Is Asia Cup’s Hybrid Model Worth The Compromise?

In a significant thaw from the showdown stance adopted until last month between the two fractious Asian neighbours, the Asia Cup, as expected, will be salvaged. But while Pakistan will have significantly climbed down from their earlier adamant stance, the question to be asked is, at what cost? Is it worth it and what will cricket have to pay in the long run for this compromise?

Last month, on the sidelines of the Asian Cricket Council (ACC) meeting in Bahrain, Pakistan stuck its feet in the ground, adamant to keep its hosting rights of the Asia Cup 2023 even as Sri Lanka tried to broker peace by stepping in.

The stance and subsequent deadlock was hardened after Jay Shah, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) secretary and also, the ACC chairman, stated in October 2022, that India would not travel to Pakistan for the scheduled Asia Cup. At the heart of the problem was the ongoing difficult relationship between the two neighbours. There has been next to nothing seen, in terms of bilateral series between the two countries since 2008.

However, in a significant development, an informal solution appears to have been reached mutually and in consultation with other Asian Council members. Najam Sethi, who took over Rameez Raja as the interim Pakistan Cricket Board chairman, stated this on the sidelines of the ICC quarterly meeting in Dubai, “We have decided on this hybrid model that Pakistan plays it Asia Cup at home and India their matches at a neutral venue and that is our proposal to the Asian Cricket Council.”

Although this has to yet meet with formal approval, on paper, it appears that peace has been brokered, and notwithstanding unforeseen scenarios, the Asia Cup is scheduled to go back to its original avatar as a 50 overs a side format. In the past, it had to adjust and adapt to the Twenty20 format when a World Cup of that nature presented itself in a particular year.

This makes sense because the Asia Cup will take anything it can get, including serving as a misguided dress rehearsal as a mini World Cup of sorts. It is a precursor to the ICC Cricket World Cup 2023 to be hosted by India not shortly thereafter.

Although these frequent negotiations, not to mention underhanded and veiled threats and quid pro quo discussions about who needs whom most, tend to dilute and undermine the value, for the moment, it keeps at least six teams interested.

Apart from India and Pakistan, a qualifier will also share their space in one group while Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Afghanistan hold fort in the other group as per original design. And if original scheduling is kept, then there is a possibility that the tournament could see as many as three India-Pakistan contests, provided both teams make it to the final.

There is also the question of India’s investment and team India’s commitment. Although no team would deliberately want to lose just because losing can become just as much as a habit as winning, India’s subdued performance such as theirs last year does take aware some of the high profile attention, even if Pakistan, Sri Lanka and any other team technically qualifier as worthy contender based on their performance on the day alone.

It keeps Asia on the map as a player, in the larger context where every other tournament and continent are being bypassed in the way of Twenty20 domestic tournaments taking commercial priority. For how long, if this is the case where so much uncertainty and bargaining ballooning around every edition, is something that might need to be asked at some point.

There is little doubt that cricket, as it presently stands, suffers from a vast imbalance. Although the unfettered spread of Twenty20 leagues around the world have appeared to bridge the gap between the permanent members and the associate teams, the truth of the matter is that even amongst the less than a dozen permanent members, cricket is heavily skewed based on relationship status, even under the International Cricket Council’s FTP (Future Tours Programme).

India and Pakistan are arguably the most avidly watched teams at tussle with each other, even eclipsing the traditional Ashes. The unique aspect of an Indo-Pak confrontation on the field is that irrespective of where it is played, it generates worldwide interest for the broadcasters and, draws huge crowds wherever it is staged, given the huge expat population and diaspora around the world.

In that light, the idea of a proxy host, while diminishing Pakistan’s political status as a safe, terror-free state, is still a lucrative prospect for even those that have never hosted a Test match in their own right.

A number of possibilities open before the cricket world should Pakistan abdicate their position on hosting rights, from England to the UAE and Oman.

While Pakistan realise the preservation of their reinitiated status as hosts, as well as the commercial interests they can keep in entirety without having to share the spoils, there is a sense that ultimately while the world laps up the contest, no fan deserves to have the contest in their own backyard than those belonging to India and Pakistan, as the case maybe.

With self-preservation paramount not only for Pakistan but also, for world cricket in its eternal bid for world domination, having a contest of such unparalleled rivalry is not only important but also, imperative.

Have Pakistan and India arrived at a compromise or the only possible outcome to the Asia Cup getting scheduled on an otherwise packed international cricket calendar? If it is commitment for commitment’s sake, then that is also what brought cricket to the state of having World Cups in consecutive years – and not just World Cups but World Cups in the same format.

Pakistan have already spoken about a possible reciprocal relationship for the compromise come the ICC Cricket World Cup 2023. Although there have been threats of pull outs in the past, Pakistan is also putting it out there about the consideration for the possibility of Pakistan adopting a similar hybrid model approach.

Pakistan have the option to play their World Cup matches later this year not in India but a neutral venue. Is that in the World Cup’s interests and does it set a dangerous precedent on such a huge stage?

After all the last time Australia and the West Indies refused to play in Sri Lanka during the World Cup in 1996, both teams had to forfeit their points in sticking to that decision.

This is something that has to be viewed in one of two ways: either with Pakistan seriously contemplating this move for genuine reasons or a tit-for-tat move or publicly exploring this option as a feeble way of asserting that they still have control over the matter and not being dictated to by the Board of Control for Cricket in India or the Asian Cricket Council.

While there has been the tete-a-tete about who needs this series, or any for that matter, to happen, Pakistan’s Najam Sethi went on record to state, “Our (Pakistan) government has imposed no restrictions about playing against India. But I can say right now that the public mood is that we are not needy and we can stand on our own feet financially and we want to play cricket with India honourably. We are also negotiating with the ACC.”

That said, there was also yet another expression of expectation as Sethi touched upon the fact that Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, the Pakistan’s foreign ministers presence in Goa for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Council meeting would bolster the relationship rebuilding between the two nations.

“We have been told that, maybe the ice will keep on melting. If this happen, when the Champions Trophy is held in Pakistan in 2025, India would consider playing in Pakistan. We have been advised to play the Asia Cup at a neutral venue and also, to go to India for the World Cup.”

If it is not the Pakistan government that is interfering in this matter, one can only assume that this ‘advice’ is being administered to Pakistan as part of the ‘good for you’ bit by the Asian Cricket Council, which is essentially India’s voice for the better part given that India does generate over 70 percent of the world’s cricket revenue.

That this would not have come without some rebuttal, threat and then a compromise cannot be ruled out.

Right now the way the cards have been dealt, it is a significant step down for Pakistan softening their stance from wanting to pull out of the tournament altogether if stripped of hosting rights to now acquiescing to the possibility of playing a two-venue tournament.

For India, where BCCI officials have not been shy of stating that India did not need the Asia Cup as far back as during the pandemic year when the Indian Premier League seemed the singular focal point, the compromise seems as much in favour of commercial interests of India’s as much as in the interest of holding sway over the Asian cricket contingent as the player that gets it done.

No time like the present in particular since the BCCI representative also just happens to be the present Asian Cricket Council chairman.