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.

The Ceasefire Illusion

Updated: Mar 20, 2025

Until Hamas is eradicated, every ceasefire in Gaza is just an intermission in an unending war.

Hamas

Israel’s latest assault on Gaza, the heaviest since the ceasefire killing over 400 people, was swift and devastating. Hamas confirmed that Essam al-Dalis, the head of its government in Gaza, was among the dead. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, mincing no words, warned this was only the beginning and that Israel would no longer entertain the idea of diplomacy as an alternative to force.


Hamas, in turn, accused Israel of undermining mediation efforts, urging its allies to pressure the United States into restraining its client state. But Washington under Donald Trump has remained unmoved, holding Hamas responsible for the resumption of hostilities.


In the years since Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007, ceasefires have never led to a lasting peace. Hamas has always prioritized military confrontation over governance, diverting humanitarian aid to build tunnels and rockets instead of improving the lives of Palestinians. It embeds military infrastructure within civilian areas, ensuring that Palestinian casualties mount whenever Israel responds to attacks. The group’s strategy is not to seek peace but to perpetuate war, believing that ongoing conflict serves its long-term interests. Instead, they have provided Hamas with an opportunity to regroup, rearm, and prepare for the next confrontation. The latest breakdown was predictable. Israel sought to extend the first phase of a ceasefire agreement, but Hamas, still holding dozens of hostages, refused unless the second phase involving Israeli concessions was implemented.


The point – if it ever needed emphasizing – is that Hamas is not interested in a political settlement; it remains committed to Israel’s destruction. And as long as Hamas holds power, the people of Gaza will continue to suffer.


For those railing Israel and the IDF’s heavy-handed bombing of Gaza, recall that when the U.S.-led coalition sought to eliminate the Islamic State from Mosul and Raqqa, those cities were turned to rubble. Entire neighbourhoods were flattened in the battle to rid Iraq and Syria of the ISIS menace. There was no great outcry from Washington or the international community about the destruction of those cities because the world understood that eradicating ISIS was a moral and strategic imperative.


Why, then, does this logic not apply to Hamas? The group is, by all measures, just as radical and dangerous as ISIS. It has governed Gaza with an iron fist, suppressing dissent, diverting humanitarian aid to its military operations, and using Palestinian civilians as human shields.


History suggests that peace in the Middle East has only been possible when one side has suffered an unequivocal defeat. Anwar Sadat, the Egyptian leader who famously made peace with Israel, first launched the 1973 Yom Kippur War in an attempt to wipe the Jewish state off the map. Egypt initially made gains, but Israel regrouped and delivered a crushing defeat. It was only after that failure that Sadat realized military force was not a viable option. His subsequent peace treaty with Israel in 1979 transformed Egypt’s role in the region and remains one of the few enduring diplomatic successes in the Arab-Israeli conflict.


For years, the international community of ‘liberals’ have indulged the fantasy that Gaza’s suffering is the result of Israeli aggression alone. But the true architects of Palestinian misery are Hamas and its backers. The elites in the West – from student activists on varsity campuses to so-called Hollywood liberals - conflate Hamas with the Palestinian people, failing to recognize that the group is as much a threat to Palestinians as it is to Israel. The real tragedy is that Palestinians trapped under Hamas’s rule are unable to express dissent or seek an alternative future.


The only path to peace in Gaza is through Hamas’s total defeat. Palestinians must understand that terrorism and military confrontation will only bring them further suffering. Only then can a new political reality emerge - one in which Gaza is not a launchpad for rockets but a place where genuine statehood and economic stability can take root.

Comments

bottom of page