
Football: A turning point for India's Blue Tigresses
Most of India was hence tuned out as the national women's football team made history. They defeated Thailand, a team ranked 24 places above them in the FIFA rankings, 2-1 on 5 July to qualify for the Asian Cup for the very first time.
Yes, India had played the showpiece continental event before —in 2003, when they competed directly in the main draw, and then in 2022, when they were given an automatic spot as hosts but had to leave the tournament due to a covid-19 outbreak in the team. But this was the first Indian side to earn their place in the line-up, that includes football powerhouses like Japan, Australia and South Korea. To get there, they defeated Thailand, a team they had never beaten before in front of their home crowd at the Chiang Mai Stadium.
'It is sad," says India's most-capped player Loitongbam Ashalata Devi, who sat out the tournament as she is recovering from an ankle injury. 'That we had to watch it on the Facebook page of the rival team. But this is why the success of the Indian team is so important. No one will support us till we prove ourselves."
The Indian women's team is no stranger to indifference. Though not the most competent of bodies, the All India Football Federation's governance of the women's game was shambolic till recently. The first top-flight club tournament, the Indian Women's League (IWL), was only founded in 2016. National camps were few and far between. In 2023, the IWL took place after the completion of the more popular men's Indian Super League and were made to play in the afternoon in April in the sweltering heat in Ahmedabad.
Things have improved in the last couple of years. The IWL now takes place over four months, rather than the 18 days it started out with. Participating clubs have adopted a more professional approach and have boosted player salaries. Players like Manisha Kalyan, Soumya Gugoloth and Jyoti Chauhan earned contracts with European clubs and brought back all that knowledge and experience. Even now, Ashalata points out, most of the national team members have to take up government jobs to sustain themselves.
This is what the Indian team that played in Thailand was battling for, a lost past and a better future.
The team was as prepared as they had ever been. A two-month national camp under the guidance of new coach Crispin Chhetri, and international friendlies had helped them get ready for the challenge ahead.
The 'Blue Tigresses" started their journey by ripping through the competition. They defeated Mongolia 13-0, Timor Leste 4-0 and Iraq 5-0 in their first three Group B matches to set up a tantalising decider. Going into the final match against the hosts, India were dead level with Thailand on nine points and goal difference of +22. It was a virtual knockout against an opponent they had never beaten. Thailand were seeking their 10th Asian Cup qualification and had been to the World Cup twice, in 2015 and 2019.
'That morning, we did our prep, had the team meeting," says defender Sweety Devi Ngangbam, who captained the Indian team in the match against Thailand. 'We knew this was the one chance in our life to go through. We believed in each other, knew we had a great chance with this group."
'There was no room for error, we had to do this," the 25-year-old adds. 'I was lucky that my father was a football coach, pushed me into the game and supported me throughout. But I have seen so many players struggle. Most of them have to battle their families and society just to play the game. Then, they have to deal with things like lack of funds, of access to grounds or a proper diet. So many had to face these challenges, we knew we needed to do this for the future generation of players."
This was a team on a mission. Sangita Basfore gave them the lead in the 29th minute. But Thailand came back hard in the second half and scored through Chatchawan Rodhong in the 47th minute. After Basfore secured a lead for India once again, in the 74th minutes, the Indian team protected their lead gallantly, throwing bodies in defence as Thailand mounted one attack after another.
Once the final whistle blew, the Indian team erupted in joy, then melted down in tears. 'We kept hugging, and reassuring ourselves that we had done it," says Sweety Devi. While qualifying for the Asian Cup for the first time in 23 years is a historic achievement indeed, the endgame for this team is the World Cup. The AFC Women's Asian Cup Australia will serve as a qualifying event, with the top six teams progressing to the 2027 World Cup in Brazil.
'This could be a turning point in women's football in India," says Ashalata, 32. 'The road to World Cup is open." The dream is on. Hopefully, there may be a few more takers this time.
Deepti Patwardhan is a sportswriter based in Mumbai
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hindu
a minute ago
- The Hindu
Ravichandran Ashwin calls out England's ‘double standard'; cricket fraternity back India
Feisty R Ashwin called out England's "doubles standards" in their attempt to prematurely end the fourth Test as cricket fraternity extensively supported India's decision to let Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar complete their well-deserved centuries instead of accepting home team's handshake offer. Drama erupted at the start of the final hour of the match on Sunday (July 27, 2025) when home skipper Ben Stokes offered to shake hands with Indian batters, realising that an outright result was not possible. Jadeja and Washington batting on 89 and 80 respectively refused the offer to leave the England captain frustrated. Stokes later said that he made the offer since he didn't want to risk injury to his fatigued frontline bowlers. "Have you heard the term double standards? They played your bowlers all day, batted you out and suddenly when they're nearing hundreds, you want to walk off? Why should they?," Ashwin said on his YouTube channel. "They have played all your bowlers since morning and taken it to a draw. They have worked hard, so you want them to leave their hundred?" the former off-spinner fumed. India eventually called it a draw once both Jadeja and Washington brought up their centuries. It was Washington's maiden Test ton. Both Ashwin and legendary Sunil Gavaskar said they would have had India bat mandated 15 overs. "If I was the Indian captain, I would have played the entire 15 overs," Ashwin said. Gavaskar echoed the same sentiment on Sony Sports: "I'd ask them to keep batting and keep the team on the field for the full 15 overs." As England players crowded Jadeja, Stokes had sarcastically quipped "You're going to get a Test hundred against Harry Brook (part-time bowler)?" "You ask, 'You want to make a hundred against Harry Brook? He has to make a hundred, you bring Steve Harmison, Andre Flintoff bring any bowler - they didn't object, it was your call to bring Brook, not ours," Ashwin said. "These are Test runs, a century is earned, not gifted, Washington deserved it, Jadeja deserved it. Period." Ashwin said India were well within their rights to refuse to call it a draw with the two batters going for their milestone. "There were two reasons: one you didn't want to tire your bowlers. Fine. Second you were frustrated and though 'If I'm not happy, you shouldn't be either'. That's now how cricket works." Former Australia keeper-batter Brad Haddin called out England for their poor sportsmanship. "India showed tremendous fight on the final day. Then all of a sudden, it was a situation when England said they can't win so then let's stop the game because England are done playing," Haddin said on the 'WillowTalkPodcast'. "I liked what India did, they earned the right to stay as long as they want. They had the right to make the hundred. Just because it didn't go England's way and they didn't get the answer that they want, all of sudden they (England) weren't happy and started getting verbal. "So things don't go England's way all of sudden it's everyone else's problem. Well done to India," Haddin said. Former England captain Alastair Cook too backed India's decision, suggesting the momentum would serve them well heading into the fifth and final Test at The Oval, which they need to win to level the series. "It was the right decision for (Jadeja and Washington) to carry on for the momentum they'll gain from it," Cook said on BBC's 'Test Match Special'. "When you've been out in the field for 140 overs, you get frustrated. So, it is a little bit of frustration for England but I understand why India did it," he added. Nasser Hussain, another former skipper, agreed termed Stokes' decision to bowl Harry Brook after the handshake as "silly". "I didn't have a problem with it. England seemed to have a problem with it. They were a bit tired, tired bowlers so they wanted to get off but two lads worked hard to get to 80s and 90s and they wanted to get Test match hundreds," Hussain said on 'Sky Sports'. "Stokes didn't have to bowl Brook and look silly at the end. We make far too much of these things. They played well and all credit to India," Hussain said.


Time of India
15 minutes ago
- Time of India
India likely to bench Shardul, Kamboj as search for 'ideal XI' continues
The long-winding five-match Test series in England has hit the home stretch but despite securing a memorable draw at Old Trafford, India continue to search for the "perfect" eleven, more specifically the right bowling combination, heading into the finale at The Oval in three days' time. India's preference to bat till number eight at the expense of a specialist bowler has been constantly questioned over the course of the series and more so after Shardul Thakur, playing in place of the injured Nitish Reddy, was used for only 11 overs at Old Trafford. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Design Thinking Others Finance Public Policy Cybersecurity Leadership Degree Project Management Data Analytics PGDM Operations Management others Product Management Artificial Intelligence Data Science MBA Data Science Management Digital Marketing CXO Healthcare Skills you'll gain: Duration: 25 Weeks IIM Kozhikode CERT-IIMK PCP DTIM Async India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 25 Weeks IIM Kozhikode CERT-IIMK PCP DTIM Async India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 22 Weeks IIM Indore CERT-IIMI DTAI Async India Starts on undefined Get Details But with India conceding more than 600 runs for the first time since 2014 at Old Trafford, the case for including an out and out wicket-taker like Kuldeep Yadav, who has been warming the bench for the past 40 days, is stronger than ever. After an underwhelming debut, Anshul Kamboj is likely to make way for a fit-again Akash Deep or Prasidh Krishna. Arshdeep Singh, who too has been a passenger like Kuldeep, has also recovered from a hand injury and would be dreaming of a Test debut in what has been a highly competitive and engaging series. Live Events Though head coach Gautam Gambhir declared all the fast bowlers fit in his usual combative tone following the draw on Sunday, there is no denying that the pace pack, especially Jasprit Bumrah and Mohammed Siraj, are part of the tiring bunch on either side of the dressing room. Washington Sundar and Ravindra Jadeja, the architects of a famous draw, formed India's top six in the second innings due to Rishabh Pant's injury and showed remarkable grit to bat out more than two sessions to save the game, completing fine hundreds in the process. If that same template is followed at The Oval, Dhruv Jurel will come in to bat number seven and India can play four specialist bowlers by benching Shardul, who anyway has not been getting enough overs. The fourth bowler can be Kuldeep with the pitch expected to aid spinners or an extra fast bowler. By its own admission, the Indian team management has been consciously trying to fit Kuldeep into the playing eleven but the current template of batting till eight has prevented it from doing that. "So Kuldeep, we are trying to find a way for him, but it is just (that we need) more consistent runs from our top six, so that we can bring a guy like Kuldeep in," said India bowling coach Morne Morkel during the fourth Test. "It's finding when he comes in, how we can find balance and how we can get that batting line-up to be a little bit longer and stronger. We've seen in the past that we've lost wickets in clumps. "Kuldeep is world-class and he's bowling really well at the moment, so we're trying our best to find ways for him to get in," added the South African. Recently-retired Test great R Ashwin can't understand India's obsession of batting till eight for a few extra runs when a strike bowler like Kuldeep can allow them to play with fewer runs. For him, picking Kuldeep in Manchester was a no brainer. Considering the selection calls thus far, it can be said that India have been pretty firm about having a cushion with the bat in the lower-order. That will need to change if Kuldeep has to come into the scheme of things. Bumrah has already played three Tests but with series on the line, he could turn up at The Oval and someone like Mohammed Siraj, the only Indian pacer to have featured in all the games, would be raising his hand up despite the heavy workload. "On these do not know whether you will lose the toss, you will win the toss. You do not know what sort of a start you are going to get. So when you pick a team, I think you will try and pick a balanced team," said India batting coach Sitanshu Kotak recently when asked about playing an extra bowler over an all-rounder. "You cannot go like 'because last game three guys got 100s, we can play a batter less'. "...sometimes we feel that six bowlers are not getting enough bowling. So when you have six options, anyway captain struggles to bowl all six equally. Picking an 11, you will always try and keep that balance of batting and bowling," he reasoned for India's existing selection approach. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )


NDTV
18 minutes ago
- NDTV
"If I Was Captain...": R Ashwin Doesn't Mince Words In Fiery Verdict On Handshake Row
Feisty R Ashwin called out England's "doubles standards" in their attempt to prematurely end the fourth Test as cricket fraternity extensively supported India's decision to let Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar complete their well-deserved centuries instead of accepting home team's handshake offer. Drama erupted at the start of the final hour of the match on Sunday when home skipper Ben Stokes offered to shake hands with Indian batters, realising that an outright result was not possible. Jadeja and Washington, batting on 89 and 80 respectively, refused the offer to leave the England captain frustrated. Stokes later said that he made the offer since he didn't want to risk injury to his fatigued frontline bowlers. "Have you heard the term double standards? They played your bowlers all day, batted you out and suddenly when they're nearing hundreds, you want to walk off? Why should they?," Ashwin said on his YouTube channel. "They have played all your bowlers since morning and taken it to a draw. They have worked hard, so you want them to leave their hundred?" the former off-spinner fumed. India eventually called it a draw once both Jadeja and Washington brought up their centuries. It was Washington's maiden Test ton. Both Ashwin and legendary Sunil Gavaskar said they would have had India bat mandated 15 overs. "If I was the Indian captain, I would have played the entire 15 overs," Ashwin said. Gavaskar echoed the same sentiment on Sony Sports: "I'd ask them to keep batting and keep the team on the field for the full 15 overs." As England players crowded Jadeja, Stokes had sarcastically quipped "You're going to get a Test hundred against Harry Brook (part-time bowler)?" "You ask, 'You want to make a hundred against Harry Brook? He has to make a hundred, you bring Steve Harmison, Andre Flintoff bring any bowler - they didn't object, it was your call to bring Brook, not ours," Ashwin said. "These are Test runs, a century is earned, not gifted, Washington deserved it, Jadeja deserved it. Period." Ashwin said India were well within their rights to refuse to call it a draw with the two batters going for their milestone. "There were two reasons: one you didn't want to tire your bowlers. Fine. Second you were frustrated and though 'If I'm not happy, you shouldn't be either'. That's now how cricket works." Former Australia keeper-batter Brad Haddin called out England for their poor sportsmanship. "India showed tremendous fight on the final day. Then all of a sudden, it was a situation when England said they can't win so then let's stop the game because England are done playing," Haddin said on the 'WillowTalkPodcast'. "I liked what India did, they earned the right to stay as long as they want. They had the right to make the hundred. Just because it didn't go England's way and they didn't get the answer that they want, all of sudden they (England) weren't happy and started getting verbal. "So things don't go England's way all of sudden it's everyone else's problem. Well done to India," Haddin said. Former England captain Alastair Cook too backed India's decision, suggesting the momentum would serve them well heading into the fifth and final Test at The Oval, which they need to win to level the series. "It was the right decision for (Jadeja and Washington) to carry on for the momentum they'll gain from it," Cook said on BBC's 'Test Match Special'. "When you've been out in the field for 140 overs, you get frustrated. So, it is a little bit of frustration for England but I understand why India did it," he added. Nasser Hussain, another former skipper, agreed termed Stokes' decision to bowl Harry Brook after the handshake as "silly". "I didn't have a problem with it. England seemed to have a problem with it. They were a bit tired, tired bowlers so they wanted to get off but two lads worked hard to get to 80s and 90s and they wanted to get Test match hundreds," Hussain said on 'Sky Sports'. "Stokes didn't have to bowl Brook and look silly at the end. We make far too much of these things. They played well and all credit to India," Hussain said.