THE national team is in Spain these days, but there is little information in the media to really know what is happening out there on the field. The only thing I know is that the first Test between the two sides ended in a 1-1 draw after Pakistan had taken the lead first.
This is a sorry state of affairs, to say the least. Hockey is our national game, but there is little coverage in the country’s media of the various happenings that keep taking place from time to time. Just the fact that one has to mention it every now and then that hockey happens to be the country’s national game, is ample proof of the step-motherly treatment that is meted out to the game in Pakistan.
Cricket matches played even in the remotest of places are telecast live. The whole of football World Cup is religiously telecast live every four years even though the national team is nothing to talk about. But no one bothers to arrange at least recordings of matches that the national team plays. I know commercial sponsorship is the key factor, but what about national interest?
Yes, the national team has not been able to take to the victory stand for a while, but that is not reason enough to start sidelining the game itself. In fact, this is all the more reason to support and encourage those involved in salvaging the nation’s pride.
Media coverage is essential to the cause of promoting any game, and hockey is no exception. It helps attract youngsters to the game, and, thus, keeps the supplyline activated. It saddens me to see how little hockey is played these days in a major city like Karachi. The situation is so simply because the glamour factor has been taken away from the equation. And the media stands guilty on this count.
It is ironic that while there is scant coverage of on-the-field activities, the same media carries the team’s criticism in much detail and in bold print. I fail to see any justification for this lopsided equation generated by the media on its own. The media itself has a role to play in the promotion of the game. Can it say in all honesty that it has played that role effectively? I am afraid not many would like to answer this basic question, for an honest answer would always be in the negative.
Having said that, I guess I need to make an unnecessary clarification before the media jumps to hasty conclusions and get to my jugular. No one can have any argument about the importance of constructive criticism by the media. It helps at all levels: in rectifying policy glitches, in formulating future guidelines, in charting out game strategies, and so on. Only some dimwit can downplay the importance of such criticism. But writing something for the sake of filling up space, I am sorry, is not my idea of professional ethics.
