Pramod Thomas is a senior correspondent with Asian Media Group since 2020, bringing 19 years of journalism experience across business, politics, sports, communities, and international relations. His career spans both traditional and digital media platforms, with eight years specifically focused on digital journalism. This blend of experience positions him well to navigate the evolving media landscape and deliver content across various formats. He has worked with national and international media organisations, giving him a broad perspective on global news trends and reporting standards.
The chairman of the BCCI's national selection committee Chetan Sharma landed in a major soup after he disclosed behind-the-scenes talks regarding team selection and also made startling revelations on star batter skipper Viral Kohli's alleged feud with former Board president Sourav Ganguly, to a television channel, during a sting operation aired Tuesday (14).
Sharma claimed that alleged straned relationship between Ganguly and Kohli involved 'ego issues'.
The chief selector claimed that Kohli had started considering himself "bigger than the Board" and had tried to "hit back" at the former BCCI president as he felt that Ganguly had removed him from ODI captaincy.
"When the player becomes popular, he considers himself to be bigger than the Board and thinks that nobody can touch him. He feels that cricket in India would stop without him. But has that ever happened? Some of our biggest cricketing stars came and went but cricket remained the same. So he (Kohli) tried to hit back at the (former) president at that time," said Sharma during the sting operation.
"It was a damaging controversy. It was a classic case of a player going against the BCCI. The president represents the BCCI, isn't it? As to whose fault it was will be judged in time but it was an attack on the BCCI. All our players are discouraged from doing this because the loss will be theirs as everyone will go against them even if the president is at the fault. There has to be some respect for the chair."
He further claimed that ahead of the 2022 India tour of South Africa in January, Kohli brought up the matter of being removed from ODI captaincy on purpose in front of reporters because he felt that Ganguly had played a role in removing him from leadership in the 50-over format.
He also accused Kohli of lying in front of the media about being removed from ODI captaincy without any communication, in order to defame Ganguly.
"Virat was going to South Africa as captain (of the Test side). Press conferences should be about team matters and not selections. There was no need to bring up this topic (Virat being removed from ODI captaincy) during the press conference. But he did so intentionally. He felt that he had lost his ODI captaincy because of Ganguly. Ganguly hold told reporters that he had asked him not to step down (as ODI captain) but Virat claimed before the media that the president never said this to him. This created a major controversy," Sharma said.
"Ganguly had told him once during a video conference to think it (stepping down as ODI skipper) over. But Virat did pay heed. There were nine people at the conference, including all the selectors. I am not sure if Virat heard Ganguly correctly. Ganguly later claimed that Virat lied to the media about him. As to why he did so, nobidy knows. It is his personal matter. It sparked off a controversy and matters escalated to the extent where it became an issue of a player against the Board."
"Rohit Sharma had volunteered (to take over ODI captaincy). It was an ego clash. Virat felt he was removed from captaincy by Ganguly and wanted to teach him a lesson. So he made the statements to the media to defame him. But it backfired on him," added the national selector.
He said the reason why Kohli was removed from ODI captaincy was that the Board did not want two skippers for two-white ball formats, but rather one for red-ball cricket and another for white-ball cricket.
"Removing someone from captaincy is the job of selectors. We removed him the ODI captaincy as we wanted to have one white-ball captain. This is normal procedure and even he (Kohli) knows it. After Virat announced that he was giving up the T20I captaincy, the selectors made up their minds to remove him from the ODI captaincy as well," said Sharma.
"The Board and the selectors sits with the captain before removing him from the job. Virat knows this and this is why he felt that Ganguly had a big role in his removal from ODI captaincy. But the thinking of selectors was different. We wanted separate captains for red-ball and white-ball formats," the chief selector added.
Chetan also shed new light inon the relationship between Kohli and current all-format skipper Rohit Sharma, who had earlier been allegfed to share a strained relationship.
"There is no rift. It's just media speculation. When there are two big leaders in a team, there could be an ego clash every now and then. It is like Amitabh Bachchan ji and Dharmendra ji. It is just ego. The media made up stories that weren't true," Sharma said.
The chairman of selectors further revealed that both players have supported each other in their bad times.
"Rohit had supported Virat the most when he was going through a lean run. When Rohit fell into a similar crisis of confidence with the bat, Virat supported him," said Sharma.
Both players will be seen in action during the second Test against Australia in Delhi, which starts on February 17. (ANI)
UK AVIATION engineers are arriving in Thiruvananthapuram to carry out repairs on an F-35B Lightning jet belonging to the Royal Navy, which has remained grounded after an emergency landing 12 days ago.
The jet is part of the HMS Prince of Wales Carrier Strike Group of the UK's Royal Navy. It made the emergency landing at Thiruvananthapuram airport on June 14. The aircraft, valued at over USD 110 million, is among the most advanced fighter jets in the world.
According to a spokesperson for the British High Commission, the aircraft is currently awaiting repairs at the Thiruvananthapuram international airport after it developed an engineering issue.
The UK has agreed to move the aircraft to the Maintenance Repair and Overhaul (MRO) facility at the airport.
"The aircraft will be moved to the hangar once UK engineering teams arrive with specialist equipment, thereby ensuring there is minimal disruption to scheduled maintenance of other aircraft," the spokesperson said.
The F-35B is the only fifth generation fighter jet with short takeoff and vertical landing capabilities, which allows it to operate from smaller decks, austere bases and ships.
The official said the aircraft would return to active service once the repairs and safety checks are completed.
"Ground teams continue to work closely with Indian authorities to ensure safety and security precautions are observed. We thank the Indian authorities and Thiruvananthapuram international airport for their continued support."
The aircraft was unable to return to HMS Prince of Wales due to adverse weather conditions.
Engineers from HMS Prince of Wales had assessed the aircraft after the emergency landing and determined that support from UK-based engineering teams was required.
The Indian Air Force had said a few days after the incident that it was providing all necessary support for the "rectification and subsequent return" of the aircraft.
Earlier this month, the HMS Prince of Wales Carrier Strike Group conducted military exercises with the Indian Navy.
In British service, the F-35B is referred to as the 'Lightning'. It is the short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) variant of the fighter jet, designed for use from short-field bases and air-capable ships.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.
Relatives carry the coffin of a victim, who was killed in the Air India Flight 171 crash, during a funeral ceremony in Ahmedabad on June 15, 2025. (Photo: Getty Images)
TWO weeks after the crash of Air India flight AI-171 in Ahmedabad, families of victims are grappling with grief and trauma. Psychiatrists are now working closely with many who continue to oscillate between denial and despair.
The crash occurred on June 12, when the London-bound flight hit the BJ Medical College complex shortly after takeoff, killing 241 people on board and 29 on the ground. Only one passenger survived.
The emotional impact of the incident continues to affect survivors and relatives of those who died.
Counselling support on the ground
In the immediate aftermath, the Department of Psychiatry at B J Medical College deployed a team of psychiatrists—five senior residents and five consultants—across locations including Kasauti Bhavan, the postmortem building, and the civil superintendent's office to support families.
"The accident was unimaginable. Even bystanders were disturbed. Then what must be the condition of someone who lost their loved one?" said Dr Minakshi Parikh, Dean and Head of Psychiatry at BJMC.
"If the people who heard the news were so disturbed, then it is not even within our scope to imagine the state of mind of the family members of people who lost their lives," she told PTI.
Processing grief in stages
As visuals of the crash began to circulate, families arrived in large numbers—many still hoping their relatives had survived. The existence of a lone survivor gave rise to hopes that it might be their loved one.
"There was an uncertainty whether one would be able to identify the loved ones they have lost and wait for matching of the DNA samples for three days. In some cases, samples of another relative of the kin had to be taken. The shock would have logically led to acute stress reactions and post-traumatic stress disorder," said Dr Parikh.
Dr Urvika Parekh, assistant professor and a member of the crisis response team, said denial was the immediate response among many families.
Facing denial and despair
"They kept asking for updates, insisting their family member had survived. Breaking the news gently, while having no confirmation ourselves, was incredibly difficult. We had to provide psychological first aid before anything else," she said.
Parekh said the hope placed on the lone survivor became a coping mechanism. "We had to deal with the denial and explain that nobody could have survived the horrific crash (except one who was not their relative)," she added.
Families were initially reluctant to accept counselling. "It was also difficult to accept the truth without seeing the bodies of their loved ones. Counselling aided them at this critical juncture," Parekh said.
She shared the case of a man who remained silent after losing his wife in the crash. "There was immense guilt—survivor guilt (that he is alive and his wife died). We gave him anti-anxiety medication to help ease the immediate stress. Eventually, he began to speak. He talked about their plans, their memories. It was catharsis. We didn't interrupt—we just let him speak and communicated through silence and empathy,” she said.
Parekh said that listening empathetically was a major part of the process. "We were managing their anger, outburst, and their questions like 'why us' (why did it have to happen to us)," she said.
The wait for DNA results was another major source of distress. With confirmation taking up to 72 hours or more, some families insisted they could identify their loved ones without DNA.
"There was one father who kept saying he didn't need DNA tests—he could identify his son by his eyes," said Parekh. "We had to gently discourage that. Seeing their loved ones in such a state could trigger PTSD and depression. We told them: it's better to remember them with a smile than with charred remains.”
Dr Parikh said the five commonly known stages of grief—denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance—were not experienced in a fixed sequence.
Lingering grief and support
"People cycle through these stages. Someone might accept the loss in the morning and fall back into denial by evening,” said Parekh. "So we mourned with them. That was part of the therapy".
Parekh stays in one of the residential buildings near the crash site. Her building was not damaged.
Some families found the waiting unbearable. One Air India crew member’s family had to wait seven days for DNA confirmation. “The exhaustion, the helplessness—it broke her mentally,” a relative said. “But the counselling helped. Those sessions were our only anchor."
"A calm voice, the right amount of information, and simply being there—these saved a lot of families from spiralling into chaos,” said Dr Parikh.
(With inputs from PTI)
Keep ReadingShow less
Prime minister Keir Starmer delivers a speech at The British Chambers of Commerce Global Annual Conference in London on June 26, 2025. (Photo by EDDIE MULHOLLAND/AFP via Getty Images)
PRIME MINISTER Sir Keir Starmer has admitted he was wrong to warn that Britain could become an "island of strangers" due to high immigration, saying he "deeply" regrets the controversial phrase.
Speaking to The Observer, Sir Keir said he would not have used those words if he had known they would be seen as echoing the language of Enoch Powell's notorious 1968 "rivers of blood" speech.
"I wouldn't have used those words if I had known they were, or even would be interpreted as, an echo of Powell. I had no idea – and my speechwriters didn't know either," he explained. "But that particular phrase – no, it wasn't right. I'll give you the honest truth – I deeply regret using it."
Starmer made the remarks last month while announcing new immigration controls. He had said that without proper rules, "we risk becoming an island of strangers, not a nation that walks forward together."
The comments sparked fury from Labour MPs and other critics who accused him of copying the language of Powell, the former Tory minister whose inflammatory speech warned that native Britons had "found themselves made strangers in their own country" because of immigration.
Former Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell said Sir Keir was "reflecting the language of Enoch Powell," while suspended Labour MP Zarah Sultana branded the speech "sickening."
Diane Abbott, Britain's first black female MP, called the phrase "fundamentally racist."
Sir Keir accepted full responsibility for the mistake, saying he should have "read through the speech properly" and "held it up to the light a bit more." He also acknowledged there were "problems with the language" in a policy document where he claimed recent immigration had caused "incalculable" damage to Britain.
The climbdown marks another reversal for the Labour leader, who has faced criticism for changing course on several policies including winter fuel payments and welfare reforms. Just this week he watered down controversial benefit changes to avoid a rebellion from his own MPs.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage seized on the apology as proof that Sir Keir "has no beliefs, no principles and just reads from a script."
Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick said it showed the prime minister "doesn't believe in borders or the nation state."
Despite the backlash when the speech was first delivered, Downing Street had initially defended the comments.
The prime minister's spokesman said they "completely rejected" comparisons to Powell and confirmed Sir Keir stood by his words.
Home secretary Yvette Cooper had also backed the prime minister, arguing his remarks were "completely different" to Powell's and highlighting how he had praised Britain's diversity "in almost the same breath."
London mayor Sadiq Khan and Welsh First Minister Eluned Morgan had both distanced themselves from the language at the time, with Khan saying they "aren't words that I would use."
Keep ReadingShow less
Sir Sajid Javid (Photo by Tom Nicholson-WPA Pool/Getty Images)
A cross-party group has been formed to tackle the deep divisions that sparked last summer's riots across England. The new commission will be led by former Tory minister Sir Sajid Javid and ex-Labour MP Jon Cruddas.
The Independent Commission on Community and Cohesion has backing from both prime minister Sir Keir Starmer and Tory leader Kemi Badenoch. It brings together 19 experts from different political parties and walks of life.
It was set up following the violent unrest that broke out in 27 towns and cities after three young girls were killed in Southport last July. False claims about the attacker's identity spread rapidly on social media, helping to fuel the disorder.
Sir Sajid warned that Britain has become a "tinderbox of division" due to years of neglect. He said governments have only acted when tensions boil over, rather than dealing with the root problems. "We are more disconnected as a country than at any point in our modern history," he told reporters. "There is a pandemic of loneliness that has spread across the country."
According to Javid, who served as communities secretary, home secretary and chancellor in the cabinets of David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson, social cohesion had been treated as a “second tier” issue by successive governments.
“Communal life in Britain is under threat like never before and intervention is urgently needed," he told the Telegraph. "There have been long-term, chronic issues undermining connections within our communities for several decades now, such as the degradation of local infrastructure from the local pub to churches, the weakening of family units, growing inequality, declining trust in institutions and persistent neglect from policy-makers."
He pointed to several factors making the situation worse, including high levels of immigration that haven't been properly managed, rising cost of living pressures, social media spreading extremist views, declining trust in public institutions, and the breakdown of local community spaces like pubs and churches.
Cruddas, who represented Dagenham for over 20 years, said the commission would listen directly to people across Britain rather than impose solutions from Westminster.
Over the next 12 months, the panel will examine what's driving people apart and develop practical recommendations for government. The group includes former West Midlands mayor Sir Andy Street, ex-Green Party leader Caroline Lucas, and counter-extremism expert Dame Sara Khan.
The commission is being supported by the Together Coalition, which was founded by Brendan Cox after his wife, MP Jo Cox, was murdered by a far-right extremist in 2016.
Sir Sajid remains optimistic about Britain's future, saying the country has "phenomenal attributes" to overcome its challenges. The commission aims to create "a vision for communities that all British citizens can buy into."
Keep ReadingShow less
Masum was seen on CCTV trying to steer the pram away and, when she refused to go with him, stabbed her multiple times before walking away and boarding a bus. (Photo: West Yorkshire Police)
A MAN who stabbed his estranged wife to death in Bradford in front of their baby has been convicted of murder.
Habibur Masum, 26, attacked 27-year-old Kulsuma Akter in broad daylight on April 6, 2024, stabbing her more than 25 times while she pushed their seven-month-old son in a pram. The baby was not harmed.
Bradford Crown Court heard that Akter had been living in a refuge since January after Masum threatened her with a knife at their home in Oldham. Masum tracked her using her phone location and confronted her after she left the refuge to meet a friend, believing he was in Spain.
Masum was seen on CCTV trying to steer the pram away and, when she refused to go with him, stabbed her multiple times before walking away and boarding a bus. He was arrested three days later in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire.
Kulsuma Aktergetty images
Masum, of Leamington Avenue, Burnley, had admitted manslaughter and possession of a knife but denied murder. He was found guilty of murder, stalking, making threats to kill, and assault by beating.
The Crown Prosecution Service said the attack was “planned and premeditated”. West Yorkshire Police described it as a “brutal” daylight attack. Det Ch Insp Stacey Atkinson said Ms Akter “should have been safe”.
The Independent Office for Police Conduct found no breach of standards by officers involved prior to her death. Masum is due to be sentenced on 22 July.
Police may probe anti-Israel comments at Glastonbury