Aryna Sabalenka defeats Amanda Anisimova for her 2nd consecutive US Open title, 4th major
_vb_24.jpeg)
New York (AP): Aryna Sabalenka was two points away from what eventually would be a second consecutive U.S. Open title when she had what should have been a routine — easy, even — overhead smash. Instead, while backpedaling, she dumped the ball into the net, giving her opponent, Amanda Anisimova, a break chance.
After that excruciating miss Saturday, Sabalenka dropped her racket on the blue court and smiled a rueful smile. She began to feel the sort of emotions that got the better of her during losses in the finals at the Australian Open in January and French Open in June bubble up. She tried to compose herself.
“I just let the doubt get into my head,” Sabalenka explained. “But then I turned around and I took a deep breath in, and I was like, OK. It happens. It's in the past. Let's focus on the next one.'”
So everything was fine from there? Well, no. “She broke me,” Sabalenka said with a loud laugh. “I was like, 'OK. ... Reset.”
It took another 15 minutes to complete the job, but the No. 1-seeded Sabalenka did reset, unlike at those earlier title matches in 2025, and was able to kneel on Arthur Ashe Stadium's court while covering her face with her hands after beating Anisimova 6-3, 7-6 (3). That made Sabalenka the first woman to earn the trophy at Flushing Meadows in consecutive years since Serena Williams in 2012-14.
“I truly really admire her,” said No. 8 seed Anisimova, a 24-year-old American who heard raucous support from the 24,000 or so spectators. “She puts in a lot of work, and that's why she's where she is.”
Sabalenka, a 27-year-old from Belarus, earned her fourth Grand Slam trophy — all on hard courts — and avoided becoming the first woman to lose three major finals in a season since Justine Henin in 2006.
Sabalenka was the runner-up to Madison Keys at Melbourne Park and to Coco Gauff at Roland-Garros.
Those defeats helped on Saturday.
“After the Australian Open, I thought that the right way would be just to forget it and move on. But then the same thing happened at the French Open," said Sabalenka, who showed up at her postmatch news conference with a bottle of Champagne and a pair of dark goggles atop her head. “So after French Open, I figured that, OK, maybe it's time for me to sit back and to look at those finals and to maybe learn something, because I didn't want it to happen again and again and again.”
As Anisimova kept making things close again, and the crowd kept getting loud, Sabalenka reminded herself to focus on herself.
It worked.
When Anisimova trailed Sabalenka 2-0, 30-love as Saturday's match began, some fans might have wondered: There's no way there's going to be a repeat of the Wimbledon, right? That's because Anisimova's first major final, in July at the All England Club, ended with a 6-0, 6-0 shutout against Iga Swiatek.
But Anisimova grabbed the next four points to break back, capping the game with a backhand winner and a forehand winner. That got folks on their feet, shouting, and Anisimova exhaled as she walked to the sideline. Soon, she led 3-2.
That was another moment that could have thrown Sabalenka. Nope. She took the next four games and that set.
It began pouring before the match, so Ashe's roof was shut and its artificial lights were on. That was a problem from Anisimova, who said she had a hard time seeing the ball during serve tosses.
The setup also created windless conditions, ideal for two ball-strikers who really can bring the power with good contact. And that's what they both did.
Some exchanges were breathtaking — to them, certainly, and to those in the stands who gasped at the power during longer points. The rewards can be huge, as can the risks, and Anisimova was seeking the lines with full cuts off both sides.
“I think I didn't fight hard enough for my dreams today,” said Anisimova, who buried her face in a towel after the match.
Of Sabalenka's first 13 points, just one came via her own winner. The others? Six unforced errors and six forced errors by Anisimova.
By the end, Anisimova had nearly twice as many winners as Sabalenka, 22-13, and nearly twice as many unforced errors, too, 29-15.
“There was two moments where I was really close to lose control,” Sabalenka said later, “but ... I told myself, No, it's not going to happen. It's absolutely OK.'”
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
