Key points
- Hybrid model allows India to play exclusively in Dubai
- It leads to competitive imbalance: Pat Cummins
- No travel gives India undeniable advantage: Michael Atherton
ISLAMABAD: The 2025 ICC Champions Trophy has been mired in controversy due to the International Cricket Council’s (ICC) decision to schedule all of India’s matches at the Dubai International Cricket Stadium.
Consequently, a hybrid model was adopted, allowing India to play exclusively in Dubai while other teams competed across various Pakistani venues. This decision has sparked criticism from prominent international players and commentators, who argue that it grants India an undue advantage, according to Cricinfo.
Pat Cummins
Australian captain Pat Cummins openly criticised the ICC’s decision, highlighting the competitive imbalance it introduces. He remarked, “I think it’s good that the tournament can go on, but it does give them (India) a huge advantage playing on the same ground.”
Cummins emphasised that India’s consistent play at a single venue allows them to become more attuned to the pitch conditions, potentially benefiting their performance.
Nasser Hussain and Michael Atherton
Former England captains Nasser Hussain and Michael Atherton also voiced concerns regarding India’s exclusive use of the Dubai venue. Atherton noted that playing at just one venue without the need to travel provides India with an “undeniable advantage.” He stated, “They don’t have to travel either between venues or, you know, between countries, as a lot of other teams have to do.”
“What about the advantage India have in playing only in Dubai, which seems to me to be a hard-to-quantify advantage, but an undeniable advantage?” former England captain Michael Atherton asked Nasser Hussain on the Sky Sports Podcast.
“They’re playing at just one venue. Therefore, the selection, you know, can focus in on the conditions in Dubai.”
Hussain concurred, adding that India’s familiarity with the Dubai pitch allows them to tailor their team selection effectively, particularly by including additional spinners suited to the conditions.
Steve Smith
Australian skipper Steve Smith, following his team’s semi-final loss to India in Dubai, acknowledged the advantage India might have had due to their consistent play at the same venue.
Jonathan Agnew
Veteran cricket commentator Jonathan Agnew has been vocal about the perceived inequity. He described the scheduling as a “farce,” highlighting that India remains stationed in Dubai, playing all their matches at the same venue, while other teams face extensive travel between Pakistan and the UAE.
“I feel very uncomfortable about the way that India is being treated at the moment,” former England cricketer and popular broadcaster Jonathan Agnew told media.
Agnew’s comments underscore concerns about the competitive imbalance introduced by this arrangement, according to the Australian Broadcasting Association.
“This is wrong. If you’re going to play an international tournament, you can’t pick and choose where you play and where you’re not going to play. I don’t see how long this can carry on for? It makes a farce of these tournaments,” he added.
Tournament’s fairness
The decision to allow India to play exclusively in Dubai has raised broader concerns about the tournament’s fairness. Critics argue that this arrangement disrupts the level playing field essential in international competitions, according to Cricinfo.
The lack of travel and consistent pitch conditions potentially offer India a strategic edge over teams that must adapt to varying environments and undertake extensive travel.
The ICC has defended its decision, citing the necessity to accommodate India’s concerns while ensuring their participation in the tournament.
The hybrid model was proposed as a compromise to maintain the event’s schedule and commercial interests. However, this stance has not quelled the criticism from various quarters of the cricketing community.
