- Tainted & dented
July 13, 2013
Politicians are in a tizzy over the SC ruling that jailbirds cannot fight elections, and convicted MPs and MLAs can be disqualified
- It's time we moved mountains
July 6, 2013
Lamenting the tragedy of Uttarakhand isn't enough, we need to set up a commission to manage natural hazards, says KS Valdiya.
- I wanted to create the age of innocence that was…
July 6, 2013
Vikramaditya Motwane is reworking O Henry's short story 'The Last Leaf' for his second film, 'Lootera'.
- In This Section
- Entire Website
From the Times Of India
- MOST POPULAR
Umpire stat building
With regard to your coverage of Rahul Dravid's retirement (Sport, March 10), I must say that the gentleman cricketer that he was, Dravid never waited for the umpire's decision whenever it was forthcoming. He just 'walked', even on debut when he neared a century. As soon as he knew he was out he would walk back to the pavilion. Even when catching, he would not appeal if it wasn't cleanly caught. Of all great cricketers in the modern era he troubled the umpires least. If these statistics were somehow enumerated this could be a kind of record too. May his tribe increase - to make our world better. Honesty is indeed a rare quality these days.
Srikanth Chatrapathy, via email
'Heirs Loom' (Cover, March 10) was timely, and the cartoon entertaining. But the difference between the Congress' dynasty and others are many. First, most of the regional parties mentioned were started by an individual, who became the leader and the identity of that party. Congress was a national movement, which is why its dynastic approach is now unpalatable. Second, in the other parties, the heirs can be criticised, and they have to work at making adjustments to stake their claims. They are not treated with total sycophancy. Sadly, the Nehru-Gandhis are treated like demigods, with the PM's post their entitlement, to be occupied when desired by them.
Nidhi Bahuguna, via email
This refers to 'Blood, Threats, Toil and Tears' (Comment, March 3) by Kingshuk Nag. The article displays the usual bias against India's best-performing CM, and an honest political leader who is trying to make his state the best. Why is his focus on development not properly highlighted by the media, which keeps bringing up his supposed role in the 2002 riots? Even inquiry commissions have said he's not responsible, but the pseudo-secular media keeps blaming him. India's corporate leaders have rightly said that he would make an excellent PM. But immediately the riots are brought up and Narendra Modi's name is tarnished.
'S M', via email
Register for Full Access to the Crest Edition
Don't have a Facebook Account? Sign up for Times Crest here.