The tensions simmering around him T20 World Cup 2026 took a new turn after the former Indian opener Chris Srikanth launched a scathing attack on the former England captain Nasir Hussain. with Bangladesh earlier withdrawal from the tournament and Pakistan He had initially questioned Hussain, who had threatened to boycott the high-profile clashes against India. International Cricket Council (ICC) its functioning indicates that the body is affected by severe effects BCCI. However, Srikkanth did not hold back in his reply and brought up England’s own controversial past to counter the criticism.
A debate that led to a debate
The T20 World Cup 2026 is surrounded by off-field drama. Bangladesh’s decision to withdraw from the competition and Pakistan’s reluctance to face India added to the already tense atmosphere. During this time, Hussain reportedly pointed out that the ICC was under the control of the BCCI and called for equal treatment of all participating teams.
These comments did not sit well with Srikkanth, who accused Hussain of selective memory. According to India’s former chief selector, such statements ignore cricket’s complicated political and financial history.
Kris Srikkanth Nasser Hussain recalls the 2003 episode
Srikkanth pointed out 2003 ODI World Cup To challenge Hussein’s position. In that tournament, which was co-hosted by South Africa, Zimbabwe and Kenya, England refused to travel to Zimbabwe for security reasons. The decision resulted in England forfeiting the match, which significantly changed the group standings and helped Kenya advance to the knockout stages.
Srikkanth recalled that Hussain was England’s captain at the time of the publication and asked why similar decisions made in the past were not viewed with the same critical lens. He argued that at the time, British withdrawal was defended as a principled position, but now India’s position is being more aggressively scrutinized.
In his typically fiery style, Srikkanth suggested that it was unfair to apply different standards depending on which cricketing nation was involved.
“In the 2003 World Cup, he was the captain when England refused to go to Zimbabwe and Kenya. Why does he want to talk now? Even Australia agreed at the last minute. England got kicked out and Kenya made it to the quarter-finals like that. You have one rule, we have one rule. At that time, England were dominant.” said Srikkanth on YouTube.
Also READ: IND vs NAM, T20 World Cup 2026: Why Abhishek Sharma and Mohammed Siraj not playing in today’s match
The financial reality of global cricket
Another key point raised by Srikkanth was the financial structure of world cricket. He highlighted that Indian fans contribute significantly to global cricket revenues through broadcasting rights, sponsorship and ticket sales. While he refrained from endorsing any undue influence, he acknowledged that such financial weight inevitably gave India a stronger voice under the ICC.
According to him, this is not a matter of “arm-twisting”, but rather a reflection of economic realities. Cricket boards operate in a business ecosystem and generating revenue plays a major role in decision making.
“They shouted at the time. It’s not fair. It’s okay if England or any other team does it. Nobody wants to roll up their sleeves. At the end of the day, a lot of the ICC’s revenue comes from Indian fans around the world, so India has a bit of an advantage. It happens in stages,” Srikkanth added.
Pakistan’s U-turn and the bigger picture
Meanwhile, Pakistan eventually reversed its boycott stance and agreed to play against India. Srikkanth said that if they chose not to participate, Pakistan would be the biggest loser, both financially and in terms of global reputation. The India-Pakistan match remains one of the most anticipated events in world cricket, attracting record-breaking audiences.
