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.

Operation Sindoor: When Honour Struck Back

With a codename steeped in grief and resilience, India’s retaliation fused firepower with moral clarity.

From the selection of targets and strategies to the symbolic and emotional significance of the codename, Operation Sindoor got it all right. It signalled to Pakistan that it can no longer harbour terror outfits and use them to engineer such brutal acts of terror in India with impunity. Operation Sindoor is hopefully just the tactical tip of our multidimensional strategic sword that will thrust deep into Pakistan to avenge decades of terrorist violence that has left thousands of widows in its wake. This is also the time for every patriotic Indian irrespective of religion, caste or creed to support our government to pursue their aim to put an end to such brutal inhumanity, and therefore, be prepared to pay the price to eradicate the scourge that has dogged our country for decades.


Strategic Rationale

Operation Sindoor was India’s calibrated response to the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack where 26 civilians were brutally murdered. Its purpose was to avenge this brutality, to dismantle the Pakistan-based terror infrastructure behind that massacre and to deter further incursions. The strikes were “focused, measured and non-escalatory,” attacking militants rather than conventional military forces. In strategic terms, this was a limited punitive strike – severe enough to punish the perpetrators, yet calibrated to avoid all-out war.


The planners identified nine terror camps - four in Pakistan’s Punjab and five in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Notable targets included Jaish-e-Mohammed’s Bahawalpur training centre (Markaz Subhan Allah) and Lashkar-e-Taiba’s Muridke academy (Markaz Taiba), both jihadist training hubs. The strikes were launched simultaneously around 1 a.m. to maximize surprise. In keeping with the saying that revenge is a dish best served cold, nearly two weeks had passed since Pahalgam with no Pakistani action against those camps, effectively exhausting other options in the face of blatant Pakistani denial, before using force.


The operation leveraged India’s precision-strike arsenal with fighter jets carrying guided bombs and stand-off missiles. Official releases confirmed “missile strikes” on all targets and cited the use of “special precision munitions” to hit the camps accurately with minimal collateral damage.


Execution and Coordination: The strikes were executed with joint coordination. Fighter jets took off on schedule while naval and army assets supported the assault. All strike teams hit their objectives with precision, reflecting meticulous planning. Official statements noted the Army, Navy and Air Force acted in concert, and the Prime Minister was kept updated live through the night. The result was a clean execution where all designated sites were destroyed without Indian casualties reported.


Relatives of the Pahalgam victims praised the strikes as justice for their loved ones, and most political leaders backed the action. Internationally, leaders urged restraint and dialogue. The UAE’s foreign minister publicly called for de-escalation, and among others, Israel’s ambassador endorsed India’s right to self-defence. India’s response was widely viewed as measured and proportionate.


Pakistan immediately called the strikes an “act of war” and resorted to heavy shelling along the Line of Control. Pakistani media circulated claims of shooting down Indian fighter jets and hitting Indian bases, later debunked as misinformation. India’s military planners now anticipate tit-for-tat skirmishes or proxy attacks – but both sides know the nuclear threshold which may deter full-scale war. It is not judicious to further exam Pak retaliatory options in this open forum.


Symbolic Significance

Sindoor is the bright vermilion mark married Hindu women apply in their hair, symbolizing marriage. In Pahalgam, the attackers killed husbands in front of their wives, effectively “erasing the sindoor” of those women. By naming the mission Sindoor, India signalled it would avenge that injustice. The codename thus underscored the personal and cultural dimensions of India’s response to the cowardly brutal killing of husbands in front of their families and linking military action to the protection of our families and their honour.


In a utopian world, Pakistan would use this opportunity to stop fermenting terrorism and focus on building her economy by learning to live in peace with India. But that will require a regime change in Pakistan which, presently, is an unrealistic expectation.


(The author is a 1975 batch Armoured Corps officer who has commanded an Independent Armoured Brigade, an Infantry Division in Jammu and a Corps on the Chinese border. He also has had operational staff experience in J&K.)

Comments

bottom of page