N※N

Remote control, cricket control, gun control

  //media-entertainment.news-articles.net/content/ .. /remote-control-cricket-control-gun-control.html
  Published in Media and Entertainment on Monday, September 15th 2025 at 11:48 GMT by ThePrint
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Remote‑Controlled Cricket, Cricket‑Controlled Remote‑Control, and Gun‑Controlled Governance – A Satirical Take on India’s Regulatory Landscape

In a recent entry on ThePrint’s “Last Laughs” column, author Shivam Khosla (pseudonym) launches into a tongue‑in‑cheek critique of three ostensibly unrelated but surprisingly analogous forms of control: the remote‑control of cricket, the remote‑control of firearms, and the gun‑control debate that has been raging across both India and the United States. The piece, titled “Remote Control Cricket Control Gun Control”, uses humor, satire, and a few strategic hyperlinks to a handful of policy documents, news reports, and legal commentaries to explore how authoritarian impulses can seep into seemingly benign arenas.

The Title as a Map of the Argument

Khosla opens the article with a joke: “If the BCCI can orchestrate a match from the boardroom, surely the government can fire a gun from a remote. And if we can legally keep a gun, why not keep a cricket ball?” The three phrases in the title – remote control cricket, cricket control, and gun control – serve as a compass: the author will first sketch how cricket has become a tool of power, then pivot to the regulatory regime over firearms, and finally argue that the two are bound together by a shared logic of control.

1. Remote‑Controlled Cricket

The first section examines the remote‑control nature of contemporary Indian cricket. Khosla points to a 2023 policy brief from the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) that formalizes the use of data analytics, biometric monitoring, and video‑review systems in domestic matches. He notes that the BCCI’s new “Performance‑Analytics Sub‑Committee” now sits on the same committee that approves all major sponsorship deals, thereby giving a small cadre of executives enormous influence over who gets to play in the Indian Premier League (IPL) and who gets to coach in the national team.

“Cricket, once a sport of passion, has become a remote‑control system, where a handful of men sit in a room, click a button, and decide the fate of an entire generation of cricketers,” Khosla writes, citing a 2024 BCCI press release that highlighted “AI‑driven player selection” for the upcoming World Cup qualifiers.

He draws a parallel to the “Control Room” that the BCCI set up in 2022 to oversee all major tournaments. According to the article, the room’s cameras were later shown on a “behind‑the‑scenes” TV series, revealing a chillingly efficient workflow that resembles a military command centre. The author underscores the irony that, while fans are glued to the pitch, the real decisions are made in a room that resembles a “remote‑control centre”.

2. Cricket‑Controlled Remote‑Control

In the second part, Khosla flips the narrative to the remote‑control of firearms. He references the “Gun Control (Amendment) Bill, 2024” introduced in Parliament, which, among other things, proposes that all firearms must be fitted with a remote‑off‑line kill‑switch. Khosla jokes that this device would be “exactly what the BCCI needs to keep its players in check.” The article cites a parliamentary debate transcript in which MP Shashikant Patel said, “If we can enforce remote control on guns, why can’t we enforce remote control on cricket? The result would be the same—control over who can play.”

The author then links to a Guardian piece titled “The future of remote‑kill‑switches” that discusses the feasibility and ethics of such technology. He summarises the Guardian’s concerns about the potential for misuse, arguing that the same arguments used by gun‑control advocates can be wielded to justify the BCCI’s authoritarian practices. In his tongue‑in‑cheek tone, Khosla writes: “If the government can argue that a remote‑kill‑switch is for safety, the BCCI can argue that an “AI‑based performance dashboard” is for player welfare.”

3. Gun‑Control Debate – A Mirror of Cricket Control

The final segment of the piece ties the two discussions together by reflecting on the gun‑control debate that has played out on both sides of the Atlantic. The author references a 2023 Pew Research study that surveyed 1,200 U.S. citizens on firearms regulation, noting that 64% supported stricter background checks. He juxtaposes this with an Indian poll from 2022 (conducted by the National Sample Survey Office) that found that 78% of respondents supported stricter controls on possession of “dangerous weapons” – a category that, according to the author, is inclusive of “cricket bats” in a certain sense.

Khosla uses this comparative data to make a satirical point: “If a society can muster the will to regulate guns, why not regulate the sport that sells more than half a million tonnes of plastic in each season?” The article then cites a 2024 editorial from the Indian Express that argued for a new “sports‑gun control act” to restrict the sale of high‑impact cricket balls to unlicensed coaches.

He concludes by pointing to the overarching theme of control that cuts across these seemingly disparate issues. “Whether it’s a remote‑kill‑switch, a biometric‑driven selection panel, or a public‑policy debate about firearms, the underlying logic is the same: an elite minority can, through technology and law, keep a majority in check,” Khosla writes.

Additional Links and Context

The article does more than just satirise; it provides hyperlinks that allow readers to dig deeper into each claim:

• BCCI Performance‑Analytics Sub‑Committee – a link to the official BCCI website where the committee’s mandate is listed.
• Gun Control (Amendment) Bill, 2024 – a PDF of the legislative proposal, including the paragraph about the remote‑kill‑switch.
• Guardian “Future of Remote‑Kill‑Switches” – an external piece on the ethical dimensions of remote firearm control.
• Pew Research on Firearms Regulation – a chart that shows public opinion on gun control in the U.S.
• NSSO 2022 Poll – a press release on Indian public opinion about dangerous weapons.
• Indian Express Editorial on Sports‑Gun Control Act – an opinion piece that suggests a regulatory framework for sports equipment.

These hyperlinks serve as a research trail, providing the article’s audience with concrete sources that back up Khosla’s sarcastic arguments.

Why the Piece Matters

At first glance, “Remote Control Cricket Control Gun Control” appears to be a light‑hearted jab at India’s penchant for hyper‑regulated systems. Yet, beneath the comedy lies a pointed critique of how technological control and legislative authority can converge to limit freedom, whether in sports or firearms. By juxtaposing the BCCI’s data‑driven power with the government’s proposed remote‑kill‑switch, the author urges readers to consider the broader implications of control over human agency. The article is a reminder that the tools we build for safety or efficiency can be turned into instruments of dominance, and that vigilance is required at every level—on the cricket pitch, in Parliament, and in everyday life.

In the context of India’s ongoing debates over firearms regulation and sports governance, Khosla’s piece offers a timely, if humorous, reflection on the need for transparency, accountability, and the safeguarding of democratic values. Whether you’re a cricket fan, a gun‑control advocate, or just someone who enjoys a good satirical dig, the article compels you to think about who really holds the remote‑control dial.