Concerns over deliberate scheduling intensify after Asia Cup controversies
Former England captain Michael Atherton has called on the International Cricket Council (ICC) to reconsider its approach to scheduling marquee India-Pakistan clashes at major global tournaments, warning that cricket risks being used as a “proxy for propaganda” amid growing political tensions between the two nations.
Writing in his column for The Times, Atherton pointed to recent controversies during the Asia Cup as evidence that the rivalry between India and Pakistan is being orchestrated to serve economic and political ends, rather than sporting merit.
The financial engine behind India-Pakistan fixtures
Atherton highlighted the enormous commercial value generated by matches between India and Pakistan, which has made the fixture a cornerstone of the ICC’s broadcast strategy.
“Despite its scarcity (maybe, in part, because of its scarcity), it is a fixture that carries huge economic clout, one of the main reasons why the broadcast rights for ICC tournaments are worth so much — roughly $3 billion for the most recent rights cycle in 2023-27,” he wrote.
With the decline in interest and revenue from bilateral cricket, especially outside of the Big Three nations, the ICC’s flagship events have taken on outsized financial importance — with India-Pakistan matchups often serving as the primary revenue drivers.
“Due to the relative decline in the value of bilateral matches, ICC events have grown in frequency and importance, and so the India and Pakistan fixture is crucial to the balance sheets of those who would not otherwise have any skin in the game,” Atherton noted.
This dependence on marquee fixtures has led to repeated scheduling of the two teams in the same group at ICC events. Since 2013, India and Pakistan have faced each other in every ICC tournament, and the 2025 Asia Cup format even created the possibility of up to three matches between the sides — all of which were realized.
Rising political tensions on and off the field
The 2025 Asia Cup was marred by geopolitical tensions and incidents that underlined how sensitive the India-Pakistan rivalry has become.
The tournament was held in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor, which inflamed cross-border relations. In protest, Indian players refused to shake hands with their Pakistani counterparts. Pakistani players were then seen making provocative gestures during a Super 4s match. The final ended with Indian captain Suryakumar Yadav declining to accept the trophy from Pakistan’s Interior Minister and PCB chairman, Mohsin Naqvi.
Against this backdrop, Atherton warned that the ICC’s current approach risks undermining the integrity of the sport.
“If cricket was once the vehicle for diplomacy, it is now, clearly, a proxy for broader tensions and for propaganda. There is little justification, in any case, for a serious sport to arrange tournament fixtures to suit its economic needs and now that the rivalry is being exploited in other ways, there is even less justification for it,” he wrote.
A call for transparency in future tournament draws
Looking ahead, Atherton urged the ICC to adopt a more transparent and randomized fixture draw process for global tournaments — one that does not guarantee an India-Pakistan clash each time. He argued that while the rivalry has undeniable commercial appeal, the sport’s credibility and ethical standing should not be compromised for the sake of predictable ratings boosts.
“For the next broadcast rights cycle, the fixture draw before ICC events should be transparent and if the two teams do not meet every time, so be it,” Atherton concluded.
As the ICC prepares for its next cycle of events and negotiates new broadcast deals, Atherton’s comments add weight to the ongoing debate around the role of politics, profit, and fairness in the scheduling of cricket’s most high-profile rivalry.
