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.

Marcos vs. Duterte: How the UniTeam Fell Apart

What began as a coalition of convenience has turned into a contest of survival.

Ferdinand Marcos Jr Sara Duterte
Ferdinand Marcos Jr Sara Duterte

Earlier this month, a routine administrative reshuffle sent shockwaves through Philippine politics. The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) removed Col. Raymund Dante Lachica, head of the Vice Presidential Security Group (VPSG), without notifying Vice President Sara Duterte.


This was not merely a bureaucratic move but a bold political message. The removal signalled deeper institutional friction and was widely seen as evidence of the worsening ties between President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr and his vice president. Their “UniTeam” alliance had once projected unity, stability, and dynastic collaboration during the 2022 elections.


From alliance to antagonism

The UniTeam’s 2022 formation arose not from ideology but political expediency. Ferdinand Marcos Jr, representing the northern elite and business technocrats, allied with Sara Duterte, daughter of hardline populist ex-President Rodrigo Duterte, who dominated Mindanao and commanded a loyal base. Their combined machinery swept the elections, securing majorities and reshaping the nation’s power structure.


By mid-2023, cracks had begun to appear. Policy rifts emerged over education, public health, and governance. Sara Duterte pushed for a nationalistic, conservative curriculum, while Marcos backed liberal reforms and technocratic consensus. Cabinet reshuffles slowly edged out Duterte allies, deepening mistrust. In June 2024, she resigned as Education Secretary, citing irreconcilable policies and poor consultation.


What followed went beyond disagreement—it was the rise of rival political narratives. Marcos styled himself as a global-minded moderniser, courting investors and bolstering diplomacy. Duterte doubled down on populism, accusing the government of neglecting grassroots concerns and hoarding power in Manila. By late 2024, the UniTeam had devolved from an alliance into a battleground of competing agendas and loyalties.


The impeachment battle

The conflict intensified after four impeachment complaints were filed against Vice President Sara Duterte in December 2024. Allegations included misuse of intelligence funds and efforts to undermine the President through inflammatory statements and coercive tactics. In February 2025, the House approved the complaints, paving the way for a Senate trial.


The impeachment proceedings quickly dominated national discourse. Major TV networks, online influencers, and regional papers took sides. Pro- and anti-Duterte protests erupted in Davao and several provincial capitals. The issue also split the political class, leaving governors and mayors caught in a storm of pressure and potential retribution.


In July 2025, the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling declaring the impeachment unconstitutional, citing the one-year bar on successive cases within the same legislative term. Duterte supporters hailed it as a victory for judicial independence, while Marcos allies warned of judicial overreach.


Military and security fault lines

The military’s role in the feud remained one of its most sensitive and volatile aspects. The abrupt removal of Col. Lachica in October, without protocol or prior coordination with the Vice President’s office, fuelled fears of creeping militarisation in civilian politics.


Earlier that year, anonymous reports surfaced of an aborted “soft coup” allegedly led by retired officers sympathetic to Duterte. Though the AFP denied the claims, the incident prompted a rare public address by the Chief of Staff, reaffirming the military’s loyalty to the Constitution and civilian rule. Shaped by the lessons of the 1986 and 2001 EDSA uprisings, the institution sought to project neutrality and professionalism.


Despite this, the military remains a powerful arbiter in political crises. Its stance may be neutral, but internal sentiments often reflect the nation’s broader political divides.


The political landscape ahead

With the once-dominant UniTeam now defunct, political alliances are rapidly realigning. President Marcos Jr is working to tighten control over key institutions and expand his base among centrists, technocrats, and Manila’s economic elite. His administration has doubled down on infrastructure, education reform, and foreign policy to position the Philippines as a key Indo-Pacific player.


Meanwhile, Vice President Duterte is rallying her base in Mindanao and the Visayas, drawing on her family’s entrenched networks and populist legacy. Her public appearances are more frequent, her rhetoric sharper. A new political party launch seems likely. Her local-first message resonates with voters who feel sidelined by the capital-centric policies of the current administration.


The rivalry is already reshaping legislative debates, with Senate and House blocs subtly realigning. Bills on decentralisation, education, and law enforcement have turned into political flashpoints. Provincial leaders are hedging their bets, balancing between both camps. Their decisions will strongly influence the path to the 2028 presidential race.


The Philippines has long faced cycles of elite rivalry, personality-driven politics, and institutional fragility. The Marcos-Duterte rift continues this pattern but may also mark a turning point. As 2028 approaches, key questions remain: Will the political system adapt, evolve, or fracture under the strain of dynastic rule? Can realignment foster policy coherence and democratic maturity, or will it entrench old weaknesses? The answers could shape the next decade of Philippine governance and stability.


(The writer is a foreign affairs expert. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page