Pakistan Cricket Board’s chairman Najam Sethi says every ICC member wants to play against India, as it helps them earn better.
India and Pakistan have not played a bilateral series in the last five years, and chances of these two countries squaring off in a bilateral series soon seem very bleak.
The political relations between the two countries have been on the bitter term in the recent times and is the major reason for the two nations not playing against each other.
The BCCI is the richest cricket board in the world, as the board earns great revenues through IPL and from so many bilateral series the country hosts. It also has the highest percentage of share in ICC’s revenue with 23%.
Sethi disagreed with the concept of BCCI holding the International Cricket Council hostage and said,
“I don’t think we need to use such words like a hostage. The fact is that broadcasters are from India, India has most money. Every ICC member wants to play India as this allows them to make money and India is a top team as well. India’s point of view or that what they think is that since they contribute most revenues to the ICC, they should get more but for us all ICC members are equal.”
The uncertainty over India hosting the Asia Cup in 2018 will continue, as the Asian Cricket Council failed to come up with a decision due to India’s reluctance to host Pakistan.
“Asia Cup and Asia Emerging Nations Cup tournaments are matters which are pending and so let us see what happens now. There have always been ups and downs in Pakistan and India relations including cricket, so it is nothing new.”
Pakistan has been making efforts to arrange a bilateral series for the two teams and these efforts have been stated as a desperate on PCB’s part which Sethi believes is wrong,
“It is not a question of us falling over to get India to play with us. It is a question of asking for our rights. It is about USD100 to 150 million dollars revenue, and it is not right for us to leave it like that. There is nothing bigger than Pakistan and India matches. We are only asking them to fulfil their contractual obligation, and if they could not adhere to it, they should not have signed the MoU with us.”