Drama and defiance: How ICC refused to bend to PCB’s pressure

After high drama, confusion, and extreme uncertainty, the Pakistan-UAE game in the Asia Cup eventually went ahead, though it was hardly a case of 'all's well that ends well.' The Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), full of fury and bluster, was forced to accept the very official it had steadfastly opposed, as the International Cricket Council (ICC) stuck to its ground to uphold its stated policy of protecting match officials from intimidation.

The PCB claimed that match referee Andy Pycroft, at the centre of the storm, apologised to the Pakistan manager and captain before the start of the delayed match on Wednesday (September 17). However, that version is not without a counter-narrative. Sources suggest it was more of a clarification than an apology, with the referee expressing regret over any miscommunication in the September 14 handshake episode. Curiously enough, the video of the incident, circulated by the PCB, contained no audio.

Over the past couple of days, the ICC and PCB were engaged in a flurry of emails, phone conversations, and video calls, with the central issue being the PCB's demand for the removal of Pycroft from the panel of referees for the Asia Cup – a condition it declared non-negotiable for its continued participation. Not only did Pycroft remain on the panel, he also went on to officiate the contentious game on Wednesday night. The demand was decisively rejected during all those rounds of deliberations.

The ICC made its position clear that the issue was not about replacing one official but about upholding policy as the game's parent body. It was determined to go to any extent to protect match officials so they could perform their duties with fairness, impartiality, neutrality, and, above all, without fear or favour in the face of intimidation or pressure tactics. A change of umpire, the ICC feared, would have set a dangerous precedent. It conveyed this message unambiguously to the PCB that the appointment of match officials is a centralised ICC decision and cannot be influenced by the interests of any member board.

However, it was not a case of blindly protecting an official. The ICC conducted an inquiry and concluded that Pycroft had done nothing wrong. In one of its communications to the PCB – part of an exchange of three mails from each side – the ICC stated there was no valid reason to replace him. Proposals were floated to drop Pycroft from Pakistan's fixtures, particularly Wednesday's game, and bring in Richie Richardson as a middle ground. But the world body refused to accept that compromise formula.

The face-off between the ICC and the PCB began after the world body rejected the PCB's demand to expel Pycroft, @L0$ on September 16. The ICC maintained that some of the concerns raised by the PCB related to the organisers – in this case, the ACC – rather than to the match referee himself.

The negotiations on behalf of the ICC were led by CEO Sanjog Gupta, while Mohsin Naqvi and Salman Naseer represented the PCB. The PCB demanded an inquiry under ICC regulations into the incidents before, during, and after the September 14 match between India and Pakistan. The ICC responded by outlining the scope of such an inquiry – specifying on what terms it could be conducted and against whom.

Meanwhile, the PCB claimed moral victory of sorts in the issue by maintaining that the ICC had agreed to conduct an inquiry. "The ICC has expressed its willingness to conduct an inquiry into the code of conduct violation that occurred during the September 14 match," the Pakistan board said in a statement. It further added, "The ICC's match referee, Andy Pycroft, apologized to the manager and captain of the Pakistan cricket team. Pycroft had barred the captains of India and Pakistan from shaking hands before the match, and the PCB strongly objected to his actions."

In Lahore, Naqvi said, "This crisis has been going on since the match against India. We had an objection to Pycroft's conduct. This matter was only solved after Pycroft apologised over miscommunication at the toss," adding, "Cricket and politics cannot go together."

For all the ultimatums and pullout threats, it would not have been easy for the PCB to actually withdraw. Such a move would likely have triggered a series of legal disputes, court cases and arbitrations, dealing a significant financial blow to its coffers. In the end, good sense prevailed, even if the situation was far from a case of 'all's well that ends well'.