The International Cricket Council (ICC) is under fire—not from fans or fringe critics, but from one of the game’s most respected voices. Jason Gillespie, former Australia fast bowler and ex-head coach of Pakistan, has publicly called out what he describes as glaring ICC double standards in its recent handling of two high-profile tournament decisions involving India and Bangladesh.
Gillespie’s outrage centers on the stark contrast between the ICC’s treatment of Bangladesh—banned from the 2026 Men’s T20 World Cup after its government refused to allow the team to travel to India—and its accommodation of India, which will play the 2025 ICC Champions Trophy at a neutral venue because it declined to tour Pakistan over security concerns. “Why were India allowed?” Gillespie asked pointedly in a recent interview . The question has since ignited a fierce debate across the global cricket community.
In late 2025, the ICC confirmed that Bangladesh would not participate in the 2026 Men’s T20 World Cup, hosted entirely in India. The reason? The Bangladesh government denied the national team clearance to travel due to longstanding security and diplomatic sensitivities. Despite the Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) pleading for matches to be moved to a neutral venue like the UAE or Sri Lanka, the ICC refused—and replaced Bangladesh with Scotland .
Meanwhile, in an almost mirror-image scenario, India had earlier declined to travel to Pakistan for the 2025 ICC Champions Trophy, citing similar security concerns. Instead of penalizing India or excluding them, the ICC relocated the entire tournament to a neutral venue—widely reported to be the UAE—ensuring India’s participation without compromise .
For observers like Gillespie, this isn’t just inconsistent—it’s a textbook case of unequal treatment based on political and commercial influence.
Speaking with characteristic bluntness, Gillespie didn’t hold back. “If you’re going to have rules, apply them equally,” he stated. “Bangladesh wanted to play. They asked for their games to be moved. India didn’t want to go to Pakistan, and they got the whole tournament shifted. So why weren’t Bangladesh given the same courtesy?”
His critique cuts to the heart of a growing unease within the sport: that the ICC’s decisions are increasingly shaped by the financial clout of its biggest members—primarily India, whose broadcast rights and sponsorship deals account for over 70% of global cricket revenue .
Gillespie, who coached Pakistan during a turbulent period and understands the region’s complexities, emphasized that both nations faced genuine geopolitical constraints. Yet only one received institutional support. “It sends a terrible message to Full Members like Bangladesh—they’re treated as second-class citizens,” he added.
This incident fits into a broader narrative of perceived bias. Critics have long argued that the ICC’s governance model favors its “Big Three”—India, England, and Australia—granting them disproportionate voting power and scheduling advantages.
Other examples include:
The ICC double standards highlighted by Gillespie aren’t isolated; they reflect systemic imbalances that threaten the sport’s global integrity.
While the BCB has remained diplomatically quiet, sources within the board expressed frustration privately. “We did everything by the book,” said one official. “But when your hands are tied by your own government, what can you do?”
Former Sri Lankan captain Kumar Sangakkara weighed in on social media, calling for “a level playing field” and warning that “selective enforcement erodes trust in the game’s institutions.” Meanwhile, several associate nation coaches have echoed Gillespie’s concerns, fearing that such precedents could marginalize non-elite teams further.
Notably, even some Indian commentators acknowledged the optics issue. As one noted, “[INTERNAL_LINK:icc-governance-reform] isn’t just fair—it’s essential for cricket’s survival as a global sport.”
Going forward, the ICC faces a credibility crossroads. To restore trust, experts recommend:
Without these reforms, the perception—and reality—of favoritism will persist, potentially driving fans and talent away from the international game.
Jason Gillespie’s question—“Why were India allowed?”—is more than rhetorical. It’s a challenge to the ICC’s foundational principle of fairness. While security concerns are legitimate, the inconsistent application of solutions reveals a troubling hierarchy within world cricket.
If the ICC double standards continue unchecked, the council risks transforming from a global governing body into a club for the powerful. And in doing so, it may sacrifice the very spirit of competition that makes cricket beloved across continents.
Ravichandran Ashwin has issued a scathing critique of India's inconsistent selection policy, calling it a…
South African legend Jonty Rhodes has broken his silence on the Bangladesh T20 World Cup…
The Bangladesh Cricket Board's (BCB) withdrawal from the 2026 T20 World Cup has sent shockwaves…
In a dramatic twist, Bangladesh has been officially removed from the ICC Men’s T20 World…
In a stunning twist, Cricket Scotland has accepted the ICC’s invitation to replace Bangladesh in…
The ICC U-19 World Cup 2026 heats up as West Indies take on Ireland in…