Homer and I engaged in some fairly live back-and-forth about whether or not the IPL means something, and whether or not it would hurt if it were postponed for safety reasons. I think the exchange is worth a read.
I did have one more point to make, which I’m sure Homer will respond to: simply holding the IPL does not prove that India can host international sporting tournaments. Completing the IPL tournament without a security lapse or terror attack would.
Now, I’m sure that the tournament will be fine — cross your fingers — but it’s worth noting that last year’s IPL season did not go by without a terror attack (Jaipur, among other cities, suffered a series of devastating bombs). Whereas last year, most athletes brushed it off as irrelevant, this year, they most likely won’t (as Kevin Pietersen has suggested). That’s what happens when you raise the stakes on the IPL, as Homer has done, when he says that this will prove India’s safety.
A better way to handle this would be to argue that terrorism exists as a fact of life, and that we need a better way of assessing how to react to its threat. I’d rather not elevate the impact of terrorism, which precisely serves its purpose of hogging the spotlight and creating more fear than it rationally should.