Abrar Ahmed and Kavya Maran

NEW DELHI: Pakistan spinner Abrar Ahmed was signed by Sunrisers Leeds during the Hundred Auction 2026, but the move sparked backlash online. After the franchise announced the signing on X, the post was flooded with negative comments, with some fans criticising an IPL-linked team for picking a Pakistani player.

Some posts even target Kavya Maran, co-owner of Sunrisers Leeds, for roping in the Pakistani bowler. Sunrisers Leeds, which is owned by the same group that runs Sunrisers Hyderabad in the Indian Premier League, bought the 27-year-old leg-spinner for £190,000. Meanwhile, another Pakistan spinner, Usman Tariq, was picked by Birmingham Phoenix for £140,000.Before the auction, there had been speculation that franchises connected to the IPL might avoid signing Pakistani cricketers due to political tensions between India and Pakistan. Players from Pakistan have not featured in the IPL since 2009, and the two nations only face each other in global tournaments.Addressing the debate earlier, the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) and the eight franchises had clarified that selections would be made purely on merit. The joint statement said picks would be based on “performance, availability, and the needs of each team.”Despite Ahmed’s signing, several Pakistan players had a mixed outcome at the auction. Fast bowler Haris Rauf went unsold at his reserve price of £100,000, while star pacer Shaheen Shah Afridi withdrew before the auction began.Pakistan also struggled in the women’s auction held a day earlier, where Fatima Sana and Sadia Iqbal failed to attract any bids.Elsewhere in the auction, London Spirit paid £390,000 for uncapped English all-rounder James Cole, while Welsh Fire spent £540,000 combined on batter Jordan Cox and former England captain Joe Root.The 2026 season of The Hundred, featuring both men’s and women’s tournaments, will begin on July 21 and run for four weeks.

India coach Gautam Gambhir (Getty Images)

Former chief selector Sandeep Patil has revealed that Gautam Gambhir has never spoken to him since the day he was dropped from the Indian team, despite the two appearing together at several events over the years.Gambhir, a key member of India’s World Cup-winning squads in 2007 and 2011, was one of the most influential players in the national side between 2006 and 2012. Although his final international appearance came in November 2016, the first major setback in his career arrived three years earlier when he was left out of the ODI squad after the series against England in 2013.

Statistically, Gambhir’s performances during that phase were far from poor. In the final 25 ODIs he played for India, the left-hander struck two centuries and six half-centuries. However, the selectors decided to move on, and the decision effectively ended his limited-overs career. He featured only occasionally in Tests afterwards, playing two matches in England in 2014 and two more against New Zealand before his international journey gradually came to an end.Speaking on the Vickey Lalwani show, Patil admitted that the decision was one of several tough calls his selection panel had to take during that period. The former chairman explained that personal relationships could not influence such decisions, even when it involved some of the biggest names in Indian cricket.“When you are sitting in the chair of the selection committee, you are responsible for making some big calls. You’re not looking at your friendships/rapport with players. I’ve shared a good rapport with Sachin since he was 14. He has played under me, with me. Whenever I text him, he replies immediately. I met Yuvraj recently on the flight; very cordial. Even Virender Sehwag. They all talk to me nicely. Except Gambhir. He was very dear to me. Even today, I respect him a lot, but he is upset with me, and rightly so. Even I was upset with the selection committee when I got dropped. I scored a 100 in Pakistan, the highest at Kotla against England in both innings and got dropped. Never played Test cricket again,” Patil said.Gambhir’s exclusion opened the door for Shikhar Dhawan, who grabbed the opportunity in spectacular fashion. Dhawan made a memorable Test debut against Australia in Mohali, smashing a blistering 187. He later formed a highly successful opening partnership with Rohit Sharma in both ODIs and T20Is, while Gambhir gradually drifted away from the national setup.The left-hander continued to remain active in franchise cricket, representing Kolkata Knight Riders before finishing his IPL career with Delhi Capitals. In 2018, he officially announced his retirement from all forms of cricket.Even years after the decision, Patil admitted that Gambhir still maintains his distance whenever their paths cross.“Gambhir is still upset. He has never spoken to me. We have come together on so many different shows. We’ve sat in the same room, but Gautam has never even looked at me. It’s fine. Every time I reached out to him or said a ‘Hi’, he has never responded. Not even a glance. But that’s fair enough,” added Patil.Reflecting on their earlier bond, Patil said Gambhir was once very close to him and regularly stayed in touch, especially during difficult phases of his career.“He was such a great guy. We played tennis together on tours; we’ve had such a great rapport. Gauti used to call me almost once every two weeks when I was removed as a coach. He is like that. Gautam was very serious about his career and remained focused on his batting and approach. No cricketer wants to leave the stage when you’re doing well. Nobody wants to get dropped. Laxman, Dravid quietly went away. Sehwag wanted to have a good celebration but didn’t get it. So I get it.”

In her recent book ‘Having It All’ gender economist and associate professor of business economics and public policy at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Corinne Low talks about how women are caught in a ‘squeeze’ and what they must do to escape it.What made you write this book?I was caught in “the squeeze”- that period when women are at the height of their career growth, while becoming new parents and shouldering responsibilities that come with it. I was commuting, chasing tenure, and raising a newborn, all the while feeling like I was failing at everything. But, my research was examining the very dynamics that I was living in. It wasn’t just me, stretched too thin and falling short – it was women everywhere, facing the same impossible constraints on their time. Seeing this in the data made me feel profoundly seen. I wanted women to come to the same realisation I did: It’s universal, it’s structural – and we need to start creating our own solutions.What are the three big myths you would debunk?First, ‘things will get better on their own’- while we’ve seen a lot of progress for women around the world, there are several trends that I think we need to be aware of. One is an explosion of parenting time that’s leaving working moms squeezed, and two is that we’re not really seeing men’s gender roles change at home at the same time as women’s roles have changed at work.Second, that women need to act like men to get ahead at work – there’s no evidence that men’s styles are better from a profit perspective. My research shows women are better negotiators than men. And finally, that you need to do it all to be a good parent. Kids crave genuine connection, not frantic chauffeuring or Instagram-worthy birthday cupcakes. So, saying no to over-scheduled activities and trading them for higher-quality, lower-stress time together can be the better deal for everyone.Women have for so long been fed images of perfection both at home and work…I’m arguing that trying to be 110% in both domains is structurally impossible. Seamlessly combining a more than full-time career in what Claudia Goldin calls a “greedy” job, which demands 50-plus hours a week and constant availability, while also trying to be a domestic goddess at home is never going to add up. But, that doesn’t mean we can’t carve out lives for ourselves that are sustainable and meaningful, and I hope my book offers women lots of strategies for doing that.You suggest looking at life’s decisions as an investment plan or thinking of happiness like an economist…I think the economics idea of a utility function is a helpful framework for thinking about what we truly care about – and how those priorities shape our happiness, both in the short and long term. Just as for-profit companies are assumed to make choices that maximise their bottomline, economists view human beings as agents who maximise their own personal “profit” function: Utility. Crucially, you can’t compare yourself to people whose utility functions are different from yours. You might find the most fulfillment in volunteer work or travel, even if those activities leave you with little time at home. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. But here’s where the trap appears: When you visit a friend who finds deep utility in home-making or cooking from scratch, you start to feel as if you’re somehow falling short. That’s not failure – it’s simply a difference in utility functions.You have some unconventional advice for women…My advice is – understand what truly matters to you – your own personal definition of success and happiness – and make choices that maximise your well-being, not the version society has prescribed for women. Too often, the expectations placed on women are contradictory and impossible to satisfy. Real empowerment comes from rejecting those imposed standards and focusing on what genuinely aligns with your values and goals.How does squeeze impact women’s participation in the economy and what policy decisions should be taken to improve it?The “squeeze” doesn’t just affect individual women, it has broader economic costs, including the loss of skilled labour, slower productivity growth, and reduced diversity in leadership. Policies like subsidised childcare, paid parental leave for both parents, structured work arrangements, and stronger protections against career penalties during child rearing years can help ensure women aren’t forced to choose between family and career.