Winning back-to-back Olympic medals is a dream for any nation, especially one like India, where sporting success on the world’s biggest stage is a rare and precious commodity. While China and the United States vie for the top spot in the medal race, India celebrates bronze medals as monumental achievements. However, some bronzes feel more special than others. The Indian men’s hockey team pulled off the unthinkable in Paris, becoming the only team to retain their podium position from the Tokyo Olympics three years prior. This was also the first time since 1972 that India returned with a medal from consecutive editions. To put this in perspective, 1972 was the last time international hockey was played on natural grass before transitioning to artificial turf. This achievement was a resounding vindication of the processes implemented by head coach Craig Fulton, who had a mere 15 months to transform the team from the heartbreak of a World Cup at home to competing on equal footing in Paris.
Many were skeptical of Fulton’s ‘defend to win’ philosophy, labeling it a ‘European thing’ and an unnecessary restriction on India’s natural flair and attacking style. However, the players not only embraced this philosophy but adhered to it throughout the Olympics, demonstrating the strong trust and unity within the group. Sources indicate that the authorities held low expectations for the hockey team’s chances of winning a medal. India’s initial performance seemed to suggest they were still finding their feet. Fortunately, the schedule was in their favor, starting with matches against New Zealand, Argentina, and Ireland – teams known for their unpredictability under pressure. It is worth noting that New Zealand had eliminated India from the 2023 World Cup in the group stages via a shootout, but they weren’t considered unbeatable. Compared to the later stages, these early games provided the team with an opportunity to recover from mistakes, regroup, iron out inconsistencies, and define individual roles for each player. By the time India faced Belgium, they were already well-positioned to advance to the quarterfinals, having achieved their first goal. The team was in sync, ready for a smooth progression. Although India lost this match, it was their best performance to date. Less than 24 hours later, they stepped onto the field again, this time against their perennial nemesis, Australia. This game, in more ways than one, served as a defining marker of the Indian team’s true potential and their possible finish in the Olympics.
The challenge was multifaceted: could the team physically endure back-to-back games against two of the fastest and toughest teams? Check. Could they mentally rebound from a narrow defeat? Check. Could they stay composed emotionally when facing the intimidating yellow-green spectre of Australia, a team that had crushed India 5-0 in a test series just three months prior? Check. Tactically, they were also tested: could they stick to their plan, resisting the temptation of open spaces and the urge to revert to their natural attacking style? Check. Securing a full victory against the Aussies felt like breaking a curse – India hadn’t defeated them at the Olympics since 1972! This win against Australia was the first sign that, despite their ranking (India was seventh before the Paris Games), form, or expert opinions, this team had a different plan. The momentum they built hinted at a possible run to the final, aiming for their first shot at gold since 1980. Even a contentious but legally correct red card, forcing them to play with 10 men for nearly 42 minutes against a fast-paced Great Britain in the quarterfinals, was only a minor setback. “The red card revitalised us like nothing else. We decided we were not going to lose that game, come what may. We regrouped, defined our roles, worked out our plans, and just stuck to them. Any other game, not that one,” was the chorus from the Indian players after their famous shootout win.
One significant criticism leveled at the team during the World Cup was their visibly lower fitness levels compared to Tokyo. Paris effectively put those doubts to rest. This game also brought the focus back on Paddy Upton and Mike Horn, the duo credited with instilling crucial mental toughness among the players. The fact that Upton was by the team’s side throughout the Games was an added boost. It is a measure of the team’s growth that, from being considered rank outsiders to advancing to the final four, their loss to reigning world champion Germany in the semifinal was seen as a disaster, a missed opportunity. However, bouncing back from that defeat and retaining the bronze medal was an impressive feat.
There were, in fact, quite a few similarities between India’s performance in 1972 and 2024. As former captain Ajitpal Singh wrote about the 1972 Munich Olympics in his Sportstar piece, India had a team capable of winning gold but faltered. They missed penalty corners and open chances by the dozen in the semifinals. They lacked a second drag-flicker. And it marked the beginning of world hockey truly going international, with new teams emerging and staking their claims. These were the same challenges faced in 1972 and 2024. While Paris 2024 produced some surprising results – like Spain defeating Germany, South Africa pushing the Netherlands hard, or Belgium thrashing Australia – the pre-event form book largely held true with the Dutch taking gold. As the top-ranked side in the competition and boasting an enviable record – just seven losses in 52 games over the last two years – they were the team to beat, and they remained so, with the exception of a 1-0 loss to Germany in the pool stage. The Dutch women made it a double delight, achieving a historic first in Olympic history. Having missed the semifinals for the second straight edition, the Australian women’s hockey team faced questions about whether they needed a hard reset to stay competitive.
In the women’s competition, China’s silver medal was a bright spot, standing out among the usual European powerhouses. This accomplishment also highlighted the importance of good management: Alyson Annan, Ric Charlesworth, and Taeke Taekema are names not to be taken lightly, and their success should serve as a lesson for Hockey India on how a team that they consistently beat until 2022 could suddenly turn things around in the last two years.
