PAKISTAN’S boycott of its T20 World Cup match against India raises two fundamental questions: why the PCB took this decision, and what it hopes to achieve by it. The fact that neither answer is particularly clear invites a deeper concern, whether this dramatic gesture was fully thought through at all.
To begin with, let’s be clear on a few points. The ICC is controlled by India. It is a governing body that behaves like a wholly owned subsidiary of the BCCI. The ICC does not run international cricket, the BCCI — and therefore the Indian government — does. This is realpolitik. The rule of “might is right”. India is in charge, both as policymaker and paymaster, however you describe it.
India’s malign dictatorship of international cricket is to be condemned, just as the previous dominance of England and Australia had been condemned. Today, India is the Pied Piper of cricket, playing a seductive tune that brings the rats of the world’s cricket boards under its control. Something does need to be done, namely ICC’s power and independence must be restored. But is this what Pakistan’s unilateral boycott will achieve?
India has a political dispute with Pakistan, which it chooses to operationalise by “boycotting” bilateral series with Pakistan and refusing to set foot in the country. No other nation would be allowed to behave in this despotic manner. We’ve just seen what has happened to Bangladesh. Despotic rule is hypocritical. It is self-serving, and it is brutish.
India has the world of cricket in its pocket, while Pakistan has a big hole where its money and friends should be
The next tier of cricket nations, when it comes to financial might, England and Australia, are reliant on India for their revenues. They have sold their integrity and independence for Indian rupees. The remaining countries are too weak and irrelevant when it comes to tackling the excesses of India’s cricketing hegemony.
The same applies to the corporations and the broadcasters who invest in cricket. Without India’s billion-plus population, they don’t have a big enough market.
In the world of cricket commerce, India’s gravitational pull is too great. Fans might care about some of these hypocrisies and inequalities, but the global audience doesn’t care enough about whether Bangladesh is expelled or Pakistan boycotts.
There is, of course, value in a Pakistan-India contest in a major tournament, otherwise why else would it be a manufactured feature of every single major competition. The match is a money spinner; it is good for India’s coffers. And given the fact that Pakistan seems unable to compete on these occasions, it is a perfect morale booster for the Indian nation, with profit built in.
Therefore, Pakistan’s boycott of the India match will hurt India a little. India will feel the pinch in its pocket, and so too will the other ICC members. But that pinch will only be a pinch. India will pocket the points instead and move closer to the next round of the tournament. Pakistan will lose valuable revenue and the points. Would Bangladesh have done the same for Pakistan? It hasn’t in the past.
Indeed, considering the long history of India’s unfair sidelining of Pakistan, we know other nations have not and would not do the same for Pakistan. Pakistan is now a middle nation, at best, in the world of international cricket. It does not have financial muscle and it is not good enough on the field to pull other nations to its side. India has the world of cricket in its pocket, while Pakistan has a big hole in its pocket where its money and its friends should be.
In the language of Donald Trump, Pakistan has no cards. All this leaves Pakistan in a mess. It cannot genuinely hope to achieve anything meaningful as a result of its boycott. The deck is stacked against Pakistan.
Principle, then, is all that Pakistan has left. But what is the principle here? If the principle is taking a stand in support of Bangladesh, then it is an empty gesture, admittedly a noisy one.
If the principle is to protest India’s long history of mistreatment of Pakistan, the mistreatment will continue. If the principle is to protest India’s unconstitutional rule of international cricket, the cause is just but the means of protest amateurish.
What Pakistan really wants here is a shift in the balance of power in international cricket. It is entirely fair to think that must happen by freeing international cricket from India’s grip.
But to achieve this, Pakistan requires a long-term strategy with two primary objectives: to become commercially and politically powerful in international cricket, and to become a force again on the field.
It might feel good to shout about a boycott, to savour a perceived blow to India’s giant ego, but this is no more than a captive shouting into a straitjacket, or an opiate for the masses. If Pakistan is serious about a reset in cricket’s international order, it must begin by working out how it can become a cricketing superpower again, a superpower that is financially strong and independent of India.
Do that and others might follow. Sadly, for the current leaders of Pakistan and its cricket, doing just that seems to be too much like hard thinking.
Published in Dawn, February 3rd, 2026
from Dawn - Home https://ift.tt/v3T2t8a
0 Comments