advertisement
In what has otherwise been a lacklustre Asia Cup, the most significant talking point has had little to do with batting, bowling, or fielding. In fact, it has had very little to do with cricket at all.
And hence the questionnaire — Why did they not? What’ll happen now? Will India face consequences?
Let’s tackle them, one at a time.
It has to do with Pakistan’s involvement — at least, as claimed by India — in the Pahalgam attack of 22 April, which led to 22 innocent lives being lost. India retaliated with Operation Sindoor, prompting countermeasures from Pakistan and further deepening the animosity between the two neighbours.
Against this backdrop, Indian captain Suryakumar Yadav, who was already under a lot of scrutiny and criticism for having exchanged greetings with Pakistan’s skipper Salman Ali Agha during the pre-tournament captains’ press conference — albeit, he simply reacted to Agha’s approach — opted to treat the game merely as a professional commitment. In accordance with that, he decided to do away with the formalities, and his team followed suit.
On being asked about whether he has violated the spirit of the game, he said:
There is no definitive answer to this. Why? Because there is no singular or unambiguous definition of the 'spirit of cricket.'
The ICC’s Playing Conditions include a preamble dedicated to it, emphasising respect as the cornerstone.
Further, Article 1.4 of the T20I Playing Conditions explicitly states:
Yet, the possibility of India being sanctioned, or even reprimanded for not shaking hands is virtually nil.
ICC rulebook stresses the importance of spirit, but nowhere does it stipulate a requirement to shake hands before or after matches. Handshakes may be tradition, but tradition is not law. It might be a sign of cordiality, but cordiality cannot become a compulsion.
Article 2 of ICC’s Code of Conduct mentions numerous grounds on which a team can be penalised. They are:
2.1: Excessing appealing
2.2: Abuse of cricket equipment or clothing, ground equipment or fixtures and fittings during an International Match.
2.3 Use of an audible obscenity during an International Match.
2.4: Disobeying an Umpire’s instruction during an International Match
2.5: Using language, actions or gestures which disparage or which could provoke an aggressive reaction from a batter upon his/her dismissal during an International Match.
2.6: Using a gesture that is obscene, offensive or insulting during an International Match.
2.7: Public criticism of, or inappropriate comment in relation to an incident occurring in an International Match or any Player, Player Support Personnel, Match Official or team participating in any International Match, irrespective of when such criticism or inappropriate comment is made.
2.8: Showing dissent at an Umpire’s decision during an International Match.
2.9: Throwing a ball (or any other item of cricket equipment such as a water bottle) at or near a Player, Player Support Personnel, Umpire, Match Referee or any other third person in an inappropriate and/or dangerous manner during an International Match.
2.10: Unfair play
2.11: Any attempt to manipulate an International Match for inappropriate strategic or tactical reasons.
2.12: Inappropriate physical contact with a Player, Player Support Personnel, Umpire, Match Referee or any other person (including a spectator) during an International Match.
2.13: Personal abuse of a Player, Player Support Personnel, Umpire or Match Referee during an International Match.
2.14: Changing the condition of the ball in breach of clause 41.3 of the ICC Standard Test Match, ODI and T20I Playing Conditions.
2.15: Attempting to gain an unfair advantage during an International Match
2.16: Intimidation of an Umpire or Match Referee whether by language or conduct (including gestures) during an International Match.
2.17: Threat of assault on another Player, Player Support Personnel, Umpire or Match Referee or any other person (including a Spectator) during an International Match.
2.18: Physical assault of another Player, Player Support Personnel, Umpire, Match Referee or any other person (including a spectator) during an International Match
2.19: Any act of violence on the field of play during an International Match
2.20: Conduct that is contrary to the spirit of the game
2.21: Conduct that brings the game into disrepute
Can India be penalised under ICC’s Unfair Play rules? Absolutely not, for that section only entails — tampering with the ball, deliberately distracting the striker, deliberately obstructing the batter, deliberately bowling dangerous and unfair short deliveries, deliberately bowling dangerous and unfair non-pitching deliveries, deliberately bowling a front-foot no ball, fielding time wasting time, batter wasting time, batter damaging the pitch, fielder damaging the pitch.
There’s another section called Players’ Conduct. India did not violate any rules in this regard as well, for misconduct refers to — physically assaulting a player, committing any form of violence, verbally abusing a player, or threatening assault on the umpire.
India would have risked with a sanction had they been violent, either with their words or actions. They might have received a penalty had they intimidated the opposition by any means.
They did not. Yadav and his men conducted themselves professionally, and regardless of whether the denial of handshakes was unprofessional or not, it will not cause them any reprimand.
For a couple of reasons.
Firstly, Pakistan were conveyed of India’s decision to not shake hands or exchange team sheets during the toss by match referee Andy Pycroft. Claiming it to be a non-acceptable act on Pycroft’s part, they lodged a formal protest and requested the International Cricket Council (ICC) to remove the Zimbabwean from the Asia Cup.
However, according to a Cricbuzz report, ICC has already rejected Pakistan’s plea, for Pycroft had only conveyed what he was told, and had no part to play in India’s decision.
That aside, it has also been reported that Pakistan were aware of India’s decision to not shake hands only during the toss. They did try to exchange formalities after the game, but India’s dressing room was locked shut almost immediately after the victory was secured.
This controversy is hardly unprecedented. In 2023, Scotland refused to shake hands with Nepal spinner Sandeep Lamichhane during the ICC Men’s Cricket World Cup League 2. At the time, Lamichhane was accused of rape, and was out on bail. Scotland issued a statement to justify their stance, wherein they mentioned they are against all forms of assault and violence.
Very recently, India were involved in another handshake refusal controvery during the Manchester Test against England. Albeit, it had to do with purely cricket’s technicalities, and hence has not been mentioned in this article.
Yes, the controversy could have been avoided completely. The BCCI might have sidestepped the furore altogether by withdrawing from the Asia Cup — as India did in 1986 when political tensions with Sri Lanka ran high. But this time, the government insisted on participation, citing “practices of international sports bodies and the interest of our own sportspersons” in multinational tournaments.
Yes, there is precedence of that, too.
At the 1962 Asian Games, Indonesia denied visas to Israeli and Taiwanese delegations. This was done to stand in solidarity with the People Republic of China and the Muslim-dominated countries from the Middle East.
However, it was in complete violation of the rules, and as a result, Indonedia were suspended by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) from participating in the 1964 Olympics.
The question, however, remains: will this continue? India and Pakistan are very likely to meet again in this Asia Cup, and later at the ICC Women’s World Cup in Colombo. Beyond cricket, India’s javelin star, Neeraj Chopra will face Pakistan’s Arshad Nadeem at the 2025 World Athletics Championships in Tokyo. Will handshakes be withheld on those stages too?
Naqvi has already voiced his disapproval of India’s stance.
Will India be open to shaking hands with Naqvi?