Latest news with #MohammadAbdullah
Time of India
17 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Strategic Jammu-Srinagar tunnel project: All-weather route for troops, convoys on the cards; check details of project
Representative AI image In a renewed push for secure, year-round connectivity in Jammu and Kashmir , the Centre is set to revisit financial clearances for two key tunnel projects, Singhpora-Vailoo and Sudhmahadev-Dranga. This comes as part of renewed efforts on all-weather connectivity for Jammu and Kashmir following the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack. Both projects, which aim to create an alternative link between Jammu and Srinagar via National Highway 244, have been awaiting clearance for over a decade. The revised proposals are expected to be taken up by the Public Investment Board (PIB) in its next meeting, according to sources quoted by ET. Though the tunnels had already received defence and environmental clearances, PIB had earlier rejected them during a meeting on March 22 due to concerns over high cost estimates, pegged at around Rs 8,900 crore, and overbuilt structural elements. However, the plan has now been reworked to address these issues and bring down the overall cost. Tunnel details, connectivity impact The projects hold significant strategic importance, especially for troop movement and safer connectivity to border areas. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Luxury Awaits at Paras Floret | Paras Sector 59 Gurgaon Birla Book Now Undo Compared to the existing Jammu-Srinagar NH 44, which runs closer to the Line of Control and is more prone to terror threats, these tunnels would offer safer, all-weather routes. The Singhpora-Vailoo Tunnel, nearly 10 km long, aims to connect Ahlan in Kokernag with Chatroo in Kishtwar. It would bypass the treacherous 12,000-feet Sinthan Pass on the current Anantnag-Kokernag-Kishtwar route, which is frequently blocked by snow or heavy rain. Once completed, the tunnel will provide round-the-year connectivity between the Kashmir Valley and the Chenab region, including Doda, Kishtwar, Ramban, Udhampur, and Reasi—key areas for mineral mining. The Sudhmahadev-Dranga Tunnel is planned as an 8 km unidirectional route that would cut the distance between Sudhmahadev in Udhampur and Khellani in Doda from 100 km to just 32 km. The existing Goha-Khellani road is prone to accidents and landslides. The new alignment is expected to improve travel safety and significantly reduce time and transport costs for local trade. Mughal route to reclaim historic role The Union government's broader push also includes 19 major road and tunnel projects worth Rs 10,637 crore, one of the most prominent being the Peer Ki Gali tunnel on the historic Mughal Road, connecting Shopian in the Kashmir Valley with Poonch in Jammu. Once built, the tunnel will make the 84-km Mughal Road an all-weather route, providing a crucial alternative to NH-44. While the project was initially started in the 1970s under Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, and revived in 2003 by Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, traffic was only allowed by 2009, under his tenure. However, the road still closes in winter due to heavy snowfall at Peer Ki Gali and Bafliaz. Among the other approved projects is the Sadhana Tunnel, estimated at Rs 3,330 crore, to connect Kupwara with the border region of Karnah, bringing much-needed relief to residents in this remote northern area. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
The Hindu
10-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Why the global counter-terrorism order fails India
'I was told to kill as many Hindus as possible. We were told that Muslims in J&K are not allowed to pray,' confessed lanky Mohammad Abdullah, his jawline shadowed by the sparse, hesitant beard of his teenage years. Abdullah was involved in the killing of 28 slum dwellers, including many children, in Qasim Nagar on the evening of July 13, 2002, on the outskirts of Jammu city. In a powerful act of resistance, Kaka, a Gujjar Muslim and resident of the nearby Raikha forests, risked his life to subdue the armed militant on August 2 with a cot, and tied him with a rope when the militant sought shelter in his home, as the police searched the nearby forests for the hiding terrorists. Kaka alerted the police and ensured the perpetrator was handed over to the authorities. The words of Mohammad Abdullah were no different from those of Ajmal Kasab, one of the terrorists who was nabbed by a daredevil act of Mumbai police assistant sub-inspector Tukaram Omble during the Mumbai terror attack of 2008. Armed only with a lathi (bamboo stick), Omble charged at the hijacked vehicle and was shot five times after he opened the passenger door where Kasab was seated. In Mumbai, the dead also included 26 foreign nationals from 14 different countries. These are among the few cases in which terrorists who carried out carnage were arrested and can be cited as clinching evidence of Pakistani nationals' involvement in some of the attacks that gained international attention. Finding support: On Operation Sindoor, international reaction The recent strikes under Operation Sindoor, carried out by India in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir, some of which are well-known in the public domain, mark a new chapter in India's fight against terrorism. Apart from demonstrating capabilities to strike, it is also an illustration of the intent. At the same time, we can safely conclude that the danger of terrorism is far from over. Having studied the subject of terrorism consistently from within the society, not from conference tables, but from the ground up, including at the UNHQ in New York, I remain struck by the recurring patterns: the repetition in discourse, the familiar reactions and the predictable strategies, both domestically and internationally. In the hinterland, the question dominating everyone's mind is why an incident with eyewitnesses has failed to galvanise the international community in India's favour. There is a deep sense of revulsion over the fact that most major powers have merely called for restraint and urged both India and Pakistan to cooperate in identifying the perpetrators. India's diplomatic efforts to confront terrorism at the U.N. have yielded partial victories but systemic inertia. While some explanations are self-evident, there are also deeper, multidimensional reasons worth examining to understand why India's narrative fails to resonate in the international — or rather Western — capitals, despite consistent reinforcement of the same theme in national discourse. Western understanding holds significant weight because it shapes multilateral frameworks and trade preferences that are vital lifelines for Pakistan's economy. Patterns of infiltration First, from strictly the security lens, there is little ambiguity that infiltration from across the border continues unabated, actively enabled by Pakistan's military establishment. The infrastructure of terror, training camps, launch pads, and logistical networks, operates with the tacit, and often explicit, support of official agencies across the border. Anyone who has tracked the international border and Line of Control since 1990 is aware of the distinct patterns of infiltration. The tunnels along the International border (IB) that enable the entry of the terrorists from Sialkot district to J&K cannot be dug without the support of the official agencies from across the border. In this connection, the current attack is especially alarming because warning signs were there on the ground. In the weeks preceding it, ground intelligence pointed to a spike in infiltration attempts, particularly through the Samba-Kathua sector in the south, and the Rajouri-Poonch-Baramulla axis along the IB and Line of Control. These areas, due to their topography and socio-cultural overlap with Pakistani Punjab and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir, provide both cover and convenient access for infiltrators. Locals had repeatedly raised concerns with both ruling and opposition parties, but their warnings were ignored. It's akin to someone hurling combustible material at a house day after day, and we notice only when the blaze erupts. The danger was always present, accumulating in plain sight, but the response, both domestic and international, is triggered only when the fire breaks out. We recognise the fire, but continue to ignore the arsonist's intent. Our knowledge ecosystem around terrorism remains narrow and incident-driven. Beyond investing in creating modern technology to detect and capture infiltration, proactive diplomatic action highlights these facts as they are unfolding. When signs of infiltration emerge, we must immediately alert the world capitals to the risks and consequences. Prior to the Baisaran attack, a series of civilian killings in the hilly terrain of Kathua signalled a consistent inflow of terrorists. The killings took place in areas that serve as a route for terrorists making their way to the Doda-Kishtwar hills that border Anantnag district in which Baisaran falls. While there are other granular factors contributing to the increased infiltration in recent years, those issues lie outside the scope of this piece. In a nutshell, by providing the topographical context, the relevant interlocutors from the international community should be timely made aware of the challenges facing India's counter-infiltration grid. The Baisaran attack shows clear signs of involvement by non-Kashmiri-speaking terrorists unfamiliar with the social fabric of Jammu and Kashmir. Evidence suggests that the assailants who interacted with the victims and their families were not locals. For example, a local Kashmiri-speaking pony operator, wearing a Kashmiri pheran, interviewed on television, recounted that the attackers asked him about his religious identity. A native Kashmiri or even a non-Kashmiri from the region is well-versed in linguistic, cultural, and visual cues, and he would not need to ask such a question, as they will clearly know the ethnic or religious details of Pony operators in the area, who are either Kashmiri Muslims or Gujjar Muslims. This distinction is critical in identifying the attackers' origins. These granular distinctions should have been underscored early on, as the trajectory of evidence collection and initial official claims must account for these societal nuances. This is particularly important when presenting the case to key members of the international community, where credibility hinges on detailed, culturally-informed assessments. Perception of contested conflict zone Second, Indian response is often reactive and ad hoc, such as after the Parliament attack on 13 December 2001, leaving the international community with little context or time to fully grasp the complexity of the situation, especially the scale of cross-border involvement. Since most attacks take place in J&K or have a linkage with Jammu and Kashmir, the region is widely perceived as a contested conflict zone, where both sides are seen to hold equally opposing narratives. There is a lesson here. In March 1994, the People's Republic of China (PRC), along with the Islamic Republic of Iran, bailed India out when Pakistan moved a resolution at the UN Human Rights Council at Geneva for sending a fact-finding mission to Jammu and Kashmir. With a much weaker political and economic heft, India fielded its top political leaders, from the opposition and ruling party, and diplomatic talent, including Atal Behari Vajpayee, Manmohan Singh, Farooq Abdullah, and India's Permanent Representative to the UNHQ, Hamid Ansari. The delegation also included a public intellectual, Balraj Puri, whose insights helped articulate the historical and contemporary dimensions of the Kashmir issue. This all-of-society approach proved effective in challenging the binary narrative, urging the international community to adopt a more nuanced perspective on Jammu and Kashmir. Communicating the human cost of terrorism Third, some actors in the international community view the terrorism threat through a specific lens, which often influences how they perceive the challenges faced by India. A more proactive approach to counterterrorism, therefore, requires greater transparency and accountability, with policies and actions consistently anchored in the rule of law and avoiding human rights violations. Strengthening institutions like the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), both in capacity and mandate, can ensure that justice is not only provided but seen to be done, reinforcing the credibility of India's counterterrorism efforts. A conspicuous gap also exists in the factual and objective sustained storytelling about the victims, networks, and threats India faces. This lack of narrative weakens the emotional and political salience of India's case on the global stage. While global narratives of terrorism victims are increasingly amplified to garner public and diplomatic support, India must also invest in consistently communicating the human cost of terrorism and the complexities of the threats it confronts. By doing so, it would not only build empathy but also reinforce the legitimacy of India's counterterrorism efforts within the international community. One poignant example is the story of the family of the late Haji Mohammad Qasim, whom I first met in a hospital as he tended to his relatives wounded in an attack by Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists in 2004. He and members of his clan had taken up arms to drive terrorists out of the Pir Panjal hamlets; among the first organised local efforts of resistance. That encounter marked the beginning of many journeys with him through the remote villages of the Pir Panjal range, where I witnessed firsthand their resolve and suffering. Twenty-eight-year-old Syed Adil Hussain Shah's story in the recent Baisaran attack is another searing example of this ongoing tragedy. These stories are just a few among countless others in Jammu and Kashmir, where victims span all ethnic and religious backgrounds. Amplifying their voices on the global stage is essential, not only to humanise the conflict, but to foster a deeper, more nuanced international understanding of the complexities of India's counterterrorism struggle. Selective priorities Four, coming to the multilateral arena, there is a structural reality playing out that doesn't entirely go in India's favour. While India pushes for initiatives like the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT), it hasn't managed to build strong, sustained global coalitions. Apart from this, India's legitimate concerns about terrorism are often minimised on the world stage due to a combination of geopolitical rivalries, perception management failures and the global community's selective priorities. For instance, the September 11, 2001, attacks in the United States fundamentally reshaped the architecture and discourse of counter-terrorism (CT) at the United Nations. The Security Council's Resolution 1373, adopted just 17 days after the attacks, provided the foundational framework for international CT cooperation by obligating all member states to criminalize terrorism financing, deny safe haven to terrorists, and improve information sharing. Over the past two decades, the Council has passed numerous follow-up resolutions, and a vast CT infrastructure has emerged within the UN system. Yet, despite the procedural expansion and normative growth, the world has consistently failed to acknowledge and respond adequately to India's counter-terrorism concerns. This dissonance between international CT architecture and India's lived experience of terrorism stems from a confluence of factors: definitional deadlock, geopolitical hypocrisy, selective enforcement, and the instrumentalisation of CT norms by major powers. At the heart of the global CT failure lies an unresolved and politically fraught question: what constitutes terrorism? India has, since 1996, championed a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT) at the UN — an effort to codify a universal legal definition of terrorism. But more than two decades later, the effort remains stalled. Diplomatic foot-dragging is only part of the problem. Beneath the surface lie deep conceptual divisions among member states. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), representing 57 Muslim-majority nations, maintains that armed resistance to foreign occupation must be distinguished from terrorism. This position, couched in international humanitarian law, is seen by countries like the U.S. and India as offering a loophole for groups that target civilians under the pretext of resistance. As an eyewitness to this process at the sixth committee of the General Assembly, the definitional gridlock means that while member states pay rhetorical homage to fighting terrorism, they remain divided on whom and what they are fighting. This ambiguity weakens legal enforcement, undermines political coherence, and more importantly, creates diplomatic space for selective outrage. In the aftermath of 9/11, the UN Security Council also created powerful mechanisms such as the 1267 Sanctions Committee, which initially targeted Taliban and later expanded to include al-Qaida and ISIL affiliates. These mechanisms now operate under the authority of UNSC Resolution 2253 (2015) and are supported by an Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team that tracks CT trends globally. In theory, these institutions should provide a robust, rules-based mechanism to identify and sanction terrorist actors. In practice, however, they have been routinely undermined by geopolitics, especially by the strategic calculations of the P-5 (permanent members of the Security Council). For instance, India's experience illustrates this vividly. It took a decade for the UN to list Masood Azhar, the leader of Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), a group responsible for attacks on the Indian Parliament (2001), Pathankot airbase (2016), and the deadly Pulwama bombing (2019). Despite ample evidence, including public video confessions and intelligence-backed dossiers, Azhar's listing was repeatedly blocked by China on procedural grounds, only to be reversed in May 2019 after considerable international pressure and political calculus changed. The delay is not just a bureaucratic anomaly; it is emblematic of how India's CT concerns are often dismissed, diluted, or delayed when they intersect with the geopolitical interests of powerful states. Also, the Security Council's sanctions regimes, 14 of which are currently active, effect a hierarchy of political attention, with some regimes being rigorously enforced (e.g., Iran's nuclear sanctions) and others languishing in procedural inertia. India, lacking veto power and a seat at the high table of the UNSC, often finds itself navigating a system that rewards geopolitical leverage rather than principled consistency. On the contrary, the rapid listing of Hafiz Saeed, the alleged mastermind of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, stands in stark contrast, triggered by global outrage and Western fatalities. Moreover, calls for greater due process, while normatively sound, are sometimes weaponised to delay or dilute sanctions efforts. For example, the creation of the Office of the Ombudsperson was a step toward procedural fairness, but it also added bureaucratic layers that can be exploited to stall listings. Another obstacle lies in the evidentiary demands of listing individuals under UN sanctions. Most petitions rely on classified intelligence. But presenting 'irrefutable evidence' that does not compromise operational capacity is difficult. This technical challenge, however, becomes a convenient excuse for political vetoes, especially when the evidence comes from a country whose strategic interests may not align with those of the P-5. In this connection, it may be mentioned that following the devastating Baisaran attack on April 22, 2025, which resulted in the deaths of 26 civilians, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) issued a press statement on April 25 condemning the attack as a 'reprehensible act of terrorism.' However, the language was notably more neutral compared to past statements, such as after the 2019 Pulwama attack. Notably, The Resistance Front (TRF), an offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba, initially claimed responsibility for the attack but later retracted its claim. TRF has been designated as a terrorist organisation by India and is known for targeting civilians and security forces in Jammu and Kashmir. While TRF is a designated terrorist group by India and widely reported to be an offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), it has not been formally designated as a terrorist organisation by the UN Security Council's 1267 Sanctions Committee. The UNSC typically avoids naming groups in official statements unless they are universally sanctioned or unambiguously linked to a designated terrorist organisation. The UNSC's failure to mention TRF reflects both its procedural constraints and the realpolitik of power dynamics among its members, as Pakistan, which is right now an elected member of the council, claimed that it ensured that TRF is not mentioned in the statement. It may be mentioned here that the Council President Jérôme Bonnafont (France) had issued a statement after a meeting. The statement conveys condemnations, condolences or appeals, but does not require full Council consensus. In terms of political messaging, the Presidential statement (PRST) of the Security Council, reflecting the collective view of the Council, is more potent as it is issued after all fifteen (15) members agree on the text and it is only next to a UNSC resolution. These nuances become important in understanding how a given terrorist attack and landscape gets internalized by the important capitals of the international community. Ground reality Fifth, turning to the domestic arena, while governments are justified in claiming credit for successes against terrorism, there must be humility when facts on the ground suggest otherwise. Official data from the J&K intelligence apparatus, presented before the Upper house of the Parliament (Rajya Sabha) on 7th February, 2025, reveals no drastic decline in the threat of terrorism between 2019 and 2025. In 2019, there were 163 terrorist-initiated attacks; 126 in 2020; 129 in 2021; and 125 in 2022. The figure dropped to 46 in 2023, but in the absence of 2024 data, the trend line appears to mirror earlier patterns. Overreliance on figures, particularly when benchmarked against the early 2000s, a completely different geopolitical landscape, can breed a false sense of complacency. The decline or increase in attacks is not, by itself, an adequate reflection of the ground reality as the structural reasons for any potential spike exist. The problem also lies in the post-2019 political discourse on J&K, which sought to tightly link the abrogation of Article 370 with the elimination of terrorism and it was amplified internationally, directly and indirectly. The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, which nullified Article 370 and bifurcated the state into Union Territories, was advanced with the claim that these changes would enhance India's counter-terrorism posture. It was argued that direct central control was vital for securing the region. Some even cited demonetization as a contributing factor in weakening terrorism financing. However, this narrative overlooks a critical reality: even when Article 370 was in force, the central government and its agencies were already managing the core aspects of countering cross-border terrorism. For instance, border security has always remained under the purview of the Union government. Thus, framing abrogation as a turning point in counter-terrorism is not only a simplification but also a potential distortion. The risk here is twofold: domestically, such framing can breed misplaced complacency; internationally, it fosters an inconsistent narrative. For five years, the dominant claim has been that the abrogation improved the security situation. Now, if the argument pivots to emphasise persistent or even resurgent cross-border terrorism, it creates confusion before a global audience. The narrative must align with ground realities, namely, the enduring and evolving challenges to India's security, as evidenced by continued infiltration across the Line of Control. Ironically, just a week before the Baisaran attack, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah urged the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to use diplomatic channels to persuade countries like the US, UK, Australia, and the EU to revise or lift their travel advisories against Jammu and Kashmir. He argued that such a move would serve as the clearest, internationally recognised proof of the region's improvement. In response to the Pahalgam attack, on May 7, 2025, India launched Operation Sindoor. The airstrikes targeted terrorist camps across the Line of Control (LoC) and in Pakistani Punjab, signalling India's resolve to combat terrorism. India released some of the names of five terrorists killed to underscore the operation's precision. The international response has been cautious. While acknowledging India's security concerns, the United States, EU, and Japan have urged restraint. China, which is now Pakistan's prime weapons supplier, termed the strikes 'regrettable' and called for stability. Russia reaffirmed support for India's sovereignty and condemned terrorism in all forms. But the key question remains: will this prevent future attacks? The answer is no. Tactical strikes cannot dismantle the entrenched terrorist infrastructure. And in a scenario where the US is looking inward and reluctant to proactively ensure peace as it has done in previous India-Pakistan crises, one needs to factor in any strategy. The actions cannot ignore the impact on the population living in border regions and on India's broader economic trajectory. At the time of writing this piece, both countries are on edge with aerial dogfights and exchanges of missiles and drones, particularly in border areas, thus raising the stakes between the two nuclear countries. Pakistan initiated heavy artillery shelling targeting civilian areas near the Line of Control, particularly in Poonch, which has resulted in the deaths of at least 16 civilians, including four children, and injured over 40 others. Along the India-Pakistan international border, especially in sectors like Jammu, Samba, Kathua, and parts of Punjab (like Ferozpur), there have been recurring instances of cross-border firing and drone incursions from Pakistan that have led to civilian injuries, displacement, and security concerns. Global indifference To sum up, no doubt, India's counter-terrorism concerns, deeply rooted in hard evidence and lived experiences, continue to be met with global indifference, diplomatic ambivalence, or, at best, procedural sympathy. Mohammad Abdullah's chilling confession and Ajmal Kasab's brazen rampage are not isolated incidents. They reflect a persistent pattern of cross-border terror fueled by ideological indoctrination and logistical support. And yet, powerful acts of defiance like that of Kaka, the Gujjar Muslim who subdued a terrorist with nothing but a rope, are emblematic of an alternative narrative within India that often goes untold. These truths, visceral and grounded, deserve not just domestic recognition but global affirmation. However, the disconnect between India's realities and international perception lies in a complex interplay of reactive diplomacy, narrative inconsistencies, procedural inertia in multilateral forums, and a failure to consistently communicate the human cost of terrorism. To change this, India must recalibrate its approach, from episodic outrage to strategic storytelling, from reactive policy to proactive engagement. It must show the world not only the faces of those it has lost, but the courage of those who resist terror daily. Most importantly, it must harmonise its domestic narrative with international messaging by being grounded, shedding defensiveness and arbitrariness in favour of a confident assertion of fact and law. Only then can India ensure that the voices of victims and the bravery of bystanders like Kaka or Adil are not lost in the fog of diplomatic relativism, but heard clearly in the global court of conscience. The author has nearly 25 years of experience tracking and working on terrorism-related issues, including in Jammu and Kashmir and at United Nations Headquarters, where he managed several programmes and chaired the Pillar I Working Group of the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy under the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (now known as UNOCT).
Gulf Today
20-02-2025
- Sport
- Gulf Today
Rohit focuses on Bangladesh tie, hopes top-5 batters to click
Mohammad Abdullah, Senior Sports Reporter Captain Rohit Sharma said that their focus is on the Champions Trophy opening match and they are not looking too far as an overwhelming favourites India start their campaign against underdogs Bangladesh at the Dubai International Cricket Stadium on Thursday. A buoyant India are coming into the tournament on the back of a series win against England. They swept England 3-0, to fine tune for the Champions Trophy. 'It's very easy for all of us to think far ahead and forget about what we need to do tomorrow. I think we'll just think about what we need to do tomorrow and then take it match by match from there.' 'It is going to be a very tough tournament for all the teams as the margin of error is very less. All the games are equally important and any slip up can be very costly. All the ICC tournaments are very tough. 'It is only the ODI World Cup, teams get a chance to relax as there are around 10 matches in the first round and if you lose one or two there is always a room to bounce back and rectify your mistake. 'But the T20 World Cup and the Champions Trophy have difficult formats as you have to win two out of three matches to advance to the next round,' said Rohit. He also said toss can play a crucial role due to dew factor but it is always not the case. 'Dew plays a big role in day night matches. But it becomes difficult to grip the ball in the second innings. Recently, we played against England in Ahmedabad, the dew disappeared in the second innings. 'It also depends on the different teams. Some teams like to avoid bowling second due to the dew factor while some teams want to put up a big score on the board after winning the toss,' he added. He also hopes that the top four batsmen can give a good start and set the tone for a big total. Apart from Rohit and Gill, Virat Kohli and Shreyas Iyer had decent starts against England but failed to convert them into big scores. 'Your top three, four, five batsmen need to get that big score for you to post a big score eventually. So, I think our top four batters are quite experienced. "We know that once they are set, once they are in, they like to get those big runs. They do understand that and everyone understands that between your top four, one has to get that big score." When Rohit was asked about the spin-heavy squad, he gave a strong reply. 'We don't have five spinners. There are two specialist spinners while three are all-rounders. I don't consider them as five spinners. 'Those three guys can bat and can bowl also. The rest of the teams have fast-bowling all-rounders. You don't ask them why they have six fast bowlers,' he replied assertively. Rohit also expressed his delight on the return of pace spearhead Mohammad Shami and Kuldeep Yadav. 'We wanted him back in the squad at any cost. He has played two matches and looks in good shape. Whether he gets wickets or not that was completely immaterial for us at that point. 'When you talk about a bowler like Shami who's done the job over the years so many times for us -- for them, it's just about getting back to their rhythm. I hope he can find some rhythm early on in this tournament and help the team.' 'Kuldeep had a hernia operation after the New Zealand series and was out of action for two and a half months. For certain players, it's just about getting back to playing. The numbers will come. He Looks quite confident in what he wants to do,' added Rohit Rohit also hoped his deputy Shbuman Gill carries his form into the tournament. Gill was the adjudged player of the series for scoring 259 runs in three ODIs, featuring one century and two half-tons as he heralded his return to the form after a lean patch in Test series in Australia. "Gill is a very classy player, No one can doubt his ability in this squad," Rohit said. "We should not mix the formats and I don't think that's the right way to judge any player. We know the numbers are crazy with Gill. He has been superb for us in the last three-four years." "Obviously there is a reason that he has been promoted to be the vice-captain of the team as well. Hopefully, he has a great tournament here. It eventually will help us achieve the things that we are looking to achieve."
Gulf Today
10-02-2025
- Sport
- Gulf Today
Confident Vipers look to thwart formidable Capitals' juggernaut in blockbuster ILT20 Season 3 final
Mohammad Abdullah, Senior Sports Reporter Dubai Capitals will look to continue their winning streak against Desert Vipers in the much-anticipated final of the ILt20 to lay down their hands on the glittering trophy. It is expected to be a high-octane game as both the teams have met twice in the league stages and once in the knockouts and the Capitals have emerged winners every time. While Vipers will look to break the jinx and lift the trophy. Irrespective of the fact whoever wins the final, the ILT20 will see a new champion. In the first seasons, Gulf Giants and MI Emirates were the winners. Despite dominating the round-robin stage and winning six of the first seven matches, Viper have been defeated by Capitals thrice in the tournament. Out of their four losses in 12 games, Vipers were defeated by their final opponents three times and once by Sharjah Warriors. Vipers were in blistering form right from the beginning and went on to become the first team to book a berth in the knockout stage while Capitals started slowly but they peaked at the right time. Capitals morale must be high as they are coming into the match on the back of three consecutive wins – two of them coming against the Vipers, one in their last round robin match and the other in the first qualifier. Capitals defeated Vipers by five wickets in the first qualifier by five wickets and by nine wickets in their last round-robin match. Moreover, Vipers suffered a huge blow, as they will be playing without their skipper Lockie Ferguson, who is nursing a hamstring injury. He could not bowl the delivery in the first qualifier and Mohammad Amir was called to complete the over. He did not play in the second qualifier against Sharjah Warrioz also. But Ferguson exuded confidence in his players, saying there is enough depth in the team that they can still win the match without him. 'I just felt a little pain in my hamstring. It is very unfortunate that I will not be able to play tomorrow. I will be very much supporting from the sideline,' Ferguson was quoted as saying in a podcast interview to the Vipers. 'But with the depth we have got in the squad you could see how well-balanced we were in the game against Warrior. I am sure the boys will not miss me too much. 'It was an exceptional game, a true team performance. I thought Dan Lawrence took the game away from Warriroz. Everyone played their part in that win, which is something I think the Vipers very much pride ourselves on,' he added. Ferguson played down the talks of any kind of pressure because of three consecutive losses against the Capitals. 'We had a very close game against the Capitals in the first qualifier but tomorrow. It went down to the wire and the result came off the last ball. 'It is final tomorrow. We both start on zero. Our focus is on the final and we are not thinking about the past games. It is an exciting time for players to step up for their teams. There is always pressure in a final, it's a big opportunity and pressure comes with opportunity,' he concluded. Alex Hales has led the Vipers' charge with the bat, scoring three half-centuries and piling up 400 runs in 12 matches. His team-mate Sam Curran has 325 runs to his name in 12 innings. Wanindu Hasaranga, Amir and Ferguson are the other players who have been the star performers for Vipers. Hasaranga and Amir both have picked 12 wickets each to be followed by Ferguson with 11 scalps. Meanwhile, Sam Billing, the skipper of Capitals, said that the players are very excited and looking forward to the final in anticipation. "The atmosphere in the dressing room is positive ahead of the title showdown. The morale of the players is high as we have had a good run in the last few matches. 'We are playing as a team. We are depending on stars. Different players have stepped up in the different matches for us throughout the competition. 'No doubt, there have been a few players who have been performers like Shai Hope and Gulbadin Naib. So, we are looking forward to tomorrow's match. Naib has been their star player, scoring a massive 376 runs and taking 11 wickets. He smashed three half-centuries in his last three matches against the Vipers. Billings was all praise for Naib as he summed it up, 'He has been fantastic. He is a three-dimensional cricketer, who is grabbing every opportunity with both hands. Hopefully tomorrow he can put on a show for the fans.' Shai Hope is the second-highest scorer in the league with 484 runs in 11 innings at an average of 60.50. He is nine runs behind MI Emirates' Tom Banton.
Gulf Today
08-02-2025
- Sport
- Gulf Today
Shoaib predicts Afghanistan in CT semis, blasts ICC for restrictions on fast bowlers
Mohammad Abdullah, Senior Sports Reporter Former Pakistan pace sensation Shoaib Akhtar predicted Afghanistan as one of the semifinalists in the upcoming Champions Trophy and batted for granting more freedom to the fast who is the brand ambassador for the DP World ILT20 and a commentator at the tournament, spoke at length about the sensitive topics, which are usually ducked diplomatically by the others. 'I want to see Afghanistan in the semi-finals. They have a bunch of very talented cricketers. My heart goes out for Afghanistan, as I love that country. The reason is the intent that they show for the game. 'The way they play cricket and the amount of joy that they bring to the game is immense. I want them to beat Australia to avenge their loss at the World Cup semi-finals. They are the best. They have very good players like Fazalhaq Farooqi, Rahmanullah Gurbaz, Gulbadin Naib and Rashid Khan to name a few. 'If they can bring some patience in their batting and bowling, I think that they can qualify for the semis. Farooqi is the find of the decade for Afghanistan. 'The number of matches that he has played and the amount of battering has gone through, he has evolved as a mature cricketer. He bowls wicket to wicket, can reverse swing the new ball, bowls Yorkers in the death over these shows that he has become very matured as a fast bowler,' said Shoaib. 'I want Pakistan to beat India on Feb.23, even if India beat Pakistan or vice versa, but I want to play one more match at least either in the semis or final. 'I want these teams in the semis from the sub-continent. I reckon Afghanistan is also a subcontinent team. We should be wary of Bangladesh too, they are not an easy team,' he added while speaking on the sideline of the first qualifier between Desert Vipers and Dubai Capitals in Dubai. Shoaib, who holds the record of bowling the fastest delivery in the history of cricket across all the formats, urged the fast bowlers to bring aggression in their bowling. 'Bowling fast is always a great idea. Once you are born as a fast bowler, you should bowl as a rapid fast bowler. You should not slow down. You should mix and match your bouncers and Yorkers,' he advised the young fast bowlers. 'I was going through my stats and I found out I have bowled 23000 deliveries, out of which 10000 were bouncers. That shows how much I lived bowling bouncers.'You should stare at the batsman and keep him on the back foot always. Bowling in the good area and good length, that is what matters. That will get you wickets.' Shoaib also blasted the International Cricket Council (ICC) for imposing so many restrictions on the fast bowlers.'You cannot blame the fast bowlers now-a-days as they are born in the era of T20 cricket where there is variation not aggression. 'Back in the old days, you had only Test matches and ODIs. You used not to mingle around with the players of the other team as often as they do now in the time of franchise cricket.' "The rivalry has gone down. The aggression is not there. I want to see the relaxed rules for the fast bowlers from ICC. They should allow three bouncers in an over. I will see then how many people can go unhurt." 'It is always at the back of the batsman's mind that he can hurt me. When it hits, it hurts. That fear tactic should always be there. I don't know which Einstein came up with the idea of five fielders in the circle. 'I want to know that Einstein, who applied this formula of two new balls and two bouncers in an over. There is nothing for the fast bowlers. How can they be aggressive when there is nothing for the fast bowlers,' he asked. 'I think ICC should relax the rules, no two new balls, no free-hit and allow the bowlers to bowl three bouncers in an over. That will bring some sledging and some aggression. Somebody will get hurt, someone will fight. There will be a bit of pushing around each other that will make the game interesting. That is what the audience wants. They don't want sixes and fours. 'There was so much aggression that Javed Miandad tried to hit Dennis Lille with the bat. I am not saying it should go to that level but there should be some body contact. You see all the international sports like ice-hockey, football and even cyclists bump into each other,' he stressed. Shoaib also backed the Sharjah Warriorz to bag the ILT20 title. Impressed by their late surge in the league, with a sensational eight-wicket win against defending champions MI Emirates Shoaib said, 'I think my heart goes for Sharjah Warriorz because they have started off very late when it comes to playing the tournament well. They gained the momentum to be in the place where they are today.' 'While I don't want to seem biased and wish to see all four teams play top quality cricket, I think it will be really good to see Sharjah go out there to claim the title,' he concluded.
