India suffer shock exit from hockey World Cup, lose to New Zealand in sudden death
Bhubaneswar, Jan 22: Hosts India made a shock exit from the FIH Men's World Cup after losing to New Zealand in sudden death in their must-win crossover match in front of a relentlessly cheering 15000 home crowd here on Sunday.
The loss ended India's hopes of a World Cup medal after 48 years.
Despite vociferous support from the jampacked Kalinga Stadium crowd, India allowed New Zealand to come back from two-goal deficit in the regulation time as the match ended at 3-3 in the regulation time.
In the penalty shootout, the scores were also tied after the first five set of strikes, and the match was finally decided via sudden death.
Captain Harmanpreet Singh had the golden chance to take India to victory in sudden death but he failed to do that as he missed the target.
Veteran goalkeeper PR Sreejesh made two saves in the shootout to rescue India after they were 2-3 down. He saved another one during the sudden death and got himself injured and Krishan Pathak replaced him in the next three rounds of strikes.
Finally, Shamsher Singh missed and Sam Lane scored to hand New Zealand the win.
New Zealand will now face defending champions Belgium, who topped Pool B, in the quarterfinals here on Tuesday.
In the regulation time, India earned as many as 11 penalty corners and converted two of them while New Zealand got just two PCs.
Yet again, it was a case of ample goal-scoring opportunities for India but the forwarrds lacked finishing skills.
India were on the offensive as soon as the match began with Mandeep Singh, who started despite taking a hit on his knee during training on Saturday, making a fine run into the New Zealand circle.
But India doubled the lead soon with Sukhjeet Singh scoring in the 24th minute, following India's fourth penalty corner.
Harmanpreet's drag-flick was palmed away by the New Zealand goalkeeper but it went up high and Sukhjeet was at the right place at the right time to volley it in.
New Zealand pulled one back a minute before half time as Sam Lane deflected a Child's low cross from the left into the Indian goal.
India were 2-1 up at the half time.
New Zealand pressed for an equaliser in the third quarter and they got into the Indian 'D' on a few occasions but the home side swelled its lead by two goal margin through a penalty corner conversion in the 41st minute.
India earned three penalty corner in the third quarters, and scored from the third PC and seventh overall with Varun Kumar sounding the board cleanly.
Three minutes later, New Zealand again cut the deficit to just one goal with Kane Russell converting a penalty corner.
In the last quarter, New Zealand made a spirited fightback and restored parity in the 50th minute following their second penalty corner of the match as Sean Findlay deflected in a Hayden Phillips strike.
Goalkeeper Krishan Pathak saved India from disaster as he palmed away a high shot from Sam Hiha in the 51st minute.
In the earlier crossover match of the day, Spain beat Malaysia 4-3 in penalty shootout to qualify for the quarterfinals after the two sides were locked 2-2 in the regulation time.
Spain will face title contenders and Pool A toppers Australia in the last eight stage on Tuesday.
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)
