Bangladesh At T20 World Cup 2026: ICC Vs BCB Row Explained With Past Precedents

Cricket’s global calendar has often seen pushback from national teams reluctant to play at designated ICC tournament venues, particularly when security or political concerns come into play. The ongoing ICC–BCB row has once again put the spotlight on how much power boards really have when they feel their interests are at stake.

This isn’t an isolated issue. From World Cups to Champions Trophy editions, ICC tournaments have repeatedly seen teams question schedules, refuse to travel, or push for neutral venues. Looking back at similar instances helps explain why such disputes keep resurfacing, and why they rarely have simple resolutions.

1. Bangladesh Challenges ICC Over T20 World Cup Venue in 2026

The Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) have asked the International Cricket Council (ICC) to relocate its ICC Men’s T20 World Cup 2026 matches out of India to Sri Lanka, citing safety and political concerns, a rare direct challenge to an ICC schedule.

The ICC board rejected the request after independent security assessments found no credible threat, warning that changing venues so close to the start could undermine tournament planning. Bangladesh was given a deadline to either commit to playing in India or risk being replaced in the event by Scotland.

2. Champions Trophy 2025 Neutral Venues After India–Pakistan Rift

Ahead of the 2025 ICC Champions Trophy, India denied to play in Pakistan due to political tensions. Rather than forcing teams to travel, the ICC adopted a neutral or hybrid hosting model, staging India’s group games in Dubai while other fixtures remained in Pakistan. This approach showed a compromise when political stances clash with tournament plans.

However, it has also raised a lot questions, especially by the Bangladeshi fans, who are asking ICC to change their venues just like they did for the Indian team.

3. 2009 ICC Champions Trophy Postponed Over Security

The 2009 ICC Champions Trophy was originally scheduled to be held in Pakistan, but security concerns from multiple participating teams led to its postponement and relocation to South Africa. South Africa had initially objected and eventually withdrew before the decision to shift the event was made, reflecting how safety fears can force major ICC calendar changes.

4. 2003 Cricket World Cup: England and New Zealand Skip Matches

At the 2003 ODI World Cup in southern Africa, England refused to play Zimbabwe in Harare due to political objections, while New Zealand refused to travel to Kenya following security concerns after an attack in Mombasa. The ICC did not relocate these matches, and both sides had to forfeit, which influenced the eventual standings.

5. 1996 Cricket World Cup: Australia & West Indies Refuse to Play in Sri Lanka

Long before the BCB row, teams had objected to ICC tournament venues on security grounds. During the 1996 Cricket World Cup, Australia and the West Indies refused to travel to Sri Lanka for group matches amid civil war and a terrorist incident in Colombo, leading them to forfeit match points. Despite the boycott, Sri Lanka advanced and eventually reached the final, underscoring how safety fears can directly affect tournament outcomes.