[harry10]

Originally Posted by Eddy

In simple words, the relationship that Pakistan has with all these countries is totally different from the India-Pak relationship. I think it is obvious why the Indian cricket team did not travel to Pakistan.

Exactly. It's like asking Ukraine to send their team to Russia or vice versa. Won't happen. Aussies and brits keep crying the same thing. Why India isn't traveling to Pak when we are going. Well, Indian govt. straight away refused and that's it. Players life can't be risked and no matter which govt. is in power. It won't happen. Period.

If other teams and Pak wanted to go ahead without India they were most welcome to do so. But, all boards unanimously signed off on India playing the tournament in Dubai because they can't leave the big money India brings to the table out of which every board gets a share. So, what's the point of crying now about India getting venue advantage or not.

On a side note Pak too will play their matches in SL from now on when India will be host of an ICC tournament. So, this goes both way now.

[Eddy]

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

And yet, despite those different relations, we host Pakistan on our soil and mint money during a World Cup, no less !!

Again, what was the option? I don't think Pakistan insisted on a hybrid model. Now that they have, there are chances that the forthcoming ICC events will be hybrid (I personally don't think it will happen, though).

And Pakistan coming to India is not the same as India going to Pakistan. Outside of cricket, one party has been at the receiving end of a lot more bloodshed compared to the other.

And it does not help when the Chairman of PCB calls visiting India for the World Cup game as visiting a "Dushman Mulk" (Enemy nation). I think it is pointless to talk about normalcy in cricketing relationship between the two countries. And in a dispute, the stronger board gets its way. And I am glad that it is the BCCI.

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

..even the post match ceremony was pre decided

What does that mean? What else was predecided? The outcome of the game? Are you implying that the match was fixed?

India & Pakistan invariably end up in the same group in such multi-nation tournaments like WC! There's no effort made to make it look like everything is fair, unbiased & neutral.

Only for commercial reasons. I am not sure how much of the revenue generated from this one annual event contributes to the coffers of ICC and hence the payout to the likes of Afghanistan. If an Ind Pak match at a non-Pak venue can fuel world cricket, I am all for it.
If cricket and the payouts can survive without this, I think we should go back to the old way of choosing pools for world events.

[DigitalOne]

Originally Posted by Eddy

And Pakistan coming to India is not the same as India going to Pakistan. Outside of cricket, one party has been at the receiving end of a lot more bloodshed compared to the other.

And it does not help when the Chairman of PCB calls visiting India for the World Cup game as visiting a "Dushman Mulk" (Enemy nation). I think it is pointless to talk about normalcy in cricketing relationship between the two countries. And in a dispute, the stronger board gets its way. And I am glad that it is the BCCI.

Just the other day, during the NZ-Bangladesh match, an intruder, carrying a poster of a radical extremist leader, invaded the pitch and attacked NZ's Rachin Ravindra. Thankfully nothing serious happened. It is anybody's guess why Rachin Ravindra was chosen. Just imagine this happening with any Indian player. Some people can keep pretending that all is well with Pakistan, but thankfully BCCI is taking the decisions keeping Indian players' safety at stake. Pakistan and its apologists can keep whining.

[Eddy]

On a different note, Nasser Hussain rocks!

https://x.com/SkyCricket/status/1894676681413038292

[ABHI_1512]

Originally Posted by Eddy

Again, what was the option?

And Pakistan coming to India is not the same as India going to Pakistan. Outside of cricket, one party has been at the receiving end of a lot more bloodshed compared to the other.
.

You talk of bloodshed but the fact remains that India has all kinds of relations with Pakistan including trade. It's only cricket where this sentiment that you talk about, comes along. Why send the Indian Tennis team to play bilateral Davis Cup competition in Islamabad then ?? Aren't they part of India too?? The tennis team travelled as recent as February and won the match comfortably.

https://www.thehindu.com/sport/tenni...le67810486.ece

My point is simple- If you want to cut off relations, do it completely. This selective cutting off relations when it comes to cricket only happens because of the clout of the BCCI and nothing else.

And by the pre decided ceremony I meant the events that unfolded even after India lost the match. Everyone expected that India will win and everything was designed along those lines is what I meant.

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

Just the other day, during the NZ-Bangladesh match, an intruder, carrying a poster of a radical extremist leader, invaded the pitch and attacked NZ's Rachin Ravindra. Thankfully nothing serious happened. It is anybody's guess why Rachin Ravindra was chosen. Just imagine this happening with any Indian player. Some people can keep pretending that all is well with Pakistan, but thankfully BCCI is taking the decisions keeping Indian players' safety at stake. Pakistan and its apologists can keep whining.

Twisting facts is not allowed in the forum but then perhaps, sign of the times. Let me correct you here-

The pitch invader that you talk about DID NOT attack Rachin Ravindra BUT wanted to hug him. The guy has been banned for life from entering a cricket stadium in Pakistan again. The video is clear but I would still attach the news link.

https://indianexpress.com/article/sp...s-ban-9857264/

Pitch invaders running on to the field is normal and it has happened to Virat Kohli twice in the last three months. One during the test series in Australia and the other during the Ranji match at New Delhi. So according to you, India should not visit Australia citing security concerns next time. And New Delhi should be banned from hosting any cricket match henceforth.

https://www.indiatoday.in/sports/sto...982-2024-12-27

https://www.hindustantimes.com/crick...391395093.html

Apologists or not, the world needs a strong Pakistan team. Those who have seen the Pakistan greats play will only understand what I am talking about. We can keep the jingoism for the ones who revel in it, I don't.

My last post on this topic.

[Eddy]

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

You talk of bloodshed but the fact remains that India has all kinds of relations with Pakistan including trade. It's only cricket where this sentiment that you talk about, comes along. Why send the Indian Tennis team to play bilateral Davis Cup competition in Islamabad then ?? Aren't they part of India too?? The tennis team travelled as recent as February and won the match comfortably.

My point is simple- If you want to cut off relations, do it completely.

.

International relations, especially the ones as delicate as Ind-Pak, are not as black and white as you want or think. Some business goes as normal while some issues are impacted and a cricket tour happens to fall in the latter category.

Are you implying that an Indian tennis player, who even you and I might not be able to recognize on the street, faces the same security threat in Pakistan as Virat Kohli? You must be kidding me!

the world needs a strong Pakistan team.

What has this got to do with the discussion at hand? Sure, the cricketing world is better with a strong Pakistan, a strong West Indies, a strong Afghanistan etc.

But this cannot come at the cost of security of our players, even if the probability of something happening is remote.

Regarding the ground invasion, I would be a lot more worried if the invader carried a poster of an extremist, compared to a regular fan in India.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by Eddy

Are you implying that an Indian tennis player, who even you and I might not be able to recognize on the street, faces the same security threat in Pakistan as Virat Kohli?

I think Indian cricket players can't walk peacefully on the roads here either. Which is probably why Virat is moving to London? Can totally understand why.

A friend of mine used to work for and travel with the team in a support capacity a long time ago (early 2000s). According to him, our cricketers (even back then) were most relaxed in countries where not many people recognized them. He would talk about the team being able to go to restaurants in England and bars in the West Indies, things they just couldn't do easily at home. Player security is not a straightforward thing at all. And a security risk is not a simple matter of 'place A safe, place B unsafe'.

[motorworks]

On this topic of India-Pakistan cricketing relations, I think we as a country should always “leverage” the position we have in the cricketing world. Its like Trade, right? Cause all this amounts of millions at the end of the day.

If India were to not send a Tennis team or some other contingent of members, would Pakistan be affected? No, absolutely not! As a Country, Pakistan has fostered Terrorist groups ( this is not an opinion, rather a fact) and they have encouraged anti Indian activities all along. So why should we not do things the way we want to? The way we see it as beneficial to our country and not add to another country’s economy when they have been not so kind to us? By playing Pakistan in Pakistan we gain very little and improving their cricketing ability is not our job. We have our very own IPL which brings the best talent from all around the world and by barring Pakistan’s players, we are sort of ensuring that their skills don’t get upgraded as much as ours.

Its another discussion that while being a good white ball team, we do not do as well in Test cricket, mainly due to lack of consistent exposure to foreign conditions ( county cricket for example) But that needs some serious planning from BCCI and does not necessarily involve Pakistan in anyway.

[Bhargav7]

Originally Posted by motorworks

On this topic of India-Pakistan cricketing relations, I think we as a country should always “leverage” the position we have in the cricketing world. Its like Trade, right? Cause all this amounts of millions at the end of the day.

We don't really need a leverage against Pakistan. In cricketing terms, India and BCCI are so far ahead, it needs no leverage. In economic terms, Pakistan is one of the minor trading partner of India. They are not a competition to us. Our real competitors are Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines and other Asian countries.

Once we stop seeing Pakistan as a rival, don't really think anyone will have any sort of interest in whether or not we play Cricket in each other's country.

Of course, the safety of cricketers is paramount. But I don't think that is the reason why BCCI stopped bilateral cricket with Pakistan.

[AtheK]

PCB and other boards should have stuck to the view that if India does not participate they will go ahead and host the tournament without them, BCCI was fine with it. India was clear that they can't travel and they are OK to skip the tournament.

So if they did not agree to that they should now stop acting like this, they are the one who looks like losers, both side of the coins this way. That said if India had lost both matches till now, no one would have said anything.

[sachinayak]

Originally Posted by Eddy

Playing at the same venue is not necessarily an advantage- ask England.

Knowing upfront that you are going to play at one venue through-out the tournament is a big advantage (without any doubt). Specially, when all other teams have to balance their squad with a mix of pacers (for pitches in Pakistan) and spinners (for pitches in UAE) vs India, which only needs to include a good set of spinners in the squad, knowing they will only play on one pitch.

Having a larger squad could have negated this advantage to some extent, but given the current situation, India does have an unfair advantage, not because we planned it or manipulated to get into this situation, but a side-effect of some other factors.

That said, it cannot be denied that India has an unfair (intentional or not) advantage over all other teams in the competition.

On a side note - England does not have a backlog of spinners to take advantage even if they were in the current situation.

[mack.mehul]

Well its completely Ok if the government does not want our cricket team in pakistan for any tour or tournament. However i think that, as Pakistan was to host Champions Trophy, ICC should have made India play in pakistan or else forfeit their matches. This hybrid model is not at all desirable as there may be a difference in playing conditions from one country to the other.

P.S. the Dubai stadium pitch is a bowlers paradise and if india ends up playing NZ, Australia on this pitch, it maybe a big problem for them while if the team was playing in pakistan where they have flat wickets, it would have suited our team better, but as always the politics prevail over the sport.

[Emvi]

I'm not going to comment on whether the playing arrangement offered to the Indian team is right or wrong.

However, no matter what the tournament schedule is or what the playing conditions are, you can't win unless you play well. And yes, no matter how powerful the BCCI is, it can do nothing about the toss or the rules of the game, for that matter. If the governing body, ICC, has no qualms about it, I don't think it's an issue at all.

[DigitalOne]

Originally Posted by ABHI_1512

The pitch invader that you talk about DID NOT attack Rachin Ravindra BUT wanted to hug him.

Let's be clear - Hugging, without consent, is an assault under law in any civilized country (not sure about Pakistan though). "Hugging" while carrying a poster of the leader of a banned organisation (Tehreek-e-Labbaik) is a brazen act of mental terrorism. It is up to you if you want to justify this by equating with other pitch invasions in other countries.

[Bhargav7]

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

Let's be clear - Hugging, without consent, is an assault under law in any civilized country (not sure about Pakistan though).

Not a law expert - but I often see footballers hugged by pitch invaders. And when I mean footballers, it is not in local games. Like the real pros like Ronaldo, Messi, etc.

Generally the pitch invaders are let go. European clubs may sometime put stadium bans, either temporary or permanent.

It was a massive surprise for many of us, the fans when we saw police manhandling the pitch invader in the T20 world cup in USA. But again, USA works fairly different from Europe and other regions.