What, let’s ask, is so important about the Indian Premier League adhering to a pre-announced schedule? How tenable is the furore over the government’s suggestion that the tournament be shifted to after the general elections, so that paramilitary forces are not stretched? After all, the April 10-May 24 dates are a measure of nothing else than the rare window in the ICC’s predetermined calendar for international cricket. And even this window does not allow all the top cricketers bought up by the franchisees to earn their full fee; many, like Kevin Pietersen, will be prevented by their national teams’ tour commitments. What difference would a few weeks make? T20’s popularity will not wane, spectators will still pack stadiums; postponement cannot significantly dent returns to the BCCI, franchisees and broadcasters. All of this, of course, in more secure conditions. Where’s the argument?

To argue so is to miss the point. When the government indicates that it seeks to postpone the IPL, the point is not the IPL and its contractual limitations. It is a statement on this country. To ask that the usual paces of national life be rearranged drastically for the conduct of elections is to strongly suggest that the state is no longer able to ensure business-as-usual for citizens. In other words, that it has taken a baby step up the failed state ladder. It is the strong conviction that India is nowhere near taking that step that compels us to caution the government against taking fright after the Lahore attack.

... contd.