India have displayed a clinical efficiency in winning the Champions Trophy – 2025. They were one of the favorites going into the tournament and they lived up to the expectations of the fans, and the predictions of the pundits. It was a consummate performance in each of the five games, and they were rarely under pressure.
Their win hasn’t gone down well in certain quarters, like other teams and commentators, most of whom are former players. There is talk of a big scheduling ‘advantage’ because India played all their games in Dubai, making it a virtual ‘home ground’ for them, while the other teams had to travel between Pakistan and Dubai. The situation was absurd at times like when New Zealand and South Africa were both in Dubai, awaiting the result of the India-New Zealand game. There was a touch of the farcical to all this.
There was a lot of drama before the tournament, once India announced that they would not be travelling to Pakistan. After it was decided that Dubai would be the venue for India’s games, with the member boards agreeing to the schedule. Nobody raised the issue of India playing all their games at one venue, in public at least, at this point. It is only when India started winning and advancing, that the carping started. Suddenly, articles started appearing and comments were made as to how ridiculous the scheduling was. Former players like Jon Agnew, Michael Atherton, Nasser Hussain, and current players like David Miller were quite vocal in their displeasure. Others too jumped on the bandwagon, and suddenly it became a cacophony, but nobody offered a solution. After India won, UK’s The Telegraph came up with the headline ‘India’s Champions Trophy title comes with an unnecessary asterisk’.
Looking at it from the Indian team’s angle, can you really blame them? They did not go to Pakistan because the Indian government stuck to the policy they have adopted since the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks. Once it was decided that Dubai was going to be the venue, what else could have been done? Perhaps they could have played a game each at Sharjah and Abu Dhabi, maybe that would have assuaged the feelings of those complaining. Apart from that, one can’t really see any other alternative. Surely, they couldn’t have played a game anywhere else.
That question should be directed at the ICC, who probably could have done better if they had the gumption to stand up to the BCCI, the all-powerful Indian cricket board. With Jay Shah now helming the ICC, that would be easier said than done. Things certainly stacked up in India’s favor due to the unusual circumstances, but one can’t say they were rigged in such a manner. It wasn’t an ideal situation, but maybe nobody saw it playing out that way when the schedule was announced.
All this wasn’t the only reason India won; they would have done so anywhere. Their record over the last three ICC white-ball tournaments will attest to that. They have won 23 of their 24 matches in these, such has been their dominance. India won because they were the best side on view, they won because they were the most balanced team which played to potential. As for the carping critics, they can eat crow.
About author: Amarinder Sangha is a former Punjab (India) cricketer hailing from Faridkot and now based at Newcastle upon Tyne, England. He writes frequently on the national and international cricket.
Valid argument. It was a farce on several levels, but India won because it played the best cricket.