The debate is on with MHF contemplating making changes to their Constitution. I personally think it should be comprehensive but news from the grapevines seems to indicate that the changes are "mild" ie a realistic approach recognising the requirements of MHF as it postures to capitalise on its immediate future. It is about an administrative "clean-up" to strengthen the proper functioning of MHF rather than being riddled with people who sway on sentiments to win support as opposed to the merits of the matter.
While i am not privy to the changes, the issue that has been talked about is the post of Secretary and Treasurer of MHF. Currently these are elected posts but apparently the TM as President has made it known that he would want the positions to be appointed. A Committee headed by the Vice President of Special Projects have made their recommendation on the matter too.
The wisdom for such appointments seems to come probably based on the 2 year experience of the TM as President and he must have his reasons. At the last BGM 2 years ago despite the number of factions there was no line-up of candidates by any particular groups. Since the TM became President unopposed and the then incumbent Deputy President lost the election, everyone else stood on their own "ticket". Effectively there was not a "team" to manage MHF, rather it was individuals with different views that tried to come together and administer MHF. This in a way permitted MHF to be pulled in different directions and more often there was "fire fighting" undertaken by the TM to bring sanity to MHF.
Fundamentally the key posts in the administration of an organisation are the President, Secretary and Treasurer. The President as the Head should obviously rely on the other 2 key people and more often than not it should be his people. This is where the issue of competency and speaking the same "language" combined with loyalty are vital ingredients to ensure the administration is properly undertaken. When the time comes for the President to state that "the bug stops with him", he knows that it is his people who have done or not done the job and the responsibility squarely rests with him and no one else.
Therefore when one Affiliate went publicly to question the wisdom of constitutional changes to pave the way for such appointments with the rationale that the future may not have "checks and balances", was he trying to start an exercise of a debate or canvassing support to derail the amendments? Whatever the motives it must be seen in the light of what is good for MHF and of the President who has decided to dedicate his time and resources to the game. If the Affiliates have doubts on him then why in the first place have him as their President? If the Affiliates want him then it is only fair that he be granted his wishes which is not to propagate himself or to enable him to sustain power but rather to ensure the sport organisation he heads functions professionally for the sports and the nation itself. Is that too much to ask from the MHF Affiliates?
My worry is that the upcoming Council Meeting where support would be sought to have an EGM to pass the constitutional changes, may turn into a "circus". Such things are not new as the Coaching Committee recently have had such history and it would not be surprising to see some of the "actors" from there reigniting the scene here. Using the excuse of a "healthy debate", people of the same kind may try to arouse feelings in the hope there would be a "fire". I am sure the TM is an "old hand" in such issues and having had his stint in other places would know how to defuse it. My belief is that at end of the day, as part of their "wayang kulit" strategy by show of hands, the amendments would be endorsed to be forwarded to an EGM for approval.
While waiting for the EGM, certain Affiliates and officials by covert operations may try to canvass to derail the proposal. Their key interest here would be to ensure that their friends can be elected to the posts, thereby they can have the needed accessibility. It is this selfishness based on self interest that is destroying Malaysian hockey. This is their reason to ensure that the positions are not filled by way of appointments. Their strategy in "wayang kulit" would also push for a "secret ballot" in voting for the amendments so as the Affiliates can be sure that nobody would know how each Affiliate has voted. This is going to be the crucial aspect of their strategy to succeed.
In a nutshell, it must be known that most of the Affiliates do nothing much for Malaysian hockey. Some even do not have a league and some even find it hard to have regular meetings. Yet! they become "king makers" in the hour where they are supposed to play an effective role for the betterment of the game in the country. They "politick" that provides the much needed "oxygen" to sustain their presence and ultimately their crooked sense of thinking only goes to destroy whatever is being built for the game.
This is where the Affiliates have to make their choices and that is if they want the TM to continue the good work he has done to date for MHF. Then they must wholeheartedly support the constitutional amendments and carry it through with the two third majority. Failing to provide that support would mean that we may lose the distinguished services of the TM and probably bring Malaysian hockey to the "Dark Ages".