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.

Ayushman Bharat: A Lifeline or a Lost Cause?

Updated: Oct 22, 2024

Ayushman Bharat

Ayushman Bharat was launched in 2018 as a flagship insurance scheme by the Modi government designed to provide annual insurance coverage of five lakh rupees per family for those hailing from the most economically deprived sections of society. This comprehensive insurance scheme aims to protect the poorest of the poor from falling into catastrophic debt, which can occur due to the inability to afford necessary medical expenses, such as doctors' fees, hospital bills, treatment costs, and surgical operations. By addressing these financial barriers, Ayushman Bharat seeks to ensure that vulnerable families can access essential healthcare services without the fear of overwhelming financial burdens.


However, six years after its inception, the Ayushman Bharat scheme seems to have somewhat derailed, primarily due to a variety of reasons. To begin with, in Maharashtra, the government has empanelled a significantly higher number of private hospitals compared to government hospitals for Ayushman Bharat-related treatments. The stark reality is that private hospitals often show a marked disinterest in providing health care to economically deprived sections of our population, as their operations are fundamentally driven by profit motives. In an article published by The Scroll, many private hospitals have reported that since 2021, they have faced considerable delays in the processing of claims, along with numerous rejections and deductions in payments. Despite the government's substantial budget allocations for Ayushman Bharat, actual spending remains disappointingly low. For clarification, in the 2022-23 fiscal year, the budget allocation for the scheme was `6,412 crores; however, during the first nine months of 2022, the government released only 18% of these allocated funds. This discrepancy raises significant concerns about the scheme's effectiveness in delivering necessary healthcare to those in need.


Keeping these facts in perspective, it would make far more sense to increase the number of government-empanelled hospitals across various states and significantly improve their overall quality. As highlighted in a recent article in Economic and Political Weekly, many government hospitals in Maharashtra face challenges due to inadequate health infrastructure and poor maintenance of diagnostic equipment, resulting in a notable mismatch between demand and supply. Even more concerning, a poorly organised and corrupt system leaves the public health system in the state consistently lacking essential medications. Consequently, these public health facilities often resort to providing private prescriptions, which leads to enormous out-of-pocket expenses for patients. This unfortunate state of affairs has a devastating impact on the economically disadvantaged, further exacerbating their struggles and hardships in accessing necessary healthcare services.


Ayushman Bharat, while a significant initiative, does not extend its coverage to outpatient treatment, and it notably does not provide reimbursement for critical diagnostic tests such as CT scans and MRI scans. This limitation raises concerns about the comprehensiveness of the healthcare services offered under the scheme.


Additionally, a troubling aspect of the healthcare landscape in Maharashtra is the persistent shortage of medical professionals. Each year, approximately 7,000 medical graduates enter the workforce; however, data from the Public Health Department highlights that a staggering 14% of medical officer positions remain unfilled. Even more alarming is the vacancy rate for district health officers, which stands at 64%, while 54% of civil surgeon posts are unoccupied. Furthermore, the situation for specialists is dire, with a vacancy rate of 81%.


All these factors have to be considered when the overall effectiveness of the scheme is determined. The deprived, especially the most economically deprived sections of our society, cannot but be adversely affected by these conditions.


(The author is a private researcher. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page