India were brave but not good enough

Indervir Grewal  in Bhubaneswar

India’s end in the World Cup felt anticlimactic. They were so close, yet it never looked that way. They fought so valiantly, yet it seemed they didn’t do enough. India’s journey to their first knockout match was so long — 16 days; it seemed they had reached so far. Yet, the abrupt end was a reminder that it was only India’s fourth match, and all the world No. 5 had confirmed was a top-8 finish. In the end, India finished sixth.

The Netherlands were beatable — that was the prevalent feeling on the matchday and the next day. Yet, India never really looked like they could beat the Dutch. Self-proclaimed exponents of “attacking hockey”, India rarely put together a dangerous move. Not that the Dutch were much better. For a clash between two attacking sides, the match was more a physical and mental “battle” in the midfield.  

Defence shines 

India matched the Dutch in defence. Both teams were uncharacteristically sure in their tackles in and around their own circle. Both teams started with a high press in the hope to exploit the nervous character of the other team. Among the Europeans, the Netherlands match the Asians in terms of temperament.

Both teams, looking for counter-attacks, were applying high pressure. That led to the game starting at a frenetic speed. While the Dutch managed to hold the ball and get it past the Indian first line of defence, India’s incapability to do the same highlighted their inexperience, especially in the central midfield.

Strange tactics, inexperience

India’s coach Harendra Singh had repeatedly trumpeted about his team’s attacking mindset. Yet, for most part of their quarterfinal match, India resorted to aerial passes to get the ball out of their own half. The strategy had worked against Belgium in the pool match by unsettling the high-pressing Red Lions’ defence. But it is not how a knockout match against three-time world champions is won.

What had worked for India against Belgium was the way they passed the ball with urgency and confidence. India were more proactive, while Belgium, not worried too much about the result of a pool match, were a bit complacent. But in a do-or-die match, the Indians were hurried by the more aggressive Dutch, forcing them into making basic errors. India had too many missed-traps, missed-passes and they were dispossessed way too many times. No possession meant no attacks. A few minutes into the match, it seemed India had already given up on building attacks. They seemed content defending and waiting for counter-attacks. Their reliance on scoops became so absurd that players were using aerial balls to eliminate just one Dutch player at times. Aerial balls are used in emergency situations — either when a deep forward is free or there is no other way to get out of a tight squeeze.

The Indian team management had gotten defensive when questioned about the team selection before the tournament. Harendra had said that there was no “child” in his team, only men. But what about big-match experience? The difference in experience was evident in the way the Dutch were more composed, even if it was marginal, than the Indians. The Dutch also showed their tactical maturity by adapting during the match — they started dominating by controlling possession. India had also done it against Belgium, after the halftime break. But in a crucial match, India just couldn’t get going.

The one-goal loss — with the feeling of so near yet so far —was hard to swallow. India did have their chances. The coach and captain also blamed the umpires. Yet, they never really looked the best team on the night. India, however, fought the “battle” valiantly till the end.  

Today’s matches 

(semifinals)

England vs Belgium, 4pm 

Australia vs Holland, 6:30pm

Live on Star Sports