The controversy surrounding the Indian hockey team’s jersey change has escalated into a major internal dispute, with Hockey India (HI) President Dilip Tirkey demanding a comprehensive explanation from Director General Cdr. R.K. Srivastava over the process that led to the change in the national team’s playing colours.
In a fresh email addressed to all Executive Board (EB) members, Tirkey rejected what he described as an inadequate response to his earlier notice seeking details of the decision. He instructed Srivastava to submit a point-by-point reply by Tuesday, supported by documentary evidence, stating that broad explanations would not be sufficient for the Executive Board to fulfil its constitutional responsibilities.
“At the outset, I wish to make it clear that the issue under consideration is not merely the colour or design of a jersey. The matter concerns the decision-making process adopted for a change involving one of the most recognisable symbols of Indian hockey, the authority under which such a decision was taken, the consultations undertaken, compliance with Hockey India’s governance framework, and whether appropriate institutional processes were followed,” Tirkey wrote.
He also stressed the wider responsibility of the federation, saying, “Hockey India does not own Indian hockey. We are trustees and custodians of a national sporting legacy.”
Tirkey sought detailed clarifications on several aspects of the decision, including the authority under which the jersey change was approved, the timeline of the process, the names and roles of everyone involved, and copies of all internal correspondence related to the decision. He also requested information on consultations with players and support staff, feedback received, testing conducted before the new kit was introduced, and details of the design, manufacturing and delivery process.
Raising concerns over the possible impact on the national team, Tirkey asked whether the effects on players’ preparation, confidence, comfort, mental focus and competition readiness had been assessed. He further questioned whether officials had considered the consequences of players having to answer media queries about the jersey change immediately before the World Cup.
The Hockey India president also underlined the distinction between the powers of elected office-bearers and appointed administrators. He stated that while the Director General has an important executive and administrative role, “administrative responsibility cannot be interpreted as replacing or overriding the authority of the elected governance bodies.”
The decision to change the Indian hockey team’s jersey colour to saffron has sparked widespread criticism, with fans and former players questioning both the process followed and the timing of the move, particularly in the absence of broader consultation.
