When Harmanpreet Kaur and her teammates walked away from the presentation ceremony after winning the 2026 Women’s Asia Cup, the scene in Dubai felt strikingly familiar. India had conquered Sri Lanka by 72 runs and secured another continental title, yet the trophy that should have completed the celebrations remained out of their hands because Asian Cricket Council president Mohsin Naqvi stood on the presentation dais.
Unlike the chaotic scenes that followed the men’s Asia Cup final a year earlier, however, there was little uncertainty this time. The BCCI had already informed the ACC that the Indian team would not receive the trophy from Naqvi if it won the tournament, thereby turning what had once looked like an extraordinary one-off protest into an established institutional position.
That second refusal brought the deterioration of the BCCI’s relationship with Naqvi into sharp focus. What began as a conventional disagreement over tournament logistics had, over the course of nearly two years, hardened into one of the most unusual administrative stand-offs in modern cricket, shaped as much by politics and diplomacy as by what happened on the field.
There was little evidence of hostility when Naqvi became PCB chairman in February 2024. Only weeks later, after meeting then-BCCI secretary Jay Shah during an ICC gathering, Naqvi described their conversation as “very fruitful”, even though he was careful not to reveal the finer details of what had been discussed.
The central issue, even then, was obvious. Pakistan was preparing to host the 2025 Champions Trophy, while uncertainty persisted over whether India would travel across the border, but Naqvi’s public tone suggested negotiation rather than confrontation. That changed dramatically before the end of the year.
The first serious break came when the BCCI informed the ICC that India would not travel to Pakistan for the Champions Trophy following advice from the Indian government. Pakistan, which had spent considerable time preparing to host its first major ICC tournament in nearly three decades, rejected the prospect of immediately shifting to another hybrid arrangement.
Naqvi publicly insisted that Pakistan remained prepared to stage the entire competition at home, while the PCB sought clarity from the ICC over India’s refusal. The disagreement dragged on for weeks, with neither side initially prepared to yield, and the tournament’s schedule caught in the middle.
Eventually, an arrangement was reached under which India’s Champions Trophy matches would be played in Dubai. A broader reciprocal formula was also created for India-Pakistan matches at ICC events hosted by either country during the relevant cycle, allowing the tournament to proceed without requiring India to enter Pakistan. The compromise solved the immediate problem, but it did little to repair the relationship. The dispute had created the first clear fault line between Naqvi’s PCB and the BCCI, and events over the following months would deepen it considerably.
Naqvi’s position became even more complicated in April 2025 when he took over as president of the Asian Cricket Council. He was now simultaneously the PCB chairman, the head of Asian cricket, and Pakistan’s federal interior minister, an extraordinary combination of roles that meant his dealings with the BCCI could no longer be viewed purely through a cricketing lens.
The Pahalgam terror attack later that month, followed by the sharp military escalation between India and Pakistan in May, transformed the atmosphere altogether. Naqvi was no longer merely another cricket administrator from a rival board; from the BCCI’s perspective, he was also a senior member of the Pakistani government during one of the most strained periods in bilateral relations in years.
That distinction became central to everything that followed. India’s government subsequently maintained that its teams could continue facing Pakistan in multinational competitions such as the Asia Cup and ICC events, even though bilateral sporting ties would remain suspended. Playing Pakistan, therefore, and engaging ceremonially with a Pakistani government minister became two very different questions.
The tension soon moved beyond the Champions Trophy dispute. An ACC annual meeting in Dhaka became another source of friction, with disagreement over the meeting itself and uncertainty surrounding arrangements for the Asia Cup.
Although the tournament was eventually confirmed for the UAE, the episode demonstrated how far relations had shifted since Naqvi’s cordial meeting with Shah in early 2024. What had begun as disagreement between the PCB and BCCI over one tournament was increasingly affecting the functioning of the continental body that Naqvi now headed. The 2025 Asia Cup would then turn administrative friction into something far more visible.
India and Pakistan’s first meeting of the tournament ended without the customary post-match handshakes. Suryakumar Yadav dedicated India’s victory to the victims of the Pahalgam attack and the country’s armed forces, while Pakistan subsequently raised objections over his comments.
The tension intensified during their second meeting, when gestures made by Pakistani players became another source of controversy, and complaints were exchanged. What had once been a boardroom disagreement was now unfolding publicly through players, officials and symbolic gestures in front of millions watching around the world.
By the time India and Pakistan reached the final on September 28, the contest carried baggage far beyond cricket. India won by five wickets, but the most enduring image of the night came after the match. The Indian team refused to receive the Asia Cup trophy from Naqvi, and the presentation was delayed as officials attempted to resolve the impasse.
No resolution came. India eventually celebrated without the trophy, with Suryakumar and his teammates miming the act of lifting an invisible cup as the actual silverware remained away from the champions. That was the point at which the relationship effectively crossed from strained to openly hostile.
The disagreement did not end with the final. BCCI representatives later confronted Naqvi during ACC meetings over the whereabouts and presentation of the trophy and the players’ medals, with Indian officials maintaining that the champions should be able to receive what they had won without being compelled to take it personally from the ACC president.
The issue dragged on for months and became another symbol of the deteriorating equation between Naqvi and the BCCI. There were occasional signs of a possible thaw, including discussions on the sidelines of ICC meetings, but no settlement ultimately produced the ceremonial handover India had refused in Dubai.
By the time another Asia Cup arrived in 2026, the precedent had already been established.
India’s women reached the final against Sri Lanka with the issue already hanging over the presentation ceremony. This time, however, the BCCI did not leave its position to be determined after the result; the ACC had been informed in advance that India would not receive the trophy from Naqvi if Harmanpreet’s side became champions.
When India completed a commanding 72-run victory, that is precisely what happened. Naqvi participated in the presentation ceremony, but the Indian team stayed away from receiving its medals and trophy from him, repeating the symbolic rejection that had followed the men’s triumph a year earlier. There was less confusion and considerably less theatre than in 2025, but that almost made the message stronger. What had once been an extraordinary reaction to an emotionally charged final had become policy.
The journey from Naqvi’s “very fruitful” meeting with Jay Shah in 2024 to two Indian teams refusing Asia Cup trophies from him is therefore not the story of one isolated controversy. The Champions Trophy created the original administrative fracture, Pahalgam and the subsequent India-Pakistan confrontation transformed the nature of the relationship, and the 2025 Asia Cup converted that hostility into a public and deeply symbolic dispute. A year later, the women’s Asia Cup demonstrated that none of it had really disappeared. India have now won two continental titles while declining to receive either trophy from the man who presides over Asian cricket, an outcome that would have appeared almost unimaginable when Naqvi first described his dealings with the BCCI as cordial little more than two years ago.
