India vs. Pakistan cricket rivalry is not just a mere game. It is an event beyond sport, an emotional rivalry, a political contest, a huge focus on the population. However, following the recent attempts by the Asia cup, the future of India-Pakistan matches is questionable. One that used to bring people together through sport, this has now turned into a source of political and social conflict. Former England captain Michael Atherton spearheads the calls by the international cricket council (ICC) to abandon the intentional staging of international matches between India and Pakistan based on commercial interests.
The Asia Cup had become more of a symbolic battle much beyond cricket. Cases like denial of hand shaking, arguments on the field and salacious celebrations created a screaming frenzy in social media and the news media. This was even aggravated by the fact that the Indian players refused to receive the trophy conferred on them by Mohsin Naqvi, who is the sitting interior minister of Pakistan and the chairman of the Asian Cricket Council. The 45-minute hold at the closure ceremony turned out to be the final consideration of the political tension that dominated the sport. It would have been a very happy proud moment to the two teams but it became an issue of world talk with all the wrong reasons.
The basis of Michael Atherton argument is a very basic fact, in the realm of sport transparency must always precede revenue. He faulted the ICC recurrently in kind of designed tournament format that ensures India and Pakistan meet. What is dangerous and counterproductive to him is the intentional creation of them in the event that these matches have become, in some wider political wrangle, a proxy. It is a game of cricket, Atherton thinks, not the battleground of doomed diplomacy.
Financially speaking, however, why the ICC finds itself in such a difficult position can be easily ascertained. The matches between India and Pakistan are the most viewed in the history of the crickets game. TV stations are paying out billions of dollars to secure rights, advertisers are fighting over the commercial spots and social media chatter is at a major peak when the two countries have the pitch together. Not only is it a match, but it is an international event that has caught even more eyes than most World Cup finals. Yet, as neat as the revenue figures are on the paper, the price to stocking in the name of cricket is making its toll increasingly difficult to avoid. The moment the fans begin identifying the sport with political aggressiveness, the soul of the game is destroyed.
And this is where the morality-meets-economics quandary hits most. On the one hand, there is the ethical imperative of maintaining sporting integrity, creating just sport competition, and securing political influence on the player. On the other hand there exists the unquestionable fact that these matches subsidize global cricket. The key difficulty the ICC faces is the balancing of revenue streams in that revenue does not compromise the integrity of the sport. Assuming that all Indians-Pakistan encounters seem theatrical, then the reality of world cricket will gradually fade away.
The ICC has traditionally had many methods of arranging these fixtures. Ever since the 2010s, India and Pakistan have worked together in nearly all ICC events, be it the world cup, the champions trophy, the T20 world cup. This isn’t mere coincidence. It is an open secret to organizers and broadcasters that millions (even billions) of viewers are attracted by the competition. Critics believe, however, that it has become time to grow out of these arrangements. In such political relations, when the relations become strained, and the mood is become elevated, the risks of these games turning into instruments of propaganda are high and these games should be turned into the instrument of peace.
What could be done instead? Being transparent in the way draw players are handled is one area that the ICC can start with. Neutral grounds may also help diminish the perceived enmity, as the matches are meant to be about the sport of cricket and not about politics. The next step would involve imposing severe codes of conduct- punishing any political statements or acts of symbolism on the field. This would be a powerful message that cricket should be associated not with division but unity.
The global image of cricket lies in the way the most delicate contest involving the game is managed. When political tension is used to characterize fixtures because governing bodies permit it, the sport would lose its soul. Cricket is not merely technically brilliant, the world is impressed with regard to fairness and sportsmanship. Those ideals are going to be tried. The ICC needs to cease its Cling to schedule-obsessed ideas to regain balance by establishing trust, transparency and unity.
The row in the Asia Cup should be taken as a wake-up call, not only to the ICC but to all who like cricket. The time has come to put the game between politics and to use every game as an exercise in ability and friendship–not rivalry. With boldness and vision looked at positively, this scandal has the potential to initiate healthier, more natural times of international cricket. The matches between India and Pakistan will always be followed by the world-but they need to follow it on the right grounds.
Follow us on Zeroto30s social channels:
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/zeroto30s/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/zeroto30s
Twitter: https://twitter.com/zeroto30s
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@Zeroto30s