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.

Terror Has an Address Now

Pahalgam is a brutal reminder that terrorism thrives not just on violence but on the world’s indifference.

The massacre of 27 innocent civilians in Pahalgam, Kashmir is a grim reminder that violent extremism respects no boundary, no creed and no norm of humanity. This was not merely an attack on civilians but an assault on the idea of civilised order. When terror strikes tourists on a peaceful journey, it exposes the moral bankruptcy of the extremists and the complacency of those who merely condemn without consequence.


Time and again, the global response to terrorism follows a weary ritual: swift condemnation, sombre diplomacy and then silence. What is needed now is not rhetoric but resolve. There can be no negotiation with those who traffic in violence as ideology. The outpouring of unity across India after the Pahalgam tragedy cutting across political, religious and social lines sent a clear signal that Bharat speaks with one voice against terrorism. The world would do well to echo it.


The idea that terrorism can be contained or compartmentalised is a dangerous illusion. Violence ignored is violence emboldened. The doctrine of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam - the world as one family - demands not only philosophical commitment but strategic coherence. Terrorism is not selective; it feeds on silence, on division and on international double standards.


India, with its syncretic heritage and pluralistic ethos, has long embraced tolerance. Yet it has also been among the foremost victims of cross-border terror. That Pakistan continues to serve as a sanctuary for violent extremists is no secret. The irony is painful: Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, whose own mother, Benazir Bhutto, was assassinated by militants, now lends rhetorical comfort to the very forces responsible for atrocities such as Pahalgam.


Indians remember standing in solidarity with Pakistan after the carnage in Peshawar and the murder of Sufi singers. But reciprocity remains elusive. Sectarian violence continues to claim lives in Pakistan. Shias, Ahmadis and other minorities live under constant threat. What Pakistan exports to the world, above all, is instability.


The international community must stop treating Pakistan’s duplicity as a diplomatic inconvenience. It must recognise that terror has metastasised into a global cancer, one that cannot be excised with half-measures or hollow statements. Human-rights organisations, too, must resist the temptation to remain silent when terror is unleashed against Indians. Silence, in such moments, is complicity.


If the world truly believes in peace, it must match India’s unity with its own. Pahalgam should not become just another headline. It should be the turning point in the fight against the global machinery of violent extremism.


The massacre is a chilling reminder that violent extremism continues to flourish with impunity. For decades, India has borne the brunt of cross-border terrorism - from the attack on its Parliament in 2001 to the carnage in Mumbai in 2008. Yet global responses have too often been confined to platitudes and perfunctory condemnations. It is high time that the international community acknowledge that terrorism in Kashmir is not a local grievance but a global threat.


Despite their grief, Indians have shown uncommon unity in the face of this violence. The aim of the terrorists, which is to sow communal discord and stifle Kashmir’s economic revival, is being countered with resolve. Tourism, a key pillar of Kashmir’s prosperity, must not be allowed to falter. With a direct train connecting the Valley to Kanyakumari in the south, India’s response should be to flood Kashmir with tourists, not fear.


The question, however, remains: what is the world doing to dismantle the infrastructure that enables such attacks? Pakistan, which gave sanctuary to Osama bin Laden and has long harboured extremist networks, remains a hub for jihadist ideology. It is time the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) reconsidered its indulgence. International funding routed through institutions such as the IMF should be scrutinised with far greater rigour. Too often, it props up a military-political elite while ordinary Pakistanis remain trapped between poverty and propaganda.


India, a land steeped in Sufi traditions and pluralism, has long advocated for a united global front against terrorism. Yet the world continues to view this scourge through the lens of narrow self-interest. The battle for Kashmir’s soul is not India’s alone but a litmus test of whether the international community truly believes in a peaceful, rules-based order. The blood spilled in Pahalgam must not be in vain.


(The author is an academician, columnist, historian and a strong voice on Gender and Human Rights.)

Comments

bottom of page