In what comes as a big development over the Asia Cup trophy and medal saga, the ACC Chief and PCB chairman, Mohsin Naqvi, has apologised to BCCI for the chaotic post-final scenes of September 28. However, the standoff over the silverware refuses to die.
As reported by India Today, Naqvi softened his tone at the ACC meeting on September 30. But the ACC Chief maintained that if India want the trophy and medals, their captain should collect them from the ACC office in Dubai.
India rejected the condition from Naqvi, arguing there was no such requirement on the night of the final and demanded a protocol handover governed by the ACC rules, not ad-hoc diktats.
BCCI pushes back
BCCI vice-president, Rajeev Shukla, told the ACC that the trophy belongs to the council, and not to any individual. He criticised Naqvi for taking the trophy and the medals with him without a proper handover. The BCCI’s message is clear – apology accepted, but hand over the trophy as per protocols.
Earlier, BCCI secretary Devajit Saikia publicly framed India’s decision and expectations with two blunt sentences: “We have decided not to accept the Asia Cup 2025 trophy from the ACC chairman, who happens to be one of the senior leaders of Pakistan. That was a conscious decision.”
“This does not give him the right to take the trophy and the medals with him. It is extremely unfortunate and unsportsmanlike. We hope the trophy medals will be returned to India as soon as possible,” he further added.
This statement perfectly encapsulates India’s standpoint. The acceptance of the trophy snub was deliberate, but did not grant custody rights to the ACC Chief, nor the license to remove the silverware from the venue. The report also claims that Mohsin Naqvi nevertheless remained firm and refused to return the trophy, adding that the Indian captain should come to Dubai to collect it.
Ceremonial protocols are not window-dressing; they are the shared grammar of sport. By conditioning the handover and treating it as his personal property, Naqvi risks recasting a routine protocol as a political power play. India’s response, centering on the ACC’s institutional ownership and process, is an attempt to pull back the situation to rule-book diplomacy.
For a rivalry that has already gained hostility over the past week, the apology without restitution frame guarantees the narrative is nowhere near its end. It will run until there is a clean, public, protocol-compliant handover. Right now, the trophy standoff remains unclear, and so do the optics around it.
