World University Games: Ankita bags women's 3000m steeplechase silver, men's 4x100m relay team takes bronze
The trio of Munita Prajapati, Mansi Negi, and Sejal Singh finished third to take the bronze in women's 20km team racewalk on the concluding day.
India ended their campaign with two gold, five silver and five bronze in the showpiece event.
On a day when several Indian athletes were in contention in track events, but could bag only two medals, 23-year-old Ankita, a second-year social sciences student, shaved nearly seven seconds from her personal best time of 9:39.00 seconds to finish a few milliseconds behind Finland's Ilona Maaria Mononen, who timed 9:31.86.
Adia Budde of Germany took the bronze, clocking 9:33.34 seconds.
On Friday, Ankita had topped Heat 1 by clocking 9:54.79 seconds and secured her place in the final. It was a massive 22-second improvement, which propelled Ankita to second place in the competitive race.
Ankita remained in the top-five through most of the race and came up with a breathtaking sprint in the final 300 metres to almost catch up with the German before missing the gold by just 0.13 seconds.
The men's 4x100m relay team, comprising Lalu Prasad Bhoi, Animesh Kujur, Manikanta Hoblidhar and Mrutyam Jayaram, clocked 38.89 seconds to take the bronze. South Korea took the gold in 38.50 seconds, while South Africa (38.80) bagged the silver.
The Indian women's 4x400m relay team came up with a season's best time of 3:35.08 seconds, but it was not good enough for a medal, as the quartet of Anakha Bijukumar, Devyaniba Zala, Rashdeep Kaur and Rupal finished fifth, clocking 3:35.08 seconds.
The German team, despite a poor reaction time, won the gold with a time of 3:29.68 seconds.
The Indian men's 4x400m relay quartet of Vishal Kayalvizhi, Aswin Lakshmanan, Jerome Jayaseelan Panimaya and Balakrishna finished fifth, clocking 3:06.5.seconds.
Poland won the gold with a time of 3:03.64.
Indian race walkers had a dismal showing, with none of them finishing in the top-10 in the men's and women's sections, though a few came up with personal or season best timings. However, the trio of Munita, Mansi, and Sejal finished third to take the bronze in women's 20km team racewalk.
Sejal came up with a personal best of 1:35:21 seconds to finish 15th, with the gold going to Australia's Elizabeth McMillen in a WUG record time of 1:28:18 seconds.
Munita (1:39:33) was 18th, Mansi (1:41:12) was 20th, Shalini (1:48:07) 23rd, and Mahima (1:55.49) 25th.
In men's 20km racewalk, Rahul clocked a season's best 1:26:34 seconds but finished 20th in the men's 20km race walk final with the gold going to Andrea Cosi of Italy with a World University Games record of 1:19:48 seconds.
Gaurav Kumar (1:28:44) was 25th, Sachin Singh Bohra (1:32:03) 28th and Sanjay Kumar (1:46:21) finished last among 31 competitors.
Pole vaulter Dev Kumar Meena (5.35m) settled for a fifth-place finish in the final with the gold going to Simen Guttormsen (5.75m) of Norway.
India's medal winners: Gold - Parneet Kaur/Kushal Dalal (mixed team compound archery), Sahil Jadhav (men's compound archery). Silver - Parneet Kaur (women's compound archery), Kushal Dalal/Sahil Jadhav/Hritik Sharma (men's team compound archery), Praveen Chithravel (men's triple jump), Seema (women's 5000m), Ankita Dhyani (women's 3000m steeplechase). Bronze - Badminton mixed team, Vaishnavi Adkar (women's singles tennis), Parneet Kaur/Avneet Kaur/Madhura Dhamangaonkar (women's compound team archery), Sejal Singh, Munita Prajapati, Mansi Negi (women's 20km racewalk team), men's 4x100m relay.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
17 minutes ago
- NDTV
Gautam Gambhir's Dressing Room-Shaking Speech Goes Viral, India Star Lauded For Inspiring Act
Indian head coach Gautam Gambhir hailed Rishabh Pant for his steely half-century despite an injured foot, saying that he has "inspired the next generation and created a legacy for himself", which is marked by resilience, bravery and putting the eam first. Pant, though unwillingly, has to bow out of the ongoing Test series against England due to a foot injury, with Tamil Nadu's Narayan Jagadeesan as his replacement. His last gift to the team before being forced to part ways due to injury was a valuable half-century, which he scored despite his injury and added some valuable runs to the first innings total of 358 runs. Speaking in a video by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), Gambhir said, "The foundation of this test team will be based on what Rishabh has done for the team. I hate talking about individuals; I have never spoken about individuals in a team sport. You have not only inspired this dressing room, but you have inspired the next generation." View this post on Instagram A post shared by Team India (@indiancricketteam) "This is what you have done, and that is a legacy which you have created for yourself and everyone in this dressing room. So very, very well done from everyone. And the country will always be proud of you," he added. Pant said that his move to bat was a gesture from his side to do whatever it takes to make his team win, and he was not thinking about any personal goals. "It has been amazing the way they have backed me. The team is under pressure, everything is there, but when the whole country stands behind you for the same cause, that is something, that emotion is difficult to explain. How proud I feel to represent my country. The only message I am going to give my team is, Let us win it, guys. Let us do it for the country," he added. All-rounder Washington Sundar also noted how swollen Pant's foot was and called him a "son of the country". "It is very difficult to even put in the feeling that he would be going through in words because he has fractured his toe, and he is in pain no matter what. I even saw his foot; it was swollen badly. So I think for him to even walk around actually takes a lot, but he did a lot more than that. I think the whole country is proud of him, and he is just the son of a country, I would say," he added. Pant finished the series as the second-highest run-getter currently, with 479 runs in four matches and seven innings at an average of 68.42, with two centuries and three fifties, and runs scored at a strike rate of over 77. His best score is 134, and he scored twin tons at Leeds, becoming the first Indian to do so in a Test. He broke several records during the series, establishing his reputation as the best wicketkeeper-batter among all Asians, especially in South Africa, England, New Zealand and Australia (SENA) nations. He also overtook his predecessor, MS Dhoni, for most Test tons by an Indian wicketkeeper, sealing his legacy as an all-time great already.
Indian Express
17 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Nasser Hussain slams Ben Stokes' ‘silly' move: ‘He didn't have to bowl Brook… Washington & Jadeja deserved to be there at the end'
The Manchester Test between India and England, which seemed to be ending for a quiet draw took a u-turn quickly after England skipper Ben Stokes went to the Indian batters and offered his hand to call an end to the match before the last hour's play was to start. But with Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar batting on 89 and 80, the Indians didn't take the offer from Stokes and chose to continue batting. Former England captain Nasser Hussain said he didn't have a problem with the call made by the Indian team, and both Jadeja and Sundar deserved to be there at the end. 'I didn't have a problem with it. England did. They had tired bowlers and tired legs and wanted to get off but the two lads had worked hard to get into the 80s and 90s and wanted hundreds,' said Hussain to Sky Sports. 'Stokes didn't have to bowl Harry Brook and it looked a bit silly but we make too much of these things. India deserved the draw and Washington and Jadeja deserved to be there at the end,' he added. Shortly after this drama, Jadeja scored his century as Stokes resorted to bowling loopy deliveries to him through Harry Brook. Jadeja slammed a six down the ground to score his 2nd Test century. Sundar, too, reached his maiden century as India finally agreed to end the hard-fought match in a draw. A visibly frustrated Stokes said after the match, 'I don't think there would have been much more satisfaction in walking off 100 not out, getting your team out of a tricky situation, than walking off at 80 or 90 not out. Scoring 10 more runs isn't going to change the fact you've saved your team from a series defeat.' India head coach Gautam Gambhir asked that if the shoe was on the other foot, would England have done the same? 'If someone is batting on 90 and the other one is batting on 85, don't they deserve a hundred? Would they have walked off? If someone from England side was batting on 90 and 85 and someone had the opportunity to get his first Test 100, wouldn't you allow him to do it? They weathered the storm. It's up to them. If they want to play that way, nothing more to say. I think both those guys deserved a 100 and fortunately they got it,' he said on Sunday at the post-match press conference.
India.com
17 minutes ago
- India.com
India vs England: Was Ben Stokes Right To Offer Early Draw? ICC Rules And Team India's Response Explained
The final day of the fourth Test between India and England at Old Trafford offered high-quality cricket — and an unexpected flashpoint. With just an hour left, England captain Ben Stokes invoked ICC Playing Condition 16.1.1, offering an early draw under the provision that allows both captains to agree that no result is possible. But when India declined — with Ravindra Jadeja on 89* and Washington Sundar on 80* — tensions flared, and the spirit of cricket was suddenly up for debate. Also Read: Explained: Why India Can't Withdraw From Asia Cup 2025 Fixture Against Pakistan – BCCI's Hands Tied So, who was right? Was Stokes justified in wanting to end early? Or did India have every right to chase personal milestones within the laws of the game? The ICC Rule Explained: What Does Law 16.1.1 Say? According to ICC Test Match Playing Conditions, Clause 16.1.1 states: "A match is drawn if no result is possible and both captains agree to terminate play." Importantly, this is not mandatory. It's a mutual decision — and a captain has every right to decline the offer. In this case, India exercised that right, with Jadeja and Sundar closing in on well-earned centuries after saving the match. India had lost only four wickets and were 75 runs ahead. The pitch was docile. The threat of collapse had passed. The team was safe — but the batters still had personal landmarks within reach. The match situation allowed it. The ICC rules allowed it. And so did the unwritten rules of Test cricket pride. Stokes Offers Draw, India Declines — Tension Follows Ben Stokes, nursing niggles and mindful of his bowling unit's workload, decided enough was enough. England had bowled 257.1 overs across five days. Archer and Woakes were visibly fatigued. Liam Dawson, the left-arm spinner, had bowled long spells exploiting the rough. Stokes offered the draw under Law 16.1.1 — and when India declined, frustration took over. Stokes turned to Jadeja and sarcastically asked: 'Jaddu, you want to get a Test hundred against Harry Brook and Joe Root?' The remark, caught on stump mic, sparked immediate criticism. Was it fair for Stokes to question India's intent when the law clearly permitted them to continue? Gavaskar, Gambhir, Manjrekar: The Verdict from Indian Legends Veteran commentator Sunil Gavaskar was quick to defend India. 'If a batter has weathered two sessions and saved the game, why shouldn't he aim for a century?' Gautam Gambhir, India's head coach, echoed the sentiment: 'They deserved that hundred. They fought hard. You don't walk off just because the opposition is tired.' Sanjay Manjrekar didn't hold back: 'Stokes behaved like a spoilt kid. Everything won't go your way just because you ask nicely.' Brook's Bowling and the Protest in Disguise After India declined the draw offer, England made a mockery of the final overs. Harry Brook, not a frontline bowler, sent down underarm lobs at 60 kmph. Jadeja responded by launching one for six to complete his century. Sundar followed soon after with his maiden Test hundred. Only then did India agree to shake hands. Was this England's passive-aggressive protest? Or was it a moment of sportsmanship gone wrong? What Does the ICC Rule Say About This? Crucially, nowhere in the ICC rules is there a stipulation that batters must accept a draw if offered. Nor is there any provision for enforcing one without mutual agreement. Law 16.1.1 exists to allow a draw — not force one. India, having secured the draw on merit, played well within the framework. In fact, continuing to bat — while seemingly milestone-driven — also served strategic goals. With just three days before the final Test at The Oval, India kept England's tired bowlers in the field longer. Tactical? Yes. Petty? Not at all.
