top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 3:26:24 pm

Cricket’s Quiet Crusader

Former kca Selection Chief who helped nurture a generation of women cricketers when the sport struggled for recognition Niketha Ramankutty A prominent figure in Indian women’s cricket, Niketha Ramankutty — former Chairperson of the Kerala Cricket Association (KCA) Women’s Selection Committee and Manager of the Kerala State women’s teams — has long championed the game, especially when women’s cricket had little platform in her home state. Her dedication helped nurture girls taking to cricket...

Cricket’s Quiet Crusader

Former kca Selection Chief who helped nurture a generation of women cricketers when the sport struggled for recognition Niketha Ramankutty A prominent figure in Indian women’s cricket, Niketha Ramankutty — former Chairperson of the Kerala Cricket Association (KCA) Women’s Selection Committee and Manager of the Kerala State women’s teams — has long championed the game, especially when women’s cricket had little platform in her home state. Her dedication helped nurture girls taking to cricket in Kerala. During her tenure, which ended recently, five players from the state went on to represent India, while three now feature in the Women’s Premier League (WPL). Niketha’s journey began in 1995 on modest grounds and rough pitches in the blazing sun of her native Thrissur. At the time, girls aspiring to play cricket often drew curious stares or disapproving glances. This was despite Kerala producing some of India’s finest female athletes, including P.T. Usha, Shiny Wilson, Anju Bobby George, K.M. Beenamol and Tintu Luka. “Those were the days when women’s cricket did not attract packed stadiums, prime-time television coverage, lucrative contracts or celebrity status. Thankfully, the BCCI has taken progressive steps, including equal pay for the senior women’s team and launching the WPL. These have brought greater visibility, professional avenues and financial security for women cricketers,” Niketha said during a chat with  The Perfect Voice  in Pune. With better infrastructure, stronger domestic competitions and greater junior-level exposure, she believes the future of women’s cricket in India is bright and encourages more girls to pursue the sport seriously. Humble Beginnings Niketha began playing informal matches in neighbourhood kalisthalams (playgrounds) and school competitions before realising cricket was her true calling. Coaches who noticed her composure encouraged her to pursue the game seriously. More than flamboyance, she brought reliability and quiet determination to the turf — qualities every captain values when a match hangs in the balance. These traits helped her rise through the ranks and become a key figure in Kerala’s women’s cricket structure. “She was like a gentle messiah for the players. During demanding moments, they could rely on her – whether to stabilise an innings or lift team spirit,” recalled a former colleague. Guiding Youngsters Her involvement came when women’s cricket in many states struggled even for basic facilities. Matches were rarely covered by the media, and limited travel or training arrangements often tested players’ patience. “As a mother of two daughters—Namradha, 18, and Nivedya, 14—I could understand the emotions of the young girls in the teams. Guiding players through difficult phases and helping them overcome failures gave me the greatest satisfaction,” she said. Niketha — an English Literature graduate with a master’s in Tourism Management — believes success in sport demands not only skill but also sacrifice. Strong parental support and encouragement from her husband, Vinoth Kumar, an engineer, helped her overcome many challenges. Never one to seek the spotlight, she let her performances speak for themselves, earning respect on the national circuit. Quiet Legacy Today, the landscape has changed dramatically. Young girls are more ambitious, parents more supportive, and cricket is seen as a viable career with opportunities in coaching, umpiring, team management, sports analysis and allied fields. Players like Niketha have quietly strengthened the sport. Their journeys show that some victories are not won under stadium floodlights, but by determined women who simply refused to stop playing.

How Trump Could Answer Palestinian Question?

Donald Trump

The re-election of Donald Trump as the next US President was greeted in the Middle East with a mixture of rapture and dread, especially among Palestinians.


While it is impossible to know exactly how a second Trump Presidency will act toward the Palestinian people and their demands for statehood, his first Presidency provides a guide to what they might expect.


Like all his predecessors, in his first term, President Trump's dealings with Israelis and Palestinians were overwhelmingly influenced by domestic political pressures, which meant unwavering support for Israel. However, true to the nature of his norm-breaking first term, Trump often dismissed long-held diplomatic norms in search of a resolution to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.


By doing so, his Administration sought to remove any obstacles to “peace” between Palestinians and Israelis – a “peace” that would paradoxically see the end of any hope for a Palestinian state.


Jerusalem divided

The 1948 War of Independence divided Jerusalem, with East Jerusalem controlled by Jordan and West Jerusalem by Israel. When Israel captured East Jerusalem in 1967, it was hugely symbolic because it meant that for the first time in almost two millennia, Jews controlled all the ideologically, religiously, politically, and culturally significant city of Jerusalem.


Nevertheless, the international community refused to accept Israel's occupation nor its subsequent annexation of East Jerusalem in 1980, declaring that the negotiations concerning the two-state solution would decide the fate of Jerusalem. Consequently, most states have their embassies in Tel Aviv. Palestinians and Israelis interpreted the Trump administration's decision as US recognition of Israeli sovereignty of all Jerusalem.


Settlements expanding

According to Peace Now, in 2023, approximately 465,000 Israeli settlers were living in the West Bank, located in over 350 settlements and outposts. There were also an additional 230,000 Israelis living in settlements in East Jerusalem.


The administration's decision mirrored the long-held Israeli legal argument that the settlements are not illegal because the international community never deemed Jordan's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem as legal. As these territories were not part of Jordan's sovereign territory, they could not be “occupied” by Israel, meaning it could settle the land as it wished.


Nevertheless, this position ran contrary to Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which states that: “the Occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its civilian population into the territory it occupied.” Consequently, the international community, including the United Nations, the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), has consistently deemed Israeli settlements as illegal and as impediments to any peace agreement between Palestinians and Israelis.


However, the administration's rationale for its decision was that declaring the settlements illegal only restrains and impedes the negotiation process and, thus, any progress towards a successful resolution of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.


Around the same time, the Trump administration announced that it would no longer contribute funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the principal UN aid agency for Palestinians.


What followed was a budget cut of 30%, culminating in profound humanitarian effects on Palestinians, especially for Gazans, who relied heavily on UNRWA's provision of essential services to survive after Israel placed the Strip under siege following Hamas's election victory in 2006.


Trump's “Deal of the Century”

In 2020, the Trump Administration published its so-called “Deal of the Century”, intending to resolve the Palestinian/Israeli conflict finally. However, Palestinians rejected the plan outright, incensed by proposals to rescind Jordanian custody of Haram al-Sharif and transfer control to Israel.


Haram al-Sharif, or the Dome of the Rock mosque, is the third holiest site in Islam. When Jordan signed a peace agreement with Israel in 1994, Israel agreed to recognise Jordan's custodianship of the Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem, specifically Haram al-Sharif. Rescinding control of Haram al-Sharif to Israel meant it would control all the disputed city.


Importantly, for Palestinians in any peace agreement with Israel, East Jerusalem would become the capital of the future Palestinian state — without East Jerusalem, there can be no Palestine.


How far does Trump's support for Israel go?

During the Presidential campaign, Trump stated on several occasions that he wanted Israel to win the war quickly. On 3 December, Trump posted on social media that Hamas needed to release all remaining hostages before he took office on 20 January 2025. Otherwise, there would be “hell to pay in the Middle East, and for those in charge…”.


Whether President Trump would risk such a calamity by supporting Israel's ultra-nationalist agenda is again uncertain. What is more certain is that the President holds little respect for diplomatic conventions and considers himself a deal-maker, meaning that he could indeed gamble on being able to make the Arab world bend to his diplomatic will without having to compromise too much on US support for Israel.

-AP

Comments

bottom of page