In an athlete’s career, two moments can define everything: the debut that announces their arrival on the big stage and the farewell that brings the curtain down. The first is about promise. The second is about legacy.
In sport, we often hear about signing off on a high. It means leaving when you are at your best, or at least before the questions about your place in the game become louder than the applause. Indian hockey has witnessed its fair share of such exits. But it has also raised an uncomfortable question: does every player get to decide when their story ends?
PR Sreejesh offers perhaps the clearest example of a farewell done right.
Initially reluctant to walk away, the legendary goalkeeper eventually chose the Paris Olympics in 2024 as the perfect stage to bring his international career to a close. He delivered when it mattered, helped India secure a second consecutive Olympic bronze medal and bid goodbye to international hockey.
The reception back home was befitting a legend. His No. 16 jersey was retired and placed in the rafters, ensuring that his contribution would outlive his playing career.
Former India women’s captain Rani Rampal received a similarly memorable send-off. She eventually left the sport on her own terms, was given a grand farewell in front of fans in Delhi and had her jersey retired.
These were the kinds of farewells one would expect for athletes who have given their blood, sweat and tears to the sport. Yet Indian hockey’s story is not always so straightforward.
Just ahead of the start of the Asian Champions Trophy (ACT), a report emerged suggesting that the tournament would serve as a farewell for four players: Amit Rohidas, Mandeep Singh, Jarmanpreet Singh and Nilakanta Sharma.
For hockey fans, the news initially seemed like another sign of the sport moving forward. This was not the first time established names had left the international stage.
Rupinder Pal Singh, one of India’s greatest drag-flickers, and defender Birendra Lakra retired from international hockey after the Tokyo Olympics. Sardar Singh, the evergreen midfielder whose name became synonymous with Indian hockey, called time on his career in 2018. Before him, former captain and drag-flicker VR Raghunath had also stepped away.
Perhaps, then, this was simply the natural cycle of sport. With the Los Angeles Olympics in 2028 approaching, Indian hockey needed to look ahead. A transition was inevitable, and established players would eventually have to make way.
Nilakanta’s social media post after the Asian Games had also appeared to hint at the possibility of an international retirement. It seemed reasonable to assume that the four players were preparing to say goodbye.
Then came a different version of events.
A source close to the players told us that the quartet had not been informed about any such decision. A subsequent report said the players were shocked by the news and hurt that such a major call had apparently been made without their involvement.
“We found out through the media ourselves, they (HI) should have at least informed us before making such a major decision. After winning gold medal for the country (at the recent Asian Games), we deserve at least that much respect,” one player told PTI.
We reached out to one of the four players, who initially agreed to speak but eventually decided against going on record. He reiterated, however, that retirement was not something he had been planning and that there had been no communication about it.
“Please speak to Hockey India or the coach about this. We don’t have much of an idea about it. No talk about retiring happened with me. There was no such conversation. Retirement was never in my mind,” said the player, who didn’t want to be named.
That raised a bigger question than whether four players would feature in the next international tournament. In Indian hockey, who gets to decide when a career is over?
Is there a proper farewell for every player who has served the country? Are athletes given the opportunity to leave on their own terms, or is the decision effectively made for them by those in charge?
The answers point towards a system that deserves closer scrutiny.
HOCKEY INDIA’S WAY OF RETIREMENT
A pattern appears to have emerged in Indian hockey. Once a player reaches 30, they can find themselves quietly phased out of the national setup.
Hockey India maintains core groups for the men’s and women’s teams. Players who fall out of favour are removed from these groups, and many are never seen in Indian colours again.
The player issues a carefully worded social media statement about making way for the next generation. Sometimes, the exit simply happens, with little clarity about whether the player has chosen to retire or has been made to understand that their international career is over.
A source within Hockey India explained what can happen when a player reaches that stage of their career.
“When these players hit 30 or go above that age, they’re under the scanner. Once HI feels that they aren’t good enough for the national team, they’re called in and told by the coach and officials, you will be dropped from the core group and won’t ever be called up for a national camp again.”
“The players are then given the ultimatum. Either you announce your retirement on your own, or face the fact you will never be seen in India colours again. It is their choice,” said the source anonymously.
According to the source, players may continue representing their state teams and clubs, but that does not necessarily translate into another opportunity with the national side.
Consider Rupinder Pal Singh. He announced his international retirement in 2021 but remains an active player. He captained the Bengal Tigers when they won the 2024-25 edition of the revamped Hockey India League and also played for SG Pipers last year.
Raghunath, who retired in 2017, remains involved in hockey through his association with Indian Oil.
Their continued presence in the sport raises an obvious question: if players are still active, fit and competing, should the door to international hockey be shut permanently?
Sardar Singh’s experience offers another glimpse into how an international career can unravel.
The mercurial midfielder was dropped from the squad for the 2018 Commonwealth Games after featuring in the Sultan Azlan Shah Cup that year. His account of the period suggested that the uncertainty surrounding his place in the team had taken its toll.
“There were a lot of reasons behind my decision (to retire). After Oltmans was removed as coach, a lot of things happened. John and another foreign coach (Marijne) wanted to try new players. We won the (2017) Asia Cup and I was hoping to continue. But I was dropped without any discussion,” Sardar said to TOI.
“Then I was sent to the (2018) Sultan Azlan Shah Cup with some junior players, but when I came back, I was ignored again for the Commonwealth Games (CWG) in Gold Coast.”
“So I started doubting myself at times, started questioning myself, despite being fit,” he added.
The final blow came when Sardar’s name did not appear on the squad sheet for the 2018 Commonwealth Games. The team was not announced in front of the players; they learnt about the selection through a sheet of paper.
For a player who had led India and spent years at the heart of the national setup, the experience raised questions about communication, transparency and respect.
It is a concern that now hangs over the latest reports involving Mandeep, Rohidas, Jarmanpreet and Nilakanta.
TRANSITION OR FORCED EXILE?
There is little argument against the need for a transition. The Los Angeles Olympics are approaching, and Indian hockey cannot afford to wait until the last moment to build its next generation.
There are also legitimate questions about the performances of the four players. Mandeep, India’s poacher in the D, had seen his numbers decline. Rohidas appeared to have slowed down, while Nilakanta seemed to be past his prime.
Jarmanpreet’s reported inclusion in the group facing the chop, however, came as more of a surprise.
The source close to the players said some senior members of the team were shocked to see the defender on the chopping block. Jarmanpreet had been a favourite of Craig Fulton during the 2025 Asia Cup and had established himself as an attacking presence in the wing-back role.
His reported exclusion has fuelled the feeling that this may be less a mutual decision and more a case of players being pushed towards the exit.
“Some players are still young. Like Jarmanpreet is still young. He can serve more for the country, maybe. And obviously, he’s playing well also.”
“So they wanted to play more. They wanted to serve more for the country. So I think Hockey India and the players should, like, you know, they have to take it easy,” said Lazarus Barla, former India defender.
If the objective is to prepare for LA 2028, another question follows: why not use the Asian Champions Trophy as an opportunity to introduce younger players?
Sreejesh raised the point that if transition was the priority, India could have fielded a younger team at the ACT. The tournament did not carry the same stakes as an Olympic qualifier or a major World Cup qualification campaign.
Even if Hockey India had already decided that the four players were no longer part of its long-term plans, why select them for the tournament at all?
“Instead of carrying on with them, they should have inducted 4 new young players, so that they gel well with the seniors.”
“What’s the point of giving the last someone who has already played 300 caps, another chance? This was a good platform to test your youngsters at home.”
Former India coach V Bhaskaran echoed those concerns. If four players were being phased out, he questioned why 34-year-old Manpreet Singh remained in the setup and how goalkeeper Krishan Pathak, who had been out of national team reckoning for almost a year, had returned.
“If I’m dropping somebody, I should, I should say why I’m dropping them. You should tell the hockey lovers or hockey followers what was the need for the change? Yes, I want a change definitely but this not the way to do it.”
“In terms of performance, it may not be just this four. A lot of people had to be revaluated. At least 8 players of the current team needs to be under the scanner,” said Bhaskaran.
The argument is not that senior players must be retained indefinitely. Nor is it that a player who has served the country for years should automatically be guaranteed a place in the team.
It is about applying clear standards, communicating decisions and giving players a fair understanding of where they stand.
A transition can be necessary. The manner in which it is carried out matters just as much.
WHAT’S THE YARDSTICK?
The controversy also exposes a larger problem within Indian hockey: the lack of a clearly defined route back into the national team.
Core-group players spend much of the year at national camps, while others are left to prove themselves in domestic competitions. But how much weight do those performances carry when selectors make their decisions?
Cricket offers a useful comparison. Players are expected to turn out in the Ranji Trophy, regardless of their stature or age, to maintain their place in the selection conversation. Bhuvneshwar Kumar has worked his way back into contention through domestic performances, while Mohammed Shami has continued to put in the hard yards for Bengal.
In hockey, the route appears less straightforward. Once a player falls out of the core group, even strong performances in senior national tournaments may not be enough to reopen the door.
Bhaskaran believes domestic hockey needs a more prominent role in the selection process, much like the Ranji Trophy in cricket.
“Domestic hockey or nationals, if you’re keeping it, you think it along with the senior players. It’s a must. Like Ranji Trophy is a must for selectors when it comes to Indian cricket. You must play Ranji for getting into it. There is no yardstick thing in hockey, so you’re not playing at all it,” said Bhaskaran.
“See, there are two things to look at if all the current players would have played. Then the selection committee can have a meeting. OK, an unknown player will be up against an Indian team regular. Then you could have seen the competitiveness. But you haven’t seen any of the Indian players there. There’s a rule that you have to pay regular domestic cricket to be considered for the Indian team, but here it’s not there.”
“I have not seen a Manpreet or Harmanpreet turn up for their state teams or clubs in major domestic tournaments. You should make, or Hockey India should make a rule that 5 major tournaments in India, the Indian hockey players should play with, which was there when I was a coach. It is not there. Because you are held up within four walls in Bengaluru.”
The point is not to suggest that domestic hockey and international hockey are necessarily played at the same level. Rather, regular domestic competition could provide a common benchmark for players inside and outside the national setup.
It would also give selectors a chance to assess whether a player who has been dropped can still compete with the country’s best.
James agreed that allowing players to prove themselves could benefit the sport, even if the standard of domestic hockey or the Hockey India League is not identical to that of international competition.
“Why not consider them again? It’ll be good for hockey. I know it’ll be good for the game of hockey. If you’re a player and get dropped. You play well in the domestic circuit and the HIL and prove yourself and if he’s fit and the coach wants him, then the selectors can pick him again. That just elevates the standard of the game.”
A system that offers a route back would not guarantee a recall to every player who has been dropped. It would simply ensure that selection remains connected to performance, fitness and the needs of the team, rather than becoming a one-way door.
For players who have already given years to Indian hockey, that distinction could be significant.
THE IDEAL FAREWELL
Every player has their own idea of an ideal farewell.
For some, it may be just putting a message on August 15, 2020 with the song ‘Main Pal Do Pal Ka Shayar Hoon’ playing in the background. Others might want one final moment on the field: a match in front of a passionate home crowd, with family members watching from the stands.
There is no single way to say goodbye to a sporting career. But there should be room for players to have a say in how that goodbye unfolds.
When a player is dropped without clarity or a meaningful opportunity to announce their retirement, that final moment can disappear altogether.
Imagine Sachin Tendulkar not getting the chance to play his farewell match at the Wankhede Stadium. Or Sourav Ganguly not having the opportunity to captain his side during the final chapter of his international career.
Those moments matter because sport is about more than results. They are also about the relationship between athletes and the people who have followed them through years of triumphs and disappointments.
Indian hockey players deserve that same consideration.
“Mandeep and all, they played a lot of hockey. They earned for a medal. They served a lot for a country. So we should respect for them, what they did for the country.
“So we should wait for them to announce retirement, instead of seemingly forcing it on them,” said Lazarus.
James believes Hockey India could organise a farewell on a smaller scale, even if a grand send-off is not always possible. More importantly, players who are not ready to retire should be given the opportunity to demonstrate that they still have something to offer.
“In our time, we retired and left and we didn’t get a farewell. But now, Hockey India can organise a farewell for these players for them on a smaller scale and say thank you.”
“In a way, when you’re going out, that would be graceful. I mean you should be considered before that. But if the player wants to prove himself, then let him prove himself and then make a call on his career,” said James.
It is a reasonable ask. A farewell need not be an elaborate ceremony or a packed stadium. Sometimes, it can begin with a conversation, a clear explanation and the acknowledgement of what a player has contributed to the country.
And if that player believes his international career is not over, the system should offer a fair way to test that belief.
For now, attention will turn to the Asian Champions Trophy, with the spotlight likely to remain on Mandeep Singh, Amit Rohidas, Jarmanpreet Singh and Nilakanta Sharma. If the reports prove accurate, the tournament could become their final appearance in front of a passionate crowd in Punjab.
But the bigger issue will remain long after the final hooter.
Indian hockey needs a transition. It needs younger players to emerge, established names to be assessed honestly and selectors to make difficult calls when required.
What it does not need is uncertainty over whether a player has chosen to retire or has simply been told that his time is up.
– Ends
