top of page

By:

Bhalchandra Chorghade

11 August 2025 at 1:54:18 pm

Applause for Cricket, Silence for Badminton

Mumbai: When Lakshya Sen walked off the court after the final of the All England Badminton Championships, he carried with him the disappointment of another near miss. The Indian shuttler went down in straight games to Lin Chun-Yi, who created history by becoming the first player from Chinese Taipei to lift the prestigious title. But the story of Lakshya Sen’s defeat is not merely about badminton final. It is also about the contrasting way India celebrates its sporting heroes. Had the same...

Applause for Cricket, Silence for Badminton

Mumbai: When Lakshya Sen walked off the court after the final of the All England Badminton Championships, he carried with him the disappointment of another near miss. The Indian shuttler went down in straight games to Lin Chun-Yi, who created history by becoming the first player from Chinese Taipei to lift the prestigious title. But the story of Lakshya Sen’s defeat is not merely about badminton final. It is also about the contrasting way India celebrates its sporting heroes. Had the same narrative unfolded on a cricket field, the reaction would have been dramatically different. In cricket, even defeat often becomes a story of heroism. A hard-fought loss by the Indian team can dominate television debates, fill newspaper columns and trend across social media for days. A player who narrowly misses a milestone is still hailed for his fighting spirit. The nation rallies around its cricketers not only in victory but also in defeat. The narrative quickly shifts from the result to the effort -- the resilience shown, the fight put up, the promise of future triumph. This emotional investment is one of the reasons cricket enjoys unparalleled popularity in India. It has built a culture where players become household names and their performances, good or bad, become part of the national conversation. Badminton Fights Contrast that with what happens in sports like badminton. Reaching the final of the All England Championships is a monumental achievement. The tournament is widely considered badminton’s equivalent of Wimbledon in prestige and tradition. Only the very best players manage to reach its final stages, and doing it twice speaks volumes about Lakshya Sen’s ability and consistency. Yet the reaction in India remained largely subdued. There were congratulatory posts, some headlines acknowledging the effort and brief discussions among badminton enthusiasts. But the level of national engagement never quite matched the magnitude of the achievement. In a cricketing context, reaching such a stage would have triggered days of celebration and analysis. In badminton, it often becomes just another sports update. Long Wait India’s wait for an All England champion continues. The last Indian to win the title was Pullela Gopichand in 2001. Before him, Prakash Padukone had scripted history in 1980. These victories remain among the most significant milestones in Indian badminton. And yet, unlike cricketing triumphs that are frequently revisited and celebrated, such achievements rarely stay in the mainstream sporting conversation for long. Lakshya Sen’s journey to the final should ideally have been viewed as a continuation of that legacy, a reminder that India still possesses the talent to challenge the world’s best in badminton. Instead, it risks fading quickly from public memory. Visibility Gap The difference ultimately comes down to visibility and cultural investment. Cricket in India is not merely a sport; it is an ecosystem built over decades through media attention, sponsorship, and mass emotional attachment. Individual sports, on the other hand, often rely on momentary bursts of recognition, usually during Olympic years or when a medal is won. But consistent performers like Lakshya Sen rarely receive the sustained spotlight that their achievements deserve. This disparity can also influence the next generation. Young athletes are naturally drawn to sports where success brings recognition, financial stability and national fame. When one sport monopolises the spotlight, others struggle to build similar appeal. Beyond Result Lakshya Sen may have finished runner-up again, but his performance at the All England Championship is a reminder that India continues to produce world-class athletes in disciplines beyond cricket. The real issue is not that cricket receives immense attention -- it deserves the admiration it gets. The concern is that athletes from other sports often do not receive comparable appreciation for achievements that are equally significant in their own arenas. If India aspires to become a truly global sporting nation, its applause must grow broader. Sporting pride cannot remain confined to one field. Because somewhere on a badminton court, an athlete like Lakshya Sen is fighting just as hard for the country’s colours as any cricketer on a packed stadium pitch. The only difference is how loudly the nation chooses to cheer.

A Step Backwards?

The SC ruling upholding the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, marks a victory for religious education - but at what cost to India’s progress? While the judgment emphasizes the state’s responsibility to ensure that madrassa students receive an education that prepares them for contemporary life, the ruling also perpetuates an insular approach to learning that fails to equip students with essential skills for a modern economy.


At the heart of the Court’s decision is a noble ambition: to enable madrassas to blend religious study with secular subjects, thereby meeting basic educational standards. The court viewed this hybrid model as a bridge between tradition and modernity, helping madrassas equip their students to compete in a world increasingly defined by technological and scientific proficiency. However, this assumes that madrassas will embrace a broader curriculum when in fact the reality paints a more regressive picture.


Last year, the Darul Uloom Deoband, one of the most influential Islamic seminaries, had issued a fatwa banning the teaching of English and other languages besides Urdu and Arabic. This move, accompanied by strict mandates discouraging students from engaging with subjects beyond classical Islamic texts, epitomizes a mindset resistant to reform. Such edicts directly contradict the Court’s call for educational inclusivity.


A monolithic religious education, when devoid of critical engagement with diverse worldviews, lays the potential groundwork for insularity and even radicalization. With the SC’s endorsement, these madrassas will continue to operate under a framework that promotes limited secular content. The consequences of this are far-reaching. While madrassa education may instil a deep understanding of Islamic culture and philosophy, its isolation from mainstream educational disciplines denies students access to knowledge that is vital for socio-economic advancement. Without grounding in subjects like science, mathematics, and modern languages, students remain at a disadvantage in job market.


Furthermore, this approach raises questions about the adherence to Article 21A, which guarantees the right to free and compulsory education for children aged six to fourteen. A well-rounded education is essential for social mobility, and in its absence, madrassa graduates risk being marginalized, lacking the necessary skills for careers beyond religious vocations.


While the Supreme Court’s decision appears to champion educational diversity, it also sends a message that religious schooling need not conform to the same standards as public education. This verdict, though legally sound, is ultimately a regressive step for Indian society. Rather than drawing madrassa students into the mainstream, it risks leaving them on the margins of progress, confined to an educational model that is both narrow and insular—and, in some cases, vulnerable to extremist ideologies. For India to thrive, every child needs a broad, balanced education - an aspiration this judgment regrettably does little to fulfil.

Comments

bottom of page