Suggested Premier Hockey League improvements for season II

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 5:47 am

There is every possibilty that hockey might be deviated from the present set of rules.

Presently there are Indian teams in hockey and football that are owned by people. Have these two sports deviated from the present set of rules?

The rules of hockey were changed for PHL and none of the teams were owned by any business or corporation. Rules van be changed by people other than the team owners so why blame them?

Rules and regulations have to be set up in advance before PHL II should be organized next year.

Reply to Sandeep:

BEfore considering OWNING a team like how they do in USA lot of work has to be done. Once a team is owned by a private firm or so lot of control will be there in their hands. There is every possibilty that hockey might be deviated from the present set of rules. NBA played in USA is pretty much different from how other countries play Basketball. Private owners dictated the terms and they made rules however they wanted it to be. A control should be established over private owners if at all we want to go for ownership.

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:16 am

Kumar wrote:

Junior Division.. I am not sure i follow you.. Are we talkin about 'Juniors ' playing in this division or just 'junior' in the name...

The Indian universities used to be the nursery of Indian hockey in the past and I get the impression that the universities are not bringing out as many good players as in the past.

India needs a good hockey league for the under-19 players. These players must be coached properly so that they do not have to "unlearn" before learning the right way of playing at a later stage. There are state sponsored schools where junior players get coaching throughout the year. India has produced several excellent under-19 players recently and India is the defending Junior World Cup champions. Some of that credit has gone to few individuals (see David and mugu's writings on this subject a few months back) but the junior hockey program must be better organized.

The junior league is not going to cure the ills of Indian hockey just the same way the PHL will not bring the Olympic Gold. But a well organized junior and senior programs will revitalize Indian hockey. Playing in well run tournaments will help the juniors and seniors.

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:23 am

Kumar wrote:

Three tier is a great idea, but may be little Ambitious at thiese stage.. I am not sure we can find one team owner to sponsor teams across two tiers also.. May be a Major league model, where they have some kind of partnership/agreement among the teams.

As Kumar knows it very well, the Major League baseball teams are expensive ($200 million for a mediocre team) and the AAA teams are not cheap also (several million dollars). The AA and single A baseball teams are more expensive than the Indian hockey teams. Hence it is very expensive for one person to own baseball teams across the various divisions, and the owners have tie-ups with other team owners (like Kumar mentioned).

The Indian model can be similar to the Major League baseball or one person can own the Tier I, II and II teams. The Indian teams are not going to be very expensive. I am not sure how the relationship between Indian owners will pan out if they have to share resources, and hence I proposed one owner for Tier I,II and III team combo.

pkmohanva · Post by **pkmohanva** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:37 am

1. What is the difference between a League and a Tournament? Was PHL I a league, or a 1-venue, 5-team, invitational tournament with live television coverage? Is the upcoming national championship a league or a tournament?

2. What would be the optimum number of teams in PHL II? Were the 5 teams in PHL I too little (when compared to 12 of India's National Football League) or just right (based solely on budgetary constraints)?

3. What would be the optimum duration of PHL II? Was the 5 week duration of PHL I too little (when compared to the 5-month Indian National Football League) or just right (based on the packed domestic/international hockey calendar of India and the rest of the hockey world)?

4. What were the goals of PHL I? Why can't a Tour achieve, or exceed those goals in Season II?

5. Will a Tour model attract more foreign players than a 5-week, all-or-nothing, your league or my PHL kind of setup, which resulted in 0 Australian, 1 European, 2 Malaysians and the rest Pakistanis in PHL I?

6. Instead of Tier I, Tier II and Tier III (junior) teams, can we have a League at the inter-university level in India, and a Tour at the senior/professional level in India? Recommended URLs:

http://www.bharatiyahockey.org/kreeda/ (League model)
http://www.bharatiyahockey.org/hockeybharata/ (Tour model)

7. Can Indian hockey accomodate another television channel in the mix? How about TEN Sports for the inter-university League and ESPN-Star for the senior-level Tour - their respective target audiences will not clash, and one will feed into the other.

8. Can the PHL have an Indian name? Though it is hard to define an 'Indian name', some examples are as follows:

India's national broadcaster - Doordarshan
India's national sports award - Arjuna Puraskar
India's national radio broadcaster - Akashvani
India's first reactor - Apsara
India's first satellite - Aryabhatta
India's first IR ballistic missile - Agni
The names of each and every person in this Forum who has contributed to this ongoing discussion.

Did the fact that ESPN is an American television network influence the English name 'Premier Hockey League'? A rose by any other name will be just as sweet, but we still call a rose 'gulab'

9. Other countries have privately owned sports team, India has public sector institutional sports teams. Should we co-opt these permanent, year-round, employment-generating institutions as is into the league, or do we break them up and assign their players to artificial teams? What will be the incentive for public sector institutions to maintain teams, sponsor tournaments and form Academies, when they do not get an opportunity to play together as a team? When we talk of a league in Indian hockey, are public-sector institutions part of the solution or part of the problem?

10. What were the stakes of the IHF in PHL I? What did the IHF gain by handpicking the different teams and coaches of the PHL I? Was IHF really required for PHL I to be successful? Can PHL II be purely an ESPN-Star Sports project, with zero involvement of the IHF except to allot the dates?

Kumar · Post by **Kumar** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:14 am

India needs a good hockey league for the under-19 players.

Bhushan, I would probably increase the age limit to '21'... Further this means that this kids are going to lose out on their college/ university education.. Especially in low-pay sports like Hockey, not sure if we will find a lot of takers.. So not sure if this will ever pan out!!!!

How about something on the lines of College games(football, NBA) in US... We already have similar format in India, where they have Inter collegiate and Inter University games.. May be tweak this format to make it popular and interesting!!!!!

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:31 am

Bhushan, I would probably increase the age limit to '21'... Further this means that this kids are going to lose out on their college/ university education..

Arrange the league matches in summer when the colleges are out for vacation. Have the league matches be played in one city like the PHL I to keep the cost down. Raising the age to 21 years will result in less 17-19 year olds getting a chance to play. My idea is to give exposure to talented under-19 years with the coaches of the main PHL teams working with them for the PHL Junior League.

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 7:04 am

2. What would be the optimum number of teams in PHL II? Were the 5 teams in PHL I too little (when compared to 12 of India's National Football League) or just right (based solely on budgetary constraints)?

The PHL has to evolve over time. The number of teams will depend on how many lighted hockey stadiums Indian cities have. Ultimately a 10-team format will be better than the present 5-team set up. However, a 10-team format will require greater participation of foreign players otherwise the standard of play will suffer. The idea is to have top class international hockey flavor in PHL.

3. What would be the optimum duration of PHL II? Was the 5 week duration of PHL I too little (when compared to the 5-month Indian National Football League) or just right (based on the packed domestic/international hockey calendar of India and the rest of the hockey world)?

The Indian NFL and PHL are two different breeds. The Indian football team rarely plays international matches and the imported players have no other commitment during the NFL.

PKL is quite different than NFL and good foreign players will not commit to a 5-month long PHL. The PHL should be one of several tournaments in the Indian hockey calender, the difference being that the caliber of hockey in the PHL is expected to be very high because of the presence of top Indian and foreign players.

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:58 pm

1. What is the difference between a League and a Tournament? Was PHL I a league, or a 1-venue, 5-team, invitational tournament with live television coverage? Is the upcoming national championship a league or a tournament?

I feel that the terms “League” and “Tournament” are interchangeable depending on how a championship is set up. For example, a “League” will have teams playing against each other and the winner will be the one with the highest points, or the two teams that top the league standings may play for the championship. A “Tournament” can be run on a league basis or on a “knock-out” basis.

I viewed the PHL I as a one-venue, 5-team invitational tournament played in a league format.

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 7:10 pm

4. What were the goals of PHL I? Why can't a Tour achieve, or exceed those goals in Season II?

5. Will a Tour model attract more foreign players than a 5-week, all-or-nothing, your league or my PHL kind of setup, which resulted in 0 Australian, 1 European, 2 Malaysians and the rest Pakistanis in PHL I?

I am not sure about the goals of PHL I. Was it a way to show the Indian public that Mr. Gill and IHF are doing something to improve Indian hockey?

My goals for PHL are:

- Organize a top class international hockey tournament in India where the top hockey players of the world will participate.

- A ten-team format in the PHL Tier I will give enough opportunities to many Indian players to play with or against the best players in the world. These players by living with the international players will see what it takes to become the best players in the world. Presently only the top 25 or 30 Indian players get to play against the world’s best each year.

- The Tier II and Junior League will give chance to the rising Indian stars to showcase their talent, give them match experience, and offer them an opportunity to rise to Tier I level.

- The Tier II and Junior League teams will benefit from expert coaching available to Tier I teams if the teams at the three levels will have some sort of relationship. The top level coaching is available to perhaps the top 40 or 50 Indian players currently. Some diamonds in the rough may be found once they get expert coaching.

The PHL alone will not raise the standard of Indian hockey. Indian players need a well organized year-long calendar full of domestic and international tournaments. Hence an Indian Hockey Tour is important and some tournaments can be organized where international club teams will participate also.

The PHL I was poorly organized and it resulted in lack of participation of players from Australia, New Zealand, Europe, South America and Korea. These players will come to PHL if the timing is right and the team formation is done correctly.

My idea is to have about ten teams each in Tier I, II and Junior level that will have a home base with a good hockey field/training facilities, have access to top level coaches (preferably good foreign ones with Indian coaches assisting them), trainers, physiotherapists, video film libraries to review the matches with the players, etc. These teams should be run like businesses with little or no interference from IHF but have a set of rules laid down and implemented by a committee. These teams should develop their fan base and loyalty, and play on a domestic Indian Hockey Tour. The number of teams in each Tier can be increased as more teams reach that standard.

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 8:50 pm

6. Instead of Tier I, Tier II and Tier III (junior) teams, can we have a League at the inter-university level in India, and a Tour at the senior/professional level in India?

The inter-university hockey tournaments must continue as they are, and I would recommend adding more tournaments at that level. The universities must produce more future hockey stars.

My concept about the Junior League is mainly for players in the 16-17 year age group - pre-university level. These players need "correct" coaching so that the players do not have to "unlearn" bad habits of hockey. I want them to be part of the Tier I and II teams so that they get frequent exposure to the coaching staff and players throughout the year. The team owners must take responsibility for the proper training of the junior players, and it might happen if these players are part of the total team (Tiers I, II and Juniors).

As I have written before, the PHL should be a part of the National Hockey Tour. I envision PHL to be the top tournament in the Tour, and that it will have the top hockey players in the world. PHL must bring hockey fans to the stadium or in front of the TV sets because it will have the most exciting hockey in the world (except perhaps for Olympics/World Cup).

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:03 pm

8. Can the PHL have an Indian name? Though it is hard to define an 'Indian name', some examples are as follows:

India's national broadcaster - Doordarshan
India's national sports award - Arjuna Puraskar
India's national radio broadcaster - Akashvani
India's first reactor - Apsara
India's first satellite - Aryabhatta
India's first IR ballistic missile - Agni
The names of each and every person in this Forum who has contributed to this ongoing discussion.

A rose by any other name will smell just as sweet but an Indian rose can smell the sweetest.

PHL can or must be renamed with an Indian name as long as an outstanding product is the main ingredient. I think that having "Bharatha" in the name of PHL and naming the best player award "Khel Abhushan" would be a great idea.

______________________
Bharat Bhushan Sharma

Kumar · Post by **Kumar** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 3:08 am

My goals for PHL are:

Bhushan has covered most of the points.. Apart from the goals listed above, the most important goal is to raise the awareness of 'Hockey' in the minds of Indian people!!!

The hockey players need to become household names and kids should grow up aspiring to play 'Hockey'...

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 4:55 am

Kumar wrote:

My goals for PHL are:

Bhushan has covered most of the points.. Apart from the goals listed above, the most important goal is to raise the awareness of 'Hockey' in the minds of Indian people!!!

The hockey players need to become household names and kids should grow up aspiring to play 'Hockey'...

Kumar, you have hit the nail on the head.

I also want the PHL to bring excitement to the Indian public, and for children to look up to the Indian hockey stars.

A well run PHL with the top hockey players from India and the rest of the world can do it. People have to identify with the teams and the players to make them household names. PHL should be like the Majors in PGA or the Grand Slam events in tennis. There are many golf and tennis tournaments but Wimbledon, The Masters Championship, The US Open and the French Open bring more excitement for the fans. The popularity of golf and tennis becomes more when these Majors are held.

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Sun Feb 27, 2005 6:48 am

9. Other countries have privately owned sports team, India has public sector institutional sports teams. Should we co-opt these permanent, year-round, employment-generating institutions as is into the league, or do we break them up and assign their players to artificial teams? What will be the incentive for public sector institutions to maintain teams, sponsor tournaments and form Academies, when they do not get an opportunity to play together as a team? When we talk of a league in Indian hockey, are public-sector institutions part of the solution or part of the problem?

The Indian hockey and football teams are owned by people (e.g., Mohan Bagan, East Bengal, Goan teams, etc) or by institutions (e.g., Indian Airlines, Air India, some Banks, etc) or by government (e.g., Services teams, Punjab Police, etc).

The problem is that the players have to be employed by the institutions or government agencies to play for them. Development of junior players (under 18 years) does not occur in these cases.

My suggestions:

Let us create teams that will be owned by people/institutions and the team name remains the same when the team is sold to a new owner. This occurs in the NBA or Major League baseball or British soccer, etc. The owners should hire players for the team and not necessarily for the institution in case the team is owned by a bank or airlines. The team name should not reflect the name of the airlines or bank because then it will create problems if the team is sold to another person.

These teams will be new for the fans in the beginning but in a year or so they will develop large fan following. They will play throughout the year in the Indian hockey tour and not just for the PHL. When new teams are added to the NBA or American Football (NFL) it does not take much time for the teams to get new fans.

Airlines, Banks and other businesses can help build hockey stadiums and they can name the stadiums after them, e.g., Air India hockey stadium in Mumbai, Indian Airlines stadium in Delhi. Businesses can pay the team owners to place ads in the stadiums.

Indian businesses can sponsor hockey tournaments in the Indian hockey tour and give their names to the tournament, e.g., PGA Tour tournaments.

BSharma · Post by **BSharma** » Sun Feb 27, 2005 6:55 am

10. What were the stakes of the IHF in PHL I? What did the IHF gain by handpicking the different teams and coaches of the PHL I? Was IHF really required for PHL I to be successful? Can PHL II be purely an ESPN-Star Sports project, with zero involvement of the IHF except to allot the dates?

The less that is written about IHF's involvement in PHL I, the better it is. Handpicking players and coaches for PHL was utterly useless.

I do not want PHL to be owned by ESPN-Star Sports project. It should be run by an independent agency and it should negotiate long term TV contracts with ESPN or the highest bidder. US based NBA, College or Pro football, PGA Tour, etc are good example of how the independent sports bodies negotiate TV contracts.

I agree that IHF's role in PHL should be minimal.

The Sports-India Community