IPL 2026: From square to straight – Abhishek Sharma redraws the map. cricket news
SRH opener’s 135* against DC was an inning built on subtle changes in geometry, balance and intentBy Tuesday night in Uppal, Abhishek Sharma had started looking more readable. Neither the talent was in doubt nor the intent, but the bowlers had begun to guide them into a familiar pattern. Deep midwicket and deep cover were the two coordinates of concern in recent times, with fields set not only to stop him but to highlight a familiar pattern.They dragged Abhishek, lured him to the intersection and stood there waiting with security. For Abhishek, violence was still there but the options seemed to be diminishing. For a batsman who thrives on instinct, the narrowness of the map was beginning to make sense.Go beyond limits with our YouTube channel. Subscribe now!Against Delhi Capitals, Sharma did not show just one weak stretch. He reclaimed the grounds. His unbeaten 135 off 68 balls with 10 fours and 10 sixes took Sunrisers Hyderabad to 242/2 and won by 47 runs. This was also the ninth T20 century of his career. But the significance of the shift goes beyond quantity – it was a smart adjustment.Sharma looked less rushed, less eager to create and more willing to let the ball come on its own terms. Beneath the flourish lies a wonderful recalibration.This change was most visible in his scoring arc. The arc that once spanned the horizontal has now narrowed and become straight. Seventy-one runs fell on the field through long-on and long-off. The corridor which they had neglected for so long has now been reclaimed with authority.
The old temptation was to keep the game square, especially through cover and point. Here, the path of the bat seemed clear and the intention straight. He got 34 runs from off drive.His footwork, still intuitive and balletic, gained a new grammar. First, he carelessly moved away to create width and force a square hit. Sharma now got to the ball, pushed the pace, closed down the angles and finished it on his own terms.Former South Africa captain Faf du Plessis said, “On flat tracks, he (Sharma) is almost like Chris Gayle.” The SRH opener displayed a steady base, clean delivery and a mind that remapping the field in real time. In doing so, the 25-year-old destroyed Delhi’s plans with great ease.
Congress face of leadership, 
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell confirmed the move, saying that Phelan was “leaving the Administration effective immediately” and adding, “We are grateful to Secretary Phelan for his service to the Department and the United States Navy”.No reason was given for his sudden resignation.Phelan’s departure comes at a sensitive time, with the US Navy actively involved in enforcing a blockade of Iranian ports and targeting ships linked to Tehran amid a fragile ceasefire in the Iran conflict.The U.S. Navy also maintains a strong operational presence in major global waterways, including the Strait of Hormuz and surrounding sea lanes.
The remarks came when senior advocate Gopal Subramaniam told the CJI, comprising Justices BV Nagarathna, MM Sundaresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Arvind Kumar, AG Masih, PB Varale, R Mahadevan and J Bagchi, that the personal faith and belief of a devotee is non-justiciable and even the government cannot infringe the religious rights of a sect or community in the name of social reform.“Social reforms and religious reforms come from the wishes and desires of the people, to which the government responds (by bringing laws). But it is very difficult for the court to act on such issues (social or religious reforms). Courts can decide the validity of a social reform law by examining whether it interferes with the faith or religious beliefs of devotees.The important observation acknowledging the limitations of the court in playing its role as a social reformer came on the seventh day of hearing on the fundamental rights versus faith issue.The bench continued to express its reservations and doubts on judicial monitoring of religious issues. Justice Kumar asked, “Can the courts adjudicate a dispute over religious practice between two groups within the same sect or temple? What could be the judicial basis for a constitutional court while considering a writ petition or PIL to decide whether one type of religious practice is more desirable?” Justice Sundaresh said it appears that apart from the three constitutionally specified grounds – public order, morality and health – there is no other ground, not even a violation of fundamental rights, to restrict an individual’s right to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice and propagate any religion.Appearing for the general secretary of Sabarimala Karma Samiti, senior advocate CA Sundaram said the court’s constitutional or legal views are immaterial to the devotees’ conscientious and genuine religious beliefs and practices of worshiping God, which is protected as a fundamental right under Article 25.Criticizing the 2018 verdict for misapplying the equality and non-discrimination test to religious practices at the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple, Sundaram said the right to equality applies to government employment and cannot be a tool to quash a long-standing religious tradition that is intrinsically linked to people’s faith and belief about the attributes of the deity.Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi said that the judiciary should adopt a soft stance in religious matters.
