The Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) is receiving substantial criticism for the absence of the host country’s name on the official Asia Cup logo displayed on participating teams’ jerseys. This omission has sparked outrage among fans and some former players.
Former Pakistan cricket captain, Rashid Latif, was among those who expressed their dismay, particularly during Pakistan’s opening match against Nepal in the Asia Cup in Multan. Despite the Asia Cup being jointly hosted by Pakistan and Sri Lanka, Pakistan holds the status of the primary host for the tournament.
Latif voiced his discontent, stating, “This is unacceptable, and it is the Asian Cricket Council which must explain this oversight since the Asia Cup is their property.”
In response to the criticism, the PCB has unofficially attempted to downplay the situation by suggesting that the Asian Cricket Council (ACC) had decided after last year’s Asia Cup that the host country’s name would no longer be included with the Asia Cup logo in future events.
However, many Pakistani cricket enthusiasts on social media remain unconvinced by this explanation. Some have questioned why the PCB agreed to such a decision, especially when Pakistan was hosting a multi-team event for the first time in 15 years.
Former Test batsman Mohsin Khan questioned the logic behind this decision, remarking, “Makes no sense at all. Then why has the ACC given the host country’s name on the logos for their Asian Emerging Nations Cup or their Asian under-16 event held in July in Malaysia.”
Another former player, who preferred not to be named, speculated that Jay Shah, the President of the ACC and secretary of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), may have played a role in Pakistan not being acknowledged as the host nation on the official logo.
Given the current geopolitical context between the two countries, there are concerns that the BCCI official may have considered it awkward for Indian team players to wear kits bearing the name of Pakistan on the official Asia Cup logo. Rashid Latif did not dismiss this possibility and emphasized that the situation was embarrassing and required clarification.