When I was a kid, I played a lot. I probably devoted as much time on the playground as in the house or at school. But then, there were vast playgrounds that afforded the prospect of such sweet happenings.

It wasn’t exactly 24x7 – the fad of today, but the perseverance wasn’t limited to only a week. It was twelve months of non stop fun. Come winter, come summer, come monsoon or even ‘Come September’, nothing could dissuade us from indulging in a few games. Examinations or no examinations, there wasn’t a day or a late afternoon that didn’t witness me or my friends at the local field that served as our playground and offered some grass for the wandering cows.

The twelve months were roughly divided as this – one month of football, one month of hockey and the rest of cricket. Football came only because there was no cricket during the monsoons, hockey happened only because we were sometimes bored of the cricketing routine.

That about sums it all!

Cricket was in vogue - no doubt about that. A thick motley of friends descended at the venue everyday without fail. Each earned a sobriquet – derived from the names of famous cricketer personalities who were never seen, just heard (on the radio). There was a Gavaskar, there was a Gundappa (incidentally there was a complaint to our parents from this particular boy’s mother that his son was unnecessarily being singularly tormented and had been evilly referred to as a ‘gunda’), there was also a Bedi (a Sardar who bowled medium fast), there was Chandra, there was a Ghavri, and a Kapil Dev. Every one of us wanted to do something like what his illustrious country-representing player was doing in the international arena.

The likes of Ashis Ray and Sushil Doshi provided the necessary impetus. The ball-to-ball commentary that never failed to fully satiate our senses always imparted the visual stimuli to play just like the god-players. I tried my best to bowl like Prasanna, not quite aware how fat he was and how emaciated a look I displayed.

Occasionally we had contests among teams weaned away different localities – there was as much fun as the India-Australia matches of the present, as many teri-maa-kis and obnoxious-weeds. And as big a crowd witnessing the game. On some days there was also a bloke blasting away on a mike, his voice carrying across the vast spacious area in a strangely beautiful peculiarity.

I also loved playing hockey – dribbling gave a thrill and I had mastered the skill of passing the ball that went effortlessly through the opponent’s feet. It was hard work, no doubt, the sweat came more easily but there was no dearth of fun.

Sadly, hockey was never as fashionable, always remaining in the sidelines as the poor cousin. It did not generate as much enthusiasm as cricket, simply because not everybody participated. Many did not know how to hold the hockey-stick, a few did not even have that basic equipment at all. And by the end of two weeks, the fun had disappeared. We played hockey twice a year, maybe thrice, but not more.

However, things at the national level were slightly different. Hockey as a competitive sport was still popular, even though it did not quite match that of cricket. While we idolised cricketers, we hardly ever gave much thought to the hockey players who represented the country. When India won the Olympics gold medal (in Moscow, I think), we rejoiced for the country, maybe not as much for the game.

Then in 1983, India won the World Cup in cricket. Nothing greater had happened for the country, and I still recollect the radio news next morning that shifted from its ‘Yes Prime Minister’ stance to devote the first news item to cricket, probably for the very first time.

Since then, both the sport has gone downhill, as far as the international performances are concerned. Because of its popularity, however, cricket has sustained, receiving both accolades and brickbats in equal measure. On the other hand, hockey has languished.

The recent uproar of the hockey debacle in non-qualification for the Olympics again has nothing to do with the game but it has become an beating-stick and an issue in mobilising popular opinion on a matter of national ‘dishonour’.

The reasons behind this entirety are not far to seek.

·          If you come to think of it, all sports involving the aerial ball have always been popular. Could be the greater speed, could be the excitement attached with altitude! Cricket, soccer, baseball, lawn tennis, rugby – these have always dominated popular attention compared to hockey or billiards. Most of the actions in cricket pertain to the ball in action in air, be it the almighty ‘six’ (though only 6 runs for that effort is a letdown), the caught out, the run out or even the circular bowling action designed to speed the ball up. Hockey has only one airborne ball activity – the magnificent scoop but that too is looked down upon (pun not unintended).

·          This popularity in cricket has led to significant money being poured into the sport. This has subsequently enabled branding and the best minds have been involved in promoting the sport as a way of promotion of a brand, or many brands. The mix of business and sport has benefited both. Hockey has failed here miserably, thanks to a total disinterest and its inability to boost affiliated marketing.

·          Everything has had a cascading effect, in cricket at least. Best practices have come in, coaches have been inducted who have introduced a no-nonsensical approach where performance is the most important criteria for continued selection. Training is more rigorous, more demanding, more conducive to fitness. Nothing of the sort has been seen in the hockey.

·          More money and fame in cricket has brought in more competition – a greater willingness on the part of players to work hard and excel. Moreover the game has progressed and adapted itself to changing conditions with an effortless ease. The introduction and popularisation of one day matches, coloured clothing with Kerry Packer and now Twenty20. Hockey has still remained an antiquated game. There have been some changes, but these have always been presented by our players and administrators of the game as excuses for non-performance.

It would be useless to deride cricket for the downfall of hockey. It would be stupid to oppose cricket as an Englishman’s game. It would be insipid to criticise Shah Rukh Khan for purchasing a cricket team after gaining a lot from a film on hockey.

Will cricketisation of hockey ever be possible? On current trends, a big NO. But we can always hope, can’t we?

And comment!