Ehsan Mani Slams ICC's 'Double Standards' Over Pakistan's India Match Boycott
Former International Cricket Council chairman Ehsan Mani has strongly criticized what he calls 'double standards' in international cricket governance as Pakistan faces potential sanctions for boycotting their match against India at the ICC Men's T20 World Cup 2026. According to Mani, Pakistan is merely following government instructions, similar to how India previously avoided playing in Pakistan without facing punishment.
Historical Precedent Cited by Former ICC Chief
Speaking exclusively to Sportstar, Mani pointed to the 2025 Champions Trophy incident where India refused to travel to Pakistan based on government security advice. 'You can't have double standards,' Mani emphasized. 'The Men in Blue faced no punishment then, so the same principle must apply to Pakistan now.'
The former Pakistan Cricket Board chairman expressed disappointment with the ICC's handling of the situation. 'Instead of dealing with the problem, the ICC just stood there as a bystander,' he told the publication. 'This has left the door open for any country to involve its government in cricket decisions.'
Pakistan's Selective Boycott Creates Unprecedented Situation
The Pakistan government announced on February 1 that its men's cricket team would boycott only the group match against India scheduled for February 15 at Colombo's R Premadasa Stadium. This marks a historically unique situation in international cricket where a team agrees to participate in an entire tournament while deliberately refusing to face one specific opponent for diplomatic reasons.
Unlike previous instances where teams avoided certain venues due to security concerns, Pakistan has been cleared to play all its matches in Sri Lanka, a neutral country accepted by all participating teams. The government has permitted participation in other Group A matches against the Netherlands on February 7 and the USA on February 10.
Key Differences in India and Pakistan's Approaches
While Mani draws parallels between the two situations, there are notable differences. India's refusal to travel to Pakistan for the 2025 Champions Trophy was based on security concerns rather than a direct refusal to play against Pakistan. The tournament eventually featured three India-Pakistan matches, all held in the UAE, with India winning each encounter including the final.
In contrast, Pakistan's current boycott represents a political protest following the ICC's decision to replace Bangladesh with Scotland after Bangladesh refused to travel to India over security concerns. The Shahbaz Sharif government has allowed the team to continue playing the rest of the tournament while specifically boycotting the India match.
Immediate Consequences and ICC's Response
By skipping the India match, Pakistan will automatically forfeit two points, which will be awarded to India. However, Team India captain Suryakumar Yadav must be present at the toss to officially secure these points.
The ICC has warned of potential sanctions but acknowledges it has yet to receive official confirmation from the Pakistan Cricket Board. The announcement came directly from the Government of Pakistan through social media channels.
Mani highlighted the particular complexity of Pakistan's situation, noting that 'the chairman of the PCB (Mohsin Naqvi) is a serving minister of the government,' making the separation between cricket administration and government directives particularly challenging.
Setting a New Precedent in International Cricket
This selective participation targeting a specific opponent rather than a venue has no clear precedent in cricket history. Previous instances like Australia refusing to visit Colombo in 1996 or New Zealand avoiding Nairobi in 2003 were venue-based security decisions where teams remained willing to play the same opponents at alternative locations.
The ICC now faces a delicate balancing act between maintaining sporting principles and acknowledging geopolitical realities. Whatever decision the governing body makes will establish an important benchmark for how cricket handles similar situations in the future, potentially influencing how national governments interact with international sporting bodies across all cricket-playing nations.
