I like to watch the MasterChef India. It's not because it is a great programme but this is the first time MasterChef is telecasted in India. I can relate myself to the contestants more in this version compared to other international MasterChef.
But I feel, apart from the Goa Mariot chef, Akshay Kumar and Leela Kempinsky chef are biased to a particular contestant.
For example, in the last episode, the golden apron was given to Radhika because she prepared the Malpua three times to serve a good Malpua. It was stated that she did not sacrifice quality. Can this be the reason for declaring winner?
If some guest comes to your house and the first Malpua is not prepared well, you/your wife or your mom would also prepare three/four Malpua and serve the best one to the guest. Everybody will do what Radhika did and that too in our ordinary lives, not even in a competition like MasterChef.
Dishes like Malpua can be done multiple times within a short time, if you have sufficient amount of batter is available.
The other contestant, Sweata, prepared a Rajasthani dish. Apparently, if she was unable to do it properly in the first attempt, she may not have gotten the time for a second attempt.
The same is true for some other contestants. For the time consuming dishes, there is simply not enough time for multiple attempts.
It is indeed a sad commentary of the judgment that is being given in this show that Radhika was awarded for such a commonplace practice.
It also questions the neutrality of Akshay Kumar and the Leela Kempensky chef.
The quality of the MasterChef program can be better if Star Plus would ensure a more nutral and better judgment.
The other thing that is apparent is the lack of non-veg dishes that are being cooked. Clearly, this is a conscious choice given the extent of viewership it is trying to attain. But it reduces the quality of the show. Really how can one be a Master Chef if he/she doesn't know how to cook decent non-veg dishes.
Shiv Shakti
Cricket
