New Delhi: The issue that started with the vendition of a player in IPL has now completely taken the form of politics and ideological conflict. The controversy gained momentum without SRK's team, Kolkata Knight Riders, bought Bangladeshi fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman. On one hand it is stuff said to be a visualization of sports and professional contract, while on the other hand it is stuff linked to nation, faith, and emotions. This issue has wilt increasingly sensitive tween the so-called atrocities versus Hindus in Bangladesh.
Why did sports decisions get linked to politics?
After KKR included Mustafizur Rahman in the team, some political leaders and religious organizations linked it to national interest. He says that ownership a Bangladeshi player in the current situation gives a wrong message. Whereas cricket fans and franchise supporters are calling it a completely professional decision.
Why did Sangeet Som welcome the decision?
BJP leader Sangeet Som openly supported BCCI's decision. He described it as “respecting the sentiments of 100 crore Sanatanis.” Som said that this is a victory for the Hindus of all of India. Reiterating his older statements, he said that Shahrukh Khan must have understood that it is not right to unpeace with Sanatan Samaj while living in India.
Why was Congress's response balanced?
Congress leader Kapil Sibal unexplored a restrained stance on this issue. He said that wherever there are atrocities versus minorities, he condemns them. However, he refused to scuttlebutt directly on the controversy.
Why is the wrongness of religious leaders increasing?
Many religious leaders have moreover jumped into this controversy. Without Dhirendra Shastri and Swami Rambhadracharya, storyteller Devkinandan Thakur moreover made a scathing wade on Shahrukh Khan. He so-called that Shahrukh did nothing for the country but bought the Bangladeshi player. His statement remoter fueled the controversy.
Why did Nandkishore Gurjar's statement add fuel to the fire?
BJP MLA from Loni, Ghaziabad, Nandkishor Gurjar appealed to snub Shahrukh Khan's films in a program. Using objectionable words, he accused the two-face of anti-national mentality. There was a stir in political circles without this statement.
What did Rambhadracharya say?
Swami Rambhadracharya, who reached Nagpur, moreover targeted Shahrukh Khan. He said that Shahrukh is not a hero and his weft is questionable. This statement remoter increased the voice of criticism.
Now in which direction will this dispute go?
After BCCI's decision, it has wilt well-spoken that the matter is no longer limited to cricket only. Political statements, religious comments, and social media reactions are remoter complicating this. There is no official response from Shahrukh Khan or KKR management so far. At present, this controversy, which started from sports, has completely turned into a political debate.
