryana.
Incidentally, Sardar is a deputy superintendent of Police (DSP) there.
This time, the Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) has supported her version of events, though the mainstream media has largely been mystifyingly silent on the issue.
You do not have to dig too deep for the reason. Hockey is the sport where India have won eight Olympic golds, the last in 1980, and there is a smidgen of hope that the current team could bring home a medal after the depressing mediocrity of the past three decades.
Sardar, the 29-year-old centre-half who made his debut a decade ago, is central to those hopes. Without him, a relatively inexperienced Indian combination, coached by Roelant Oltmans, won silver at the Champions Trophy, their highest placing at the prestigious tournament since it began in 1978.
Sardar was not even born the only time India won a medal at the Champions Trophy – a bronze in Amstelveen in 1982. That was the same year Hassan Sardar dazzled in a 7-1 evisceration of India in the Asian Games final in Delhi. It has been a precipitous decline since.
It is important to note that most teams were not close to full strength during the Champions Trophy, with one eye on Rio and giving fringe players a chance. It should also not be overlooked that India’s progress to the gold-medal match was anything but emphatic. They squandered a lead to draw 3-3 with Germany, beat Great Britain and South Korea, but were themselves beaten by Belgium and Australia, the table-toppers.
PR Sreejesh, the goalkeeper who led the side in Sardar’s absence, made some uncharacteristic errors in the group stages, but he was in stellar form in the final, as a vaunted Australian forward line was kept goalless. He was on his mettle in the shootout, too, and a controversial overrule, after he had saved the second Australian stroke, left Oltmans incensed.
India appealed the final result, and it took the International Hockey Federation (FIH) more than two hours to come to a decision, by which time the crowd had long since left for home. It was a shambolic end to the penultimate edition of a famous tournament, one that India will remember with some fondness for a while yet.
In Rio, where once-mighty Pakistan will be missing – just as their great rivals were in Beijing in 2008 – India have been drawn alongside Germany, Netherlands, Ireland, Canada and Argentina. There is relief at having avoided Australia and Belgium, two countries that have consistently thwarted them in recent years, but also wariness about the Olympic pedigree that both the Dutch and Germans possess.
With a quarter-final round added for this Olympics – in the past, only the top two in each group went through – all it will take to get into medal contention is one solid knockout performance.
The lustre of the 1980 gold was dimmed by most of the leading nations staying away because of the US-led boycott, and you have to go all the way back to 1972 for the last time India won a medal – bronze – in a full-strength field.
Millions will hope that the interminable wait ends in a few months.
Whether Shastri wins the nod or Kumble, India are set for an aggressive coach
Anil Kumble captained India for a little over a year. In that time, he led the team to a first home series win over Pakistan in a generation, and he also presided over the fiasco that was ‘Monkeygate’.
He responded with controlled fury after that defeat in Sydney – “Only one team was playing with the spirit of the game” – and less than a fortnight later, India won in Perth, traditionally an Australian bastion.
He retired that year, with the shoulder no longer able to cope with the zippy leg-spin that had fetched him 619 Test wickets in an 18-year-long career. Now, after stints as mentor with both Royal Challengers Bangalore and Mumbai Indians in the Indian Premier League (IPL), Kumble is in the fray for the India coaching job.
He may not have coached at international or first-class level, but with the long list of 57 now pruned to 21, Kumble would be a popular left-field choice.
Ravi Shastri, who served as team director for 18 months, remains favourite, and Sandeep Patil – the current chairman of selectors, who once coached Kenya to a World Cup semi-final (2003) – is also keen on the job, but neither can match Kumble’s playing pedigree.
The key factor could well be player feedback. With India set to play 13 Test matches at home before the next IPL, Virat Kohli’s inputs, as captain in the longest format, might be crucial.
He and Shastri enjoyed a robust relationship, with both in favour of an aggressive approach to the game. But Kumble was also instrumental in Kohli’s development as a player, when he captained him in the IPL in 2009 and 2010.
Both Kumble and Shastri are strong individuals, but one is more velvet glove than iron fist. Their careers barely overlapped, but whichever man gets the nod next week, it is safe to say that there will be no diffidence from the teams that they coach.
sports@thenational.ae
Follow us on Twitter @NatSportUAE
Like us on Facebook at facebook.com/TheNationalSport