If Indian franchise owners begin excluding Pakistani players in foreign leagues, it could open the door for accusations that India is unfairly influencing the sport’s global ecosystem.
Republic TV, which sees the Congress’ hand everywhere, blamed the party again—even though it’s a junior partner in the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha government led by Hemant Soren.
NSFDC beneficiaries fell from 1.18 lakh to 61,394 in a year as a Parliamentary panel flagged no fresh equity, nine board vacancies and weak state agencies.
It is reliably learnt that Airbus, which had initially offered its A400M, is likely to sit it out since its aircraft outweighs requirements with payload capacity of 37 tonnes.
It’s evident Bhagwat was watching from a distance and was worried about youth’s anger towards Modi govt. The first thing he did was to demolish any criticism of Gen Z protesters as anti-national.
This is Peacenik Punditry at Its Worst.
The author calls Indian outrage puzzling — what’s puzzling is this breathtaking selective amnesia.
The same world that cheers Russia’s Olympic bans, debates Afghanistan’s ICC status over Taliban governance, and sympathizes with boycotted Israeli athletes suddenly demands sport stay “pure” — but only when Indians react.
Calling Indian fans bullies while completely ignoring Pakistan’s documented “Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts” doctrine, state-sponsored terrorism, and decades of cross-border carnage isn’t neutral commentary. It’s a political choice wearing a sportswriter’s jacket.
Furthermore, Indian capital, Indian audiences, and Indian eyeballs built the commercial value enabling Sun Group’s global ownership ambitions. Expecting accountability to primary stakeholders isn’t hyper-nationalism — it’s basic logic.
You cannot ask Indians to compartmentalize their grief, their dead soldiers, their bombed civilians — then label them bullies for not complying. Demanding Indians alone separate sport from politics while the rest of the world freely conflates them isn’t peacekeeping.
It’s asking the victim to be more civilized than the aggressor.
There is no unfair influence, countries get banned from olympics, other sports, economic activities get sanctioned and so on when Western countries don’t like someone. There’s no need for us to act like Saints.
This is Peacenik Punditry at Its Worst.
The author calls Indian outrage puzzling — what’s puzzling is this breathtaking selective amnesia.
The same world that cheers Russia’s Olympic bans, debates Afghanistan’s ICC status over Taliban governance, and sympathizes with boycotted Israeli athletes suddenly demands sport stay “pure” — but only when Indians react.
Calling Indian fans bullies while completely ignoring Pakistan’s documented “Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts” doctrine, state-sponsored terrorism, and decades of cross-border carnage isn’t neutral commentary. It’s a political choice wearing a sportswriter’s jacket.
Furthermore, Indian capital, Indian audiences, and Indian eyeballs built the commercial value enabling Sun Group’s global ownership ambitions. Expecting accountability to primary stakeholders isn’t hyper-nationalism — it’s basic logic.
You cannot ask Indians to compartmentalize their grief, their dead soldiers, their bombed civilians — then label them bullies for not complying. Demanding Indians alone separate sport from politics while the rest of the world freely conflates them isn’t peacekeeping.
It’s asking the victim to be more civilized than the aggressor.
There is no unfair influence, countries get banned from olympics, other sports, economic activities get sanctioned and so on when Western countries don’t like someone. There’s no need for us to act like Saints.