DC Edit | India’s Asia Cup Win Comes With Heavy Dose Of Politics

India’s record-extending ninth Asia Cup triumph came after a hard fight with Pakistan that extended into the final over, but the tournament itself never came out of the shadow of the conflict between neighbours that just fell short of a full-scale war only four months ago.

Pakistan finished second best on the cricket field as Team India, a seasoned white-ball side, came through a tough test in a low-scoring game. India’s spinners, after being hit around early by Pakistan’s top order, staged a strong comeback to dominate the match.

Politics laced with the ill feelings towards a nation that allows the practice of terrorism as an instrument of state dogged the ill-timed tournament with Team India refusing to accept the trophy from Pakistan’s interior minister, who chairs the ACC.

The worthy reacted true to his nation’s dodgy reputation, which had only been enhanced by their reactions to all the controversial events tinged with politics that took place, by sneaking off with the cup that his nation’s team could not win on the field, and all the winners’ medals to boot.

That sport can never be separated from politics was made even more evident as hyper-nationalism ruled the exchanges on and off the field with the victims of the Pahalgam terror attack of April 22 never far from the minds of India’s cricketers who risked ICC code of conduct sanctions in gestures and words to make their point.

The Pakistan players, offended at the very start in the first of three encounters deviously planned by the ACC because the Indian captain refused to shake hands at the toss, reacted as poorly educated cricketers could be expected to in bringing their wild gestures mimicking military exchanges on the battlefield to a sports arena.

The final, the first ever between the Asian rivals in this 41-year competition, was a tense affair with batsmen never able to break free of the shackles even in the T20 format. Tilak Varma, the performer with the ideal temperament for a scrap, grafted his way to rescue Team India’s chase that had got off to the worst possible start with three top order batsmen falling to the guile of slower deliveries bowled by successors to a great fast bowling tradition of their country.

A six off the second ball of the final over settled the issue as it whittled down the runs required to two and soon Rinku Singh, facing only his first ball in the competition, dispatched it promptly to the boundary to sustain Team India’s reputation of a well-established white ball supremacy.

The match referees faced most of the heat as a divided ACC administration could hardly muster the unity to take a moral stand on any of the happenings. But, going forward, the best that the ICC and the ACC can do is to keep the arena and the players who star in it off-limits for politics, both in words and gestures.

Given the emotionally charged people of the subcontinent who thrive most on an old cricket rivalry, it is best that the players themselves do nothing to whip up any more sentiments. If they must meet on the field of play at least in bilateral competitions, they must learn to respect its sanctity.

The sport of cricket, known for its arts and graces, will otherwise be worse off for off-field conflicts bursting through its doors and diminishing its purpose as a vehicle for sportsmanship. Even leaders of nations might not be able to resist the temptation of connecting sport and war, juxtaposing ‘Operation Sindoor’ with ‘Operation Tilak’. It would, however, serve the game best if it does not get overtly political.