NEW DELHI: Questioning the change in the Indian hockey team's jersey colour, the Congress on Saturday launched a sharp attack on the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), alleging that the organisation was seeking to leave its ideological imprint on every national symbol and public institution despite not having contributed to India’s freedom movement.
The decision to change the colour is not merely a sports-related choice, but a matter deeply connected to the sentiments of millions of Indians and our sporting traditions, the Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge posted on X.
“It is unfortunate that those whose ideological tradition did not contribute to the freedom movement are now seen in haste to leave their ideological imprint on every national symbol and every public institution. History knows that the RSS had staunchly opposed the tricolour, and Sardar Patel had even warned them,” his post read.
Kharge also said that all three colours in the tricolour -- saffron, white, and green -- also hold an honoured place in the flag of the Indian National Congress.
The Congress leader further added that the Government has changed the colour of pavements, attire of Parliament employees, Doordarshan logo, and now players’ jerseys, without broad public consensus.
“National symbols, sports, and players should not be made a medium for narrow-minded political experiments. The government and relevant institutions should immediately reconsider this decision and clarify how such an important decision was taken without the knowledge and consent of Hockey India's Executive Board,” Kharge said.
Through his social media post, Kharge also sought to know the reason for shifting from blue to saffron, adding that it is about transparency and respect for public sentiments.
“Indian players have long been recognised around the world by names such as 'Men in Blue', 'The Blues', and 'The Blue Tigers'.
This identity is not just about the colour of the jersey, but a legacy of Indian sports. Today, it is difficult to understand why the need was felt to alter this historic identity. The question is not about any particular colour, but about the process of decision-making, transparency, and respect for public sentiments,” his post also read
