Sporting facets have taken a backseat for a berth in the Rio Olympics.
WFI had anticipated an appeal, but they had not expected Sushil Kumar to knock on their doors once again.
A single judge of the Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed Sushil Kumar’s plea for a trial with Narsingh Yadav.
In an indication of things to come, Justice Manmohan observed that ‘there is no statutory mandate’ in the sports code to hold trials.
Amit Sibal, appearing for Sushil Kumar, argued that Sports Code has to be followed by WFI and it prescribes trial for events like Olympics.
Shivani Naik weighs into the debate by asking the experts to dissect the strengths and weaknesses of the two pehelwans — Narsingh and Sushil.
Trials are the norm in most top wrestling countries who regularly reap medals, and don’t blindly send grapplers who earn quotas.
WFI opens door for discussion, then slams shut on Sushil Kumar’s hopes of featuring in Rio 2016 Olympics.
Mahabali Satpal suggests the only way Narsingh Yadav can clear any doubts is by competing in a trial with Sushil Kumar.
Delhi High Court issues notice to Sports Ministry, WFI, SAI and IOA asking them to respond to Sushil Kumar’s plea by May 27
Sushil Kumar’s plea states that under the Sports Code rules, a berth to compete in the Olympics belongs to the country and not a particular wrestler.
According to WFI, Sushil Kumar’s name has been ommitted as only the quota place earning wrestlers have been included.
Sushil versus Narsingh controversy is a reminder: Rules, not whims, must decide who goes to Rio.
Sushil Kumar asked for his medals in the past to be forgotten and a fair trial be conducted between him and Narsingh Yadav for Rio Olympics.
Narsingh Yadav had won quota in 74kg category while Sushil Kumar has been upgraded (from 66kg) after a revamp of the weight categories.