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.

Conversion Conundrum

Updated: Dec 2, 2024

The Supreme Court has delivered a landmark judgment that underscores the complexities surrounding caste-based reservations and the integrity of religious identity in a secular state. By upholding the denial of a Scheduled Caste certificate to a woman born Christian but claiming Hindu identity for employment benefits, the Court has drawn a decisive line between genuine faith and opportunistic conversions.


By denying a SC certificate to C. Selvarani—a woman born Christian who claimed Hindu identity for employment benefits—the Court has underscored the principle that faith must be genuine, not a matter of convenience.


At the crux of the case was Selvarani’s assertion that, despite being baptized as a Christian shortly after birth and actively practicing Christianity, she was entitled to SC reservation benefits under the Adi Dravida quota. She argued that her family belonged to the Valluvan caste and claimed to have consistently professed Hinduism. However, the Court, citing detailed field verification, found her claim untenable. Evidence of her consistent adherence to Christian practices, including regular church attendance and her baptism records, contradicted her professed Hindu identity.


The Court ruled that extending reservation benefits to those who manipulate religious identities for personal gain undermined the social ethos of the policy of reservation and constituted a “fraud on Constitution.”


The Court also provided guidelines on what constitutes genuine reconversion, such as adopting procedures like those of the Arya Samaj or making public declarations of faith.


This ruling arrives amid a broader debate on whether SC reservations should extend to Dalit Christians and Muslims. The 1950 Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order confines SC status to Hindus, later expanded to include Sikhs and Buddhists. Critics argue that this exclusion perpetuates discrimination within Christian and Muslim communities, where caste-based inequities still persist. Proponents of the current framework contend that extending reservations would dilute the benefits intended for historically marginalized Hindu castes. The 2007 Ranganath Mishra Commission report recommended extending SC quotas to Dalit Christians and Muslims, but the issue remains in controversy.


The Court’s decision reinforces a foundational principle: caste-based reservations are meant to redress historical and systemic injustices, not to be exploited through opportunistic claims. This judgment highlights the importance of authentic faith practices and sets a precedent for scrutinizing dubious claims of conversion or reconversion. While the debate over the intersection of caste, religion and affirmative action is far from over, the Court’s judgment reflects the fine balance India must maintain as a secular state committed to social justice. Faith must be a matter of conviction, not convenience. At a time when identity politics frequently intersects with constitutional rights, this decision serves as a reminder of the need for integrity in both personal claims and public policies.

Comments

bottom of page