A 'story of politics and money' in cricket: Why is the ICC helpless in the T20 World Cup crisis?

 

 

 

A 'story of politics and money' in cricket: Why is the ICC helpless in the T20 World Cup crisis?

Which team has the spinners who can turn the tables on the match? Which team can really work their magic on the wickets of India and Sri Lanka?

The T20 World Cup is about to begin in a few days, but instead of discussing these aspects, the discussion is about how much the ongoing tension between India and Pakistan can harm the tournament and the game of cricket at the global level.

Although Pakistan has decided to participate in the T20 World Cup, it has announced a boycott of the February 15 group match with India. While the ICC has expressed its expectation that Pakistan will work towards a mutual resolution of the issue.

In a statement, the ICC said it hopes that the PCB will “consider the significant and long-term implications of this decision for cricket in its country as it will also have an impact on the global cricketing system of which Pakistan itself is a part.”

 

It is not that cricket has ever been isolated from politics. The impact of Pakistan-India relations has always reached the field. When things are good, the leaders of both countries are seen sitting in the stadium and chatting happily, and when tensions cross the line, strange scenes like not shaking hands can be seen.

This game is the heartbeat of billions of people in South Asia, but in recent years, the noise of cricket has become less and the sound of politics has become more. And now it is not limited to Pakistan and India.

How did it get to this point?

In recent years, controversies in ICC events are nothing new and usually Pakistan and India are in the headlines. But this time the story was Bangladesh.

Bangladesh refused to go to India for the T20 World Cup, citing security concerns, after which the ICC excluded them from the tournament and included Scotland.

According to Daniel Rasool, a journalist associated with cricket website Cricinfo, the Bangladeshi players themselves did not want to be out of the World Cup. In his opinion, the T20 World Cup is a big platform to show themselves to the world and that opens up avenues for global leagues and future.

Speaking to the BBC, Daniel Rasool said that ‘politics has taken such a central place in South Asian cricket that the players’ opinions no longer matter.

‘Players are afraid to speak their minds. When boards instruct not to shake hands, players defend these decisions publicly, even if they do not agree with it privately.’

After a four-day standoff between Pakistan and India in May last year, the Asia Cup in September brought on the politics on the field. The two teams avoided shaking hands, there was a dispute over the trophy ceremony, and some players’ gestures seemed to be celebrating a war victory.

But the matter did not stop there, but the effects of the growing border tension between Pakistan and Afghanistan were also seen when Afghanistan refused to come to Pakistan to play a tri-series in November last year.

Meanwhile, tensions increased between India and Bangladesh after Sheikh Hasina left the country in 2024. Some time ago, on the instructions of the Indian Cricket Board, the Indian Premier League team Kolkata Knight Riders expelled Bangladesh’s Mustafizur Rahman from the team, for no official reason. This incident later became an important link in this World Cup controversy.

India's leading sports writer Sharda Ogra believes that politics has become increasingly involved in sports since the 2023 World Cup, and according to her, "What we are seeing today is the takeover of cricket by politics."

Why is the impact of politics on cricket different this time than before?

Cricket in South Asia is not just a game but something that millions of people are connected to. With every big match, emotions also come out on the field and where there are so many eyes, it is not surprising that politics reaches there.

That is why the history of cricket in this region has always been in the shadow of politics. But the question is, what has changed now?

Sports journalist Sharda Ogra agreed that politics has always been in cricket governance, but in her opinion, ‘the difference now is that the direct intervention of governments has increased. We are seeing governments using cricket to create policy messages and narratives.’

The current chairman of the International Cricket Council is Jay Shah, who is the son of Indian Home Minister Amit Shah. While in Pakistan, Home Minister Mohsin Naqvi is also the chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board.

Referring to this, Sharda Ogra said that ‘this combination of political power and cricket administration has erased the distinction between what the government agenda is and what the game needs.’

Whereas Sharda Ogra sees it as a nexus of political power and cricket administration, Daniyal Rasool says that the other big aspect of the story is money. According to him, the problem is not just politics but also who has the ‘financial power’ in world cricket.’

Daniyal Rasool, referring to the ICC’s revenue model, said that ‘India provides about 80 percent of the ICC’s income. Even if all the other boards are put together, they represent only a fifth of the income of world cricket.’

Due to this imbalance, according to Daniyal Rasool, the other countries are left with very few real options and India has ‘many ways to put pressure’ on other cricket boards.

What will be the future of South Asian cricket?

There was a time when joint Asian teams were formed and Sachin Tendulkar and Wasim Akram were playing for the same team in the same jersey.

Looking back today, it all feels surreal, as if cricket was actually played in another world.

According to Sharda Ogra, the region that once functioned as a unit has now fragmented.

‘The insistence on excluding some teams and politicising competitions has created division.’

Not only Bangladesh and Afghanistan, but in his opinion, emerging teams are also being affected by this politics. ‘Now instead of transparent decisions, we see vague instructions and political signals.’

How can we get out of this situation?

In response to this question, Sharda Ogra said, ‘This requires strong and independent leadership, which is not visible at the moment.’ ‘There is still hope because cricket is very important to the people and it cannot be easily abandoned, but it will take a long time to recover from this loss.’

Daniyal Rasool is also not very optimistic about the future of cricket in South Asia. According to him, there is no clear solution to this situation.

According to Daniyal, politics currently dominates cricket in almost every cricketing country in South Asia. India is pressuring Bangladesh, relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan have deteriorated, and neither side is ready to back down.

He does not see any improvement in the near future. He says, ‘Unless the political situation improves, things will get worse instead of getting better.’