As the T20 World Cup prepares to kick off this weekend, the boardroom battle is heating up faster than the action on the pitch. The Pakistan Cricket Board is reportedly preparing to invoke the "Force Majeure" clause to justify its boycott of the February 15 clash against India.
For the first time, Pakistan’s leadership has explicitly linked the boycott to the exclusion of Bangladesh. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif confirmed to his cabinet that the decision is a "considered stance" to stand by their neighbours after they were replaced by Scotland.
We won’t play the match against India because there should be no politics on the sports field... We should completely stand by Bangladesh, and I think this is a very appropriate decision
Shehbaz Sharif, Prime Minister of Pakistan
The BCCI has been quick to dismiss the PCB’s legal posturing as "mischief." Officials point to a glaring inconsistency: on the very same day the Pakistan government issued the boycott order for the T20 squad, the Pakistan Under-19 team took the field against India in their own World Cup fixture without hesitation.
Lack of distinction: The Pakistan PM is the patron-in-chief of the PCB, and the board’s chairman, Mohsin Naqvi, is a serving government minister-making the "uncontrollable government order" argument difficult to sell.
Neutral ground: Unlike previous boycotts based on security at a specific venue, this match is in Colombo, a neutral site where Pakistan has already agreed to play all their other fixtures.
The PCB is banking on historical precedents where boards were not punished for following government orders. However, the ICC appears to be drawing a line in the sand due to the sheer commercial scale of an India-Pakistan fixture.
In legal terms, Force Majeure protects a party from being penalized for failing to fulfil a contract due to an "Act of God" or "Acts of Government."
PCB’s claim: The government’s social media post on February 1 is a binding state directive that makes playing the match legally impossible for the board.
ICC’s rebuttal: The world body argues that "selective participation" based on political solidarity rather than safety or war undermines the "sanctity of competition."
