The return of India’s hockey teams to their traditional blue jerseys at the Asian Games may look like a minor sporting correction. It is not. The controversy surrounding the brief shift to saffron has exposed a more consequential question: who gets to decide how national institutions represent the country? A jersey is not merely sportswear when it is worn by a national team. Over decades, blue has acquired an identity of its own in Indian sport. It is associated with the country’s sporting tradition and, above all, continuity.

That does not make blue sacred, nor does it mean a different colour can never be used. But a departure from such an established symbol demands more than administrative convenience or political enthusiasm. The troubling aspect of the Hockey India episode is therefore not principally the colour saffron. It is the apparent absence of institutional process. Hockey India’s own subsequent action against its Director-General, R.K. Srivastava, has brought this issue into sharper focus. The organisation has alleged that the jersey change was implemented and publicly launched without the necessary consultation with its president or executive committee and without adequate documentary evidence........

© The Statesman