Was the National Hockey Team Manager fair in his actions?

MHF has been embroiled in more than sufficient issues both in and out of the field. Ironically they seem to have significant negative impact and sometimes i wonder whether MHF has permitted it to "grow" to this uncontrollable state. I state this for it was only in September 23rd in my blog under the title of: The "ghost" of Malaysian hockey "match fixing" is still lingering around, i outlined the issues of MHF failing to act. It would seem that i am proven right.


As i mentioned previously, if we allow the problem to brew by sweeping issues under the carpet, it is only a matter of time the foul stench would ooze out to fill the air.. This is what MHF has done, by leaving the allegation of "match fixing" unattended without an in-house investigation. MHF did not do anything sensible to arrest the potential problems that the "match fixing, money lending and gambling" issues when the allegations came to the forefront. Over and over, time and time, we get "new brooms" to sweep the issues under the carpet. They all thought that it was the "cure" without realising it was being postponed to let the issues become even bigger.


The failure to act by MHF in the past has given the "hard core habitual" parties the licence to continue their undesirable activities, while the newcomers to the scene just followed suit. Therefore the incident on Monday 6th October where a national player misled his coaches by missing training purportedly to repair his car when in fact he was at a cybercafe apparently indulging in online gambling, when he was caught "red handed" by MHF officials, is the testimony of the prevailing sad state of affairs with the national team . The story goes that the player was asked to apologise ( it is unclear to whom ), which the player refused and he went to see the National Team Manager, who is also his Club Manager. The Team Manager felt that he has broken a promise which he had previously made to him ( detail of the promise is not known ) that he requested the player to resign from the national team. Thereupon the Team Manager has left the fate of the player to the coaches and the MHF Management Committee.

Unfortunately this incident became a scoop story for the media and rightfully so. After all it is the duty of the media to report and publicise such matters particularly if someone is prepared to confirm or stand by the story. This the National Team Manager was a willing participant and the incident became a sort of "breaking news" i e a headline on the back page of one of the main newspaper.

It is obvious that the media had "smelled a rat" and in their usual style as responsible media they needed collaboration to ensure that they were right, There is no doubt that the media undertook their task properly but the question is whether the Team Manager did the same.

I pose this question because the actions taken by the Team Manager seem unilateral in nature and peculiarly seem to have passed the ultimate decision to the coaches and MHF Management Committee. All this is being done after the Team Manager had extracted a resignation letter from the player because the player had broken an earlier promise. In fact the Team Manager had already made the decision i e for the player to quit the national team, so why then does he need the coaches or the MHF Management Team to consider the matter. Again was the promise something of a personal nature or something that is known to everyone? It would seem the whole issue is "clouded" by too much of conflicting interests that the Team Manager should have opted not to deal with the incident and passed it on the proper MHF officials.

Indeed if any the Team Manager had made the issue far bigger by confirming the name of the player and the incident. He should have taken a responsible position stating an incident was reported and that MHF would be investigating before the details are made known. In fact the Team Manager may not have realised that in the spur of his indiscretion he has put MHF, the player plus his family, the national team and Malaysian hockey into a disrepute position. There is no doubt that on the first place the player had done so. So why give it a "double wacko".

This therefore begs the question whether the Team Manager had acted fairly? In coming to a decision the case must be seen from each parties point of view without having to compromise on the truth. Maybe the Team Manager may have been pretty upset that his emotions may have overtook all other sense of rationale thoughts at that moment. The Team Manager is a human being and when someone provides misleading information, while his actions contravenes an earlier promise plus the player comes from his own club, it must have created the "topsy turfy" scenario. This in fact has placed Malaysian hockey in a dilemma and the issue of untangling the problem becomes even more difficult. It seem that people are working in an uncoordinated fashion thereby giving an impression that there are a number of cliques at work within the national team, each having their own agenda. Some how this seem to be affecting the team's performance. So how can Malaysia perform? It is already a tough job for the coaches, why make it even tougher.