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.

Govt Medical Colleges Battle Faculty Shortage

The National Medical Commission’s new rules allow non-teaching hospitals to step in, but experts warn of risks.

In a significant and far-reaching policy shift aimed at tackling the shortage of teaching faculty in government-run medical colleges across the country, the National Medical Commission (NMC) has introduced a new set of regulations. These updated norms now allow non-teaching government hospitals that have a bed capacity of more than 220 to be officially designated as medical teaching institutions, thereby expanding the pool of eligible facilities that can contribute to medical education and training.


Once these hospitals are officially notified, doctors currently serving in them will become eligible to take on roles as teaching faculty for both undergraduate and postgraduate medical courses. This important policy shift is anticipated to offer a much-needed lifeline to numerous government medical colleges that are presently struggling to maintain their recognition status due to severe shortages in qualified teaching staff.


However, members of the medical community have expressed growing concerns regarding the practical implementation of these new regulations at the ground level. A number of these non-teaching government hospitals already grapple with their own staff shortages. And the added burden of academic responsibilities could place a further strain on an already overstretched healthcare workforce. Experts have cautioned that while the regulation may appear to address faculty shortages on paper, it risks compromising the overall quality of medical education. This risk can only be mitigated if it is supported by concrete steps in recruitment, capacity building, and adequate infrastructure development.


The ongoing faculty crisis in India’s medical education system has reached an alarming level. Despite repeated advertisements, recruitment drives, and urgent appeals by state authorities, a large number of teaching posts in government medical colleges continue to remain vacant across the country. A recent evaluation conducted by the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (MUHS) highlighted the severity of the problem. It revealed that more than 50 per cent of sanctioned teaching positions in several state-run medical colleges remain unfilled. The situation is even more critical in newly established institutions — for instance, in the government medical college at Ratnagiri, a mere 18 per cent of the approved faculty positions have been filled.


According to the norms laid down by the National Medical Commission (NMC), every medical college is required to maintain at least 90 per cent of its sanctioned teaching staff to retain its official recognition. Falling below this critical benchmark can have serious consequences, including the potential cancellation of the college’s recognition status—an outcome that would particularly affect the continuation and approval of postgraduate programmes. The gravity of the situation had left many institutions on the brink, prompting urgent intervention by the NMC.

 

Previously, only non-teaching government hospitals with a bed capacity exceeding 330 were eligible to be considered for designation as teaching institutions. This higher threshold significantly limited the number of hospitals that could contribute to medical education.


However, with the revised guidelines now lowering the minimum requirement to 220 beds, a much larger number of government hospitals across the country can now qualify for teaching status.


Further, under the new Medical Institutions (Qualifications of Faculty) Regulations, 2025, the NMC has relaxed several norms to broaden the faculty base: Specialists with at least 10 years of clinical experience can now be directly appointed as associate professors. Doctors with 2 years of experience can be appointed as Assistant Professors even without completing a senior residency. Doctors holding super-specialty degrees but working in broad-speciality departments will now be formally recognised as faculty in their respective speciality departments. To start a postgraduate course, earlier norms required three professors and one senior resident. Now, just two faculty members and two students are sufficient. A simultaneous launch of undergraduate and postgraduate programmes is now permitted.


This sweeping regulatory overhaul is closely aligned with the Union Government’s announcement in the Budget 2025, which outlined an ambitious plan to add 75,000 new medical education seats across the country over the next five years. One of the most significant obstacles to achieving this target has been the persistent and widespread shortage of qualified teaching faculty, a challenge that the new policy changes are specifically designed to address.


The NMC has defended its decision, stating that the emphasis has shifted from rigid service-duration criteria to teaching ability, experience, and academic merit. The move is also seen as a strategic effort to better utilise the existing workforce within government healthcare services.


While the reforms promise to expand medical education infrastructure, their success will depend on how effectively these new faculty appointments are integrated without compromising the quality of training and patient care.


(The writer is a senior journalist based in Kolhapur.)

Comments

bottom of page