Before going to the World Cup, the head coach of the Indian men's hockey team, Craig Fulton, said they had about five-to-six percent chance of winning the title. He wasn't wrong: they were ranked eighth in the world, and had had a tough few Pro League seasons, where they finished second-last twice. Even though they had won an Olympic bronze only two years ago, they were not among the favourites to go to the final.
Now, Harmanpreet Singh and company are out of the World Cup and will face Belgium in the seventh-eighth place classification match. By their own rankings and their own coach's expectations, they are right there where they belong.
This is one part of the story.
Their overall performance in the five games they played is the other.
They conceded 16 goals in the five games while scoring 14. In a game where they had to win big, they gave away five goals against Argentina. Against England, they were leading 2-1 and ended up losing 2-4. Against the Dutch, it was goalless till the 40th minute, then they conceded thrice to lose 1-3. Even against Pakistan, they gave three goals while winning 5-3.
Compare this with the four semifinalists at this World Cup. Netherlands, Argentina, Germany and Spain conceded six, eight, six and six goals respectively in their five games so far. Even Belgium conceded just eight goals in their five matches.
In big tournaments, defence is king. After all, at the Paris Olympics, India gave away just seven goals in five games to qualify for the semifinals, eventually winning the bronze.
Three years back, Fulton took charge of this Indian team with that defend-to-win philosophy. Now, the same philosophy has gone missing in his team. The signs were there in the last two Pro League seasons, where the team was up against the best from the world.
The reasons behind India's defensive issues
If you compare the match against Argentina earlier this year in the Pro League, which India lost 8-0, and the one they played against the same opposition on Monday, it looked like India were guilty of committing the same kind of mistakes: Mis-passes, mis-traps, bad positioning inside the circle, bad tackles, and losing the ball cheaply.
It's not just the defenders who were at fault, because even the midfielders and attackers who were supposed to do their job off the ball, largely failed. India might not have plumbed the depths of an 8-0 loss again after the Argentina game, but these same issues were seen in several games.
While the defensive issues are most glaring, there are problems at the other end too. For goals, India are still heavily dependent on Harmanpreet Singh's dragflicks and only Abhishek seemed capable of scoring field goals relative to the team's other attackers.
What's notable here is that India's core has remained the same from the Paris Olympics to the World Cup, with the only notable exclusion being goalkeeper PR Sreejesh who retired in 2024. Amit Rohidas, Jarmanpreet Singh, Sanjay, Sumit, Harmanpreet, Manpreet Singh, Hardik Singh, Vivek Sagar Prasad, Abhishek, Sukhjeet Singh and Mandeep Singh were part of both Olympics and the World Cup. Jugraj Singh and Nilakanta Sharma, who were at the World Cup, were present in Paris as alternative athletes.
The players have remained the same. So why is there a big drop in their performances in the span of just two years? This is where the heat is on Fulton and his staff.
After the brutal home leg of this season's Pro League (four losses in four against Belgium and Argentina, including the 0-8), Fulton had said that the players where coming in off a gruelling Hockey India League campaign and that it took them time to adjust to the national team settings. For the World Cup, that thin excuse is not valid: he had his time with the players, and he knew the areas that needed attention. If it's a case of players not responding to him and his coaching staff, then it's a much bigger problem.
The question arises, should Fulton have changed most of his squad after the Paris Olympics? He did experiment a little with his personnel in the Pro League and there was an India 'A' squad too. But there is no correct answer here -- If he had replaced the likes of Rohidas, Manpreet, Mandeep, Nilakanta, Jugraj and Sumit with younger, inexperienced players in the team, there was no guarantee that they would step up in a big tournament.
The trouble is, though, Fulton and India must try or they risk slipping further. Teams like Argentina, England and Spain were at the same level as India not too long ago but have made significant progress and are now consistently doing better than India. And it didn't start at this World Cup; they have been outperforming India for the last two years.
In a way, India's World Cup shouldn't be surprising because the writing was on the wall. But it's also highly concerning that they went out due to the same problems that have persisted over these two years.
What's next for the team?
This same team, with just one change in personnel, will go to Japan for the Asian Games. India are the defending champions and are clear favourites to win the gold again. At the Asian level, the competition is not much: Only India could make it to the next round of the World Cup while other Asian teams like Pakistan, Malaysia and Japan finished at the bottom of their respective groups.
Although they will not take any opposition for granted, India should win the gold medal and qualify for the LA Olympics. What happens next is the biggest question.
Does this team need changes with regard to players only? Or do they want a complete change in team's philosophy, which might include replacing Fulton? Hockey India will have to find out a way because the process has stopped working and this team has clearly regressed.