The Crossbill Sports Desk
With just over a fortnight left for the men’s T20 World Cup to begin, uncertainty has deepened over Bangladesh’s participation after cricket authorities in Dhaka reiterated their refusal to play matches in India, citing security concerns.
The stand-off has escalated a day after the International Cricket Council (ICC) publicly rejected Bangladesh’s request to shift its fixtures to Sri Lanka, one of the tournament’s co-hosts.
Despite the ICC reportedly issuing an ultimatum, Bangladesh’s sports adviser Asif Nazrul and Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) president Aminul Islam said on Thursday (January 22) that they would continue pressing the global body to relocate their matches. Speaking to the media, both officials made it clear that Dhaka would not back down from its position.
Nazrul argued that concerns over player safety were grounded in recent developments, particularly the release of Bangladeshi fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman from the Kolkata Knight Riders earlier this month.
The decision, taken on the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) instructions, followed pressure from sections of the Hindu right amid reports of violence against Hindus in Bangladesh. Citing this episode, Nazrul said the security issue “is not just a theory”.
“How can we be convinced that they [Indian authorities] can provide security to our cricketers, fans and journalists?” Nazrul asked, speaking in Bengali and quoted by ESPN Cricinfo.
He accused both the ICC and the Indian government of failing to adequately address Bangladesh’s concerns. The ICC, he said, “only talked about their standard security plan rather than address our specific grievance”, while Indian authorities “didn’t call the Mustafiz incident an isolated incident”, “didn’t say sorry about the Mustafiz incident or even try to communicate with us,” Cricinfo quoted Nazrul as saying.
“So there’s no scope for changing our decision … We are hopeful the ICC will take into account our genuine concern, and give us the opportunity to play in the World Cup.”
In protest over Rahman’s release, Dhaka also moved to ban broadcasts of the Indian Premier League.
Nazrul said he had directed the BCB to formally write to the ICC seeking a change of venue, arguing that if one “Bangladeshi cricketer cannot play in India despite being contracted, the entire Bangladeshi cricket team cannot feel safe going to play in the World Cup”.
BCB president Aminul Islam, meanwhile, accused the ICC of applying double standards and denying Bangladesh a facility it had extended to India in the recent past.
“The ICC tried to tell us about incidents in 1996 and 2003 but we pointed out their recent steps in a similar matter … When a country refused to travel to another country for the Champions’ Trophy last February, the ICC organised a neutral venue for them … They played in one ground, staying in one hotel. It was a privilege,” Islam said per Cricinfo, referring to India playing all its matches in Dubai during the Pakistan-hosted tournament.
He also criticised the reported 24-hour deadline given by the ICC to the BCB to reconsider its stance.
“A global organisation cannot give a deadline of 24 hours. We will keep fighting,” he was quoted as saying.
Linking the issue to the sport’s broader future, Islam added, “When cricket’s popularity is in decline, the ICC is denying a cricket-loving country of 200 million people. Cricket is going to the Olympics in 2028. India is bidding for the Olympics and Commonwealth Games, but it will be their failure if such a country [Bangladesh] is not going to the World Cup. We are not giving up on playing the World Cup.”
Even as administrators hardened their position, Cricinfo reported that “the prevailing sentiment among [Bangladeshi] players was that they wanted to play the World Cup”.
The ICC, however, has maintained that there is no security threat warranting a change in venue. In a statement issued on Wednesday, the council said it would not accommodate Bangladesh’s request, citing multiple security assessments.
“Over the past several weeks, the ICC has engaged with the BCB in sustained and constructive dialogue,” an ICC spokesperson said, adding that assessments, plans and assurances from host authorities “all of which consistently concluded” that there was no threat to Bangladeshi players, fans, officials or journalists.
The ICC further argued that the BCB had repeatedly linked its participation to “a single, isolated and unrelated development concerning one of its player’s involvement in a domestic league”, warning that shifting venues on such grounds “would jeopardise the sanctity of future ICC events and undermine its neutrality as a global governing body”.
According to Cricinfo, the ICC board also decided on Wednesday that Bangladesh would be replaced by Scotland in the tournament if the BCB continued to hold its line.
The confrontation between the ICC — chaired by Jay Shah, son of Union home minister Amit Shah — and the Bangladesh board comes against the backdrop of strained relations between New Delhi and the Muhammad Yunus-led interim government in Dhaka, tensions that have also spilled onto the streets in recent weeks.
The stand-off has escalated a day after the International Cricket Council (ICC) publicly rejected Bangladesh’s request to shift its fixtures to Sri Lanka, one of the tournament’s co-hosts.
Despite the ICC reportedly issuing an ultimatum, Bangladesh’s sports adviser Asif Nazrul and Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) president Aminul Islam said on Thursday (January 22) that they would continue pressing the global body to relocate their matches. Speaking to the media, both officials made it clear that Dhaka would not back down from its position.
Nazrul argued that concerns over player safety were grounded in recent developments, particularly the release of Bangladeshi fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman from the Kolkata Knight Riders earlier this month.
The decision, taken on the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) instructions, followed pressure from sections of the Hindu right amid reports of violence against Hindus in Bangladesh. Citing this episode, Nazrul said the security issue “is not just a theory”.
“How can we be convinced that they [Indian authorities] can provide security to our cricketers, fans and journalists?” Nazrul asked, speaking in Bengali and quoted by ESPN Cricinfo.
He accused both the ICC and the Indian government of failing to adequately address Bangladesh’s concerns. The ICC, he said, “only talked about their standard security plan rather than address our specific grievance”, while Indian authorities “didn’t call the Mustafiz incident an isolated incident”, “didn’t say sorry about the Mustafiz incident or even try to communicate with us,” Cricinfo quoted Nazrul as saying.
“So there’s no scope for changing our decision … We are hopeful the ICC will take into account our genuine concern, and give us the opportunity to play in the World Cup.”
In protest over Rahman’s release, Dhaka also moved to ban broadcasts of the Indian Premier League.
Nazrul said he had directed the BCB to formally write to the ICC seeking a change of venue, arguing that if one “Bangladeshi cricketer cannot play in India despite being contracted, the entire Bangladeshi cricket team cannot feel safe going to play in the World Cup”.
BCB president Aminul Islam, meanwhile, accused the ICC of applying double standards and denying Bangladesh a facility it had extended to India in the recent past.
“The ICC tried to tell us about incidents in 1996 and 2003 but we pointed out their recent steps in a similar matter … When a country refused to travel to another country for the Champions’ Trophy last February, the ICC organised a neutral venue for them … They played in one ground, staying in one hotel. It was a privilege,” Islam said per Cricinfo, referring to India playing all its matches in Dubai during the Pakistan-hosted tournament.
He also criticised the reported 24-hour deadline given by the ICC to the BCB to reconsider its stance.
“A global organisation cannot give a deadline of 24 hours. We will keep fighting,” he was quoted as saying.
Linking the issue to the sport’s broader future, Islam added, “When cricket’s popularity is in decline, the ICC is denying a cricket-loving country of 200 million people. Cricket is going to the Olympics in 2028. India is bidding for the Olympics and Commonwealth Games, but it will be their failure if such a country [Bangladesh] is not going to the World Cup. We are not giving up on playing the World Cup.”
Even as administrators hardened their position, Cricinfo reported that “the prevailing sentiment among [Bangladeshi] players was that they wanted to play the World Cup”.
The ICC, however, has maintained that there is no security threat warranting a change in venue. In a statement issued on Wednesday, the council said it would not accommodate Bangladesh’s request, citing multiple security assessments.
“Over the past several weeks, the ICC has engaged with the BCB in sustained and constructive dialogue,” an ICC spokesperson said, adding that assessments, plans and assurances from host authorities “all of which consistently concluded” that there was no threat to Bangladeshi players, fans, officials or journalists.
The ICC further argued that the BCB had repeatedly linked its participation to “a single, isolated and unrelated development concerning one of its player’s involvement in a domestic league”, warning that shifting venues on such grounds “would jeopardise the sanctity of future ICC events and undermine its neutrality as a global governing body”.
According to Cricinfo, the ICC board also decided on Wednesday that Bangladesh would be replaced by Scotland in the tournament if the BCB continued to hold its line.
The confrontation between the ICC — chaired by Jay Shah, son of Union home minister Amit Shah — and the Bangladesh board comes against the backdrop of strained relations between New Delhi and the Muhammad Yunus-led interim government in Dhaka, tensions that have also spilled onto the streets in recent weeks.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment