The International Cricket Council (ICC) made a significant announcement on December 19, stating that India and Pakistan will play their matches in ICC tournaments at neutral venues until 2028. This decision was confirmed alongside the approval of a hybrid hosting model for the ICC Men’s Champions Trophy 2025, a development that reflects the ongoing geopolitical tensions between the two cricketing giants. While the arrangement aims to address these challenges diplomatically, it has sparked debate over its broader implications for the sport.
According to the ICC, India will play its matches during the Champions Trophy 2025 at a neutral venue, most likely the UAE. In return, Pakistan will not be required to travel to India for ICC tournaments during this period, including the Women’s ODI World Cup in 2025 and the Men’s T20 World Cup in 2026. This agreement follows India’s longstanding stance of not playing in Pakistan, which had thrown the Champions Trophy’s future into question. The ICC reiterated that the policy applies to all ICC events hosted by either India or Pakistan during the 2024–27 cycle. Pakistan has also been awarded hosting rights for the Women’s T20 World Cup in 2028, which will follow the same neutral venue arrangement.
The Champions Trophy 2025, scheduled to take place in February and March, has already attracted attention due to the hybrid model, where Pakistan retains the overall hosting rights but will not host India’s matches. However, the full schedule and specific venues are yet to be announced, leaving fans and stakeholders in suspense. The ICC’s statement confirmed that no financial compensation would be provided to Pakistan for losing a portion of its hosting rights, a decision that has not gone unnoticed among cricketing circles.
While the arrangement resolves immediate concerns between India and Pakistan, it poses significant challenges for other teams participating in ICC tournaments. The 2023 Asia Cup provided a glimpse of these difficulties. Co-hosted by Pakistan and Sri Lanka, the tournament forced teams to travel frequently between the two countries, enduring logistical complications and adapting to vastly different playing conditions. Bangladesh, for example, started its campaign in Kandy, traveled to Lahore for subsequent matches, and returned to Sri Lanka—all within a span of two weeks. Such a grueling schedule strained players and support staff, leading to concerns about fairness and competitive balance.
The challenges are expected to multiply in larger tournaments like the T20 World Cup in 2026, which will feature 20 teams. With multiple countries likely to face India and Pakistan in separate venues, the travel requirements could disrupt preparations and affect performance. The strain on players, support staff, and broadcasters will only grow if hybrid hosting becomes a norm in global cricket. Broadcasters, in particular, face added uncertainty due to late venue confirmations, complicating their ability to plan coverage and maximize audience engagement.
Despite these issues, the ICC maintains that its decision was made after consulting major stakeholder boards in international cricket. While most boards have supported the hybrid model, logistical concerns remain unresolved. Former Bangladesh Cricket Board operations chairman Jalal Yunus highlighted the discomfort players experience due to frequent travel, including long airport waits, baggage handling, and jet lag. Although tournament organizers provide chartered flights to ease the burden, the challenges of playing in different countries under tight schedules are evident.
The hybrid model also raises questions about its impact on fans and the global image of cricket. The ICC’s inability to finalize schedules and venues well in advance not only disrupts fan experiences but also risks alienating audiences in emerging cricket markets. As cricket prepares for its debut at the 2028 Olympics, ensuring smooth organization and inclusivity will be essential for attracting new audiences and expanding the sport’s reach.
This arrangement between India and Pakistan underscores the complexities of organizing global tournaments in a politically divided world. While the neutral venue policy reflects a pragmatic approach to addressing geopolitical tensions, it also highlights the need for long-term solutions. The ICC must engage with member boards, streamline logistics, and prioritize fan engagement to ensure that its tournaments remain accessible and equitable. Without these measures, cricket’s ambition of becoming a truly global sport could face significant obstacles in the years ahead.
