Hockey India, on Friday, announced Janneke Schopman's resignation from the post of the chief coach of the Indian women's hockey team. It was an inevitable end: with a string of poor results that ended in her having a go at the federation.
Last month, she failed in her main objective as the team failed to qualify for the Paris Olympics and a few days ago, she heavily criticised Hockey India for gender-based discrimination and said the women's team did not get as much support as the men's team.
She took over a team which had finished fourth at the Tokyo Olympics and promised a new future. Her goal was to make India the best team in Asia and rank among top-3 in the world while playing attacking hockey. Almost three years later, despite a few decent results, her reign has been marked by inconsistency on the pitch, controversial selections (or rather non-selections) and a few hard questions for Hockey India.
Performances and results
Over the years, and to Schopman's credit, the team has played a positive brand of hockey. All the players took to her system, their work rate was relentless, they pressed high up the pitch and were quick with ball movement. However, the results didn't back their performances. For all their good work with the ball, they didn't win enough matches, especially in big tournaments. They finished ninth at the World Cup, couldn't win the Asian Games gold and then failed in the Olympics Qualifiers at home.
There were good wins in her reign -- at the Pro League, FIH Nations Cup, Commonwealth Games and even the bronze medal at the Asian Games. But inconsistency was a constant factor and they couldn't win it when it mattered the most. Many times in these big matches, when it became tough on the pitch, it seemed the players could not break down the defences and find winning goals. The issue was pretty evident at the 2022 World Cup. And it came back to trouble them in future tournaments as well.
Improvement in players
There was a lot of potential in the players who were part of the Indian team that finished fourth at the Tokyo Games. Their fitness standards were high, but they needed the right coaching and correct strategy to raise their level.
Schopman pushed them and gave them the support they needed to improve physically and mentally. Sangita Kumari and Salima Tete are the two standout names when it comes to the future of Indian women's hockey. It was Schopman who unlocked their potential and both became potent attacking threats. Salima always had the pace, but Schopman convinced her to play centrally, which added a new dimension to her game. Now, she can create big chances from the middle with clever movements and quick passing.
Sangita was far from a finished product when she came into the side. Schopman trusted her to start in big games and gradually her finishing improved. She scored important field goals when senior players like Vandana Katariya and Rani Rampal were missing. Schopman helped her realize what she was capable of.
Among all players, it was captain Savita Punia who became Schopman's biggest supporter. Savita credits her for introducing methods to improve mental health and mindfulness of the players. Schopman also worked constantly with Savita to improve her goalkeeping, especially in shootout situations. Over the years, the Indian captain pulled off many shootout masterclasses and a big reason behind these performances was Schopman.
Lack of penalty corner specialists
When India pulled off a massive win against Australia at the Tokyo Olympics, it was Gurjit Singh who scored the only goal via a penalty corner. She was India's number-one dragflicker and the most important goal threat for the team. A year after the Tokyo heroics, Gurjit's form became a concern. Her failure in penalty corner conversions was among the major reasons behind India's disappointing World Cup. She also struggled with injuries and had to miss the Asian Games and Olympic Qualifiers.
In her absence, India did not have a reliable dragflick specialist. Schopman and later Rupinder Pal Singh tried to mould youngster Deepika for the role, but it was evident that she needed more time and experience at the international level. According to Schopman, the issue was systemic as she said after the recent Pro League matches. "Penalty corners are a huge issue because juniors (team) do not have many good dragflickers. That is a big, big point of attention," she'd said.
The Rani Rampal factor
Player selections were a major issue in Schopman's reign. Rani was the team's captain when Schopman took over and a year later, she struggled to get into the team. Rampal had a long injury layoff post the Tokyo Olympics, but when she made her comeback, Schopman wasn't convinced and dropped her from the squad.
Schopman never explained her reasoning behind dropping a player of Rampal's stature. Rampal's contribution to the women's game has been massive, both as player and captain. A player of Rampal's calibre was a huge miss, and the team could never reproduce what she did during her absence. Rampal played at the national level and that indicated there was no problem with her fitness, yet the coach didn't pick her.
Rather than depending on one or two big players, Schopman tried to play to a gameplan where goals would be shared by the attackers. The plan had its merit, but it often failed against tough opponents. This was where India lacked someone like Rampal, who would stand up and deliver. Perhaps Schopman was right in not picking Rampal, maybe the player's fitness standards did drop, but the coach failed to make the post-Rampal transition phase easy for the team.
Questions for Hockey India
Both Rampal and Gurjit's issues also point to the question of talent. Are there enough talented players coming up the ranks to create competition for a place in the national team? Sangita can step up when there's no Vandana, but what about penalty corner specialists and out-and-out strikers? Who after Savita? Is Hockey India doing enough to raise standards at the domestic and junior levels?
Currently, the system is such that only players part of the junior or senior national setup get exposure to high-performance training and better facilities. India need to improve their domestic structure so that players can come out more rounded in their skills and don't need to change or adapt a lot when they enter the national setup.
Another set of questions for Hockey India is about the gender discrimination allegations raised by Schopman. When a women's team head coach accused them of differential treatment to men's and women's teams, the board should've come out with a statement taking note of it and a plan to tackle them. The allegations are serious and can be detrimental to the overall development of the game and could potentially affect the appointing of the next coach.