India won the Asia Cup on Sunday night. Again. And yet, once more, the team left the tournament without the Asia Cup trophy.
The women's side had just defeated Sri Lanka by 72 runs in Dubai to secure a record eighth Asia Cup title. But when it was time for the presentation, there was no Indian team on the podium, no trophy handed to Harmanpreet Kaur and no celebratory image of India lifting the silverware. A year after the men's team faced the same situation, the Asian Cricket Council had somehow allowed the episode to repeat itself. The men's team, in fact, still has not received its trophy, which is reportedly lying at the ACC headquarters in Dubai.
This is not India's humiliation. It is the ACC's.
What happened can no longer be dismissed as a diplomatic disagreement caused by India-Pakistan tensions. It has become a repeated administrative failure by the ACC. The same situation unfolded with India's men's team in 2025. One year later, despite knowing exactly where the disagreement stood, the governing body allowed history to repeat itself.
One incident could be described as an extraordinary diplomatic breakdown. Two incidents point to an institutional problem.
The Indian team posed for pictures without the Asia Cup trophy. Courtesy: BCCI Women X
That is why the Indian cricket board should now go beyond simply declining to accept the trophy and consider questioning its participation in ACC tournaments altogether.
ENTIRELY AVOIDABLE
The key point from Sunday's incident is that this was not a sudden decision by Indian players to refuse to share the stage with Naqvi. India's position had already been communicated beforehand. The BCCI had made it clear that India would not take the trophy from Naqvi, but it had also suggested alternatives.
One proposal was for ACC deputy chair Khalid Al Zarooni to present the trophy. Another was for a representative from the winning board to hand it over, following the practice used in recent tournaments, sources told India Today.
There was clearly a solution available.
The champions could have received the trophy, the presentation could have proceeded normally and the ACC could have avoided another embarrassing episode. Instead, Naqvi remained the designated presenter, while India remained unwilling to accept the trophy from him. The standoff ultimately ended exactly as it had the previous year, with the champions leaving without the championship trophy.
SHOULD NAQVI REMAIN AT THE HELM?
Mohsin Naqvi has been at the centre of controversy over the last two Asia Cup editions. Courtesy: AP
This is where Mohsin Naqvi's responsibility as ACC president comes into question.
He has every right to hold his position, attend an Asia Cup final and stand alongside other dignitaries at an ACC event. However, the role of ACC president carries responsibilities beyond any individual's wish to conduct the trophy ceremony. The organisation's primary duty at the conclusion of a tournament should be ensuring that the champions receive the prize they have earned.
If Naqvi was aware that India's position had remained unchanged, and if alternative arrangements had already been proposed, why was a solution not found to ensure that the winning team received its trophy?
This was not an unexpected situation. The warning signs had already been unmistakable in September 2025.
The men's final that year turned into a remarkable standoff after India made it clear that it would not collect the trophy from Naqvi. The presentation was delayed, the trophy was removed from the stage and India celebrated its victory without the silverware. Suryakumar Yadav described it as something he had never witnessed during his years of playing or following cricket — a champion side being prevented from receiving a trophy it had earned. India had also indicated that it would accept the trophy from an Emirates Cricket Board official, but that option never materialised.
The ACC therefore had a full year to ensure that the same situation would not occur again.
Yet it happened again.
This time, it happened even though everyone knew exactly what could happen. The possibility of another confrontation had already been discussed ahead of the women's final because Naqvi was expected to attend the closing ceremony. The issue was not whether a dispute could emerge. The real question was how the ACC would respond if India became champions.
We now know the answer.
Nothing.
That is unacceptable for the governing organisation of Asian cricket.
BCCI'S STAND
Women's team head coach Amol Muzumdar's comments after the final made the BCCI's position clear.
“That stand has been taken by BCCI and we stand by it. For us, this tournament is over. We are the champions,” he told reporters in Dubai on Sunday.
He added that the result was already reflected on the big screen, which showed India as the Asia Cup 2026 champions, and that the tournament was officially over for the team.
The players can understandably take that position. They won the competition on the field, and nothing can take that achievement away from them.
However, the ACC should not interpret the team's acceptance of the situation as an excuse for its own failure.
India may be able to move on without the physical trophy, but that does not remove the ACC's responsibility to present it.
A trophy represents much more than a piece of silverware. It forms part of the ceremony, the historical record and the memory of a sporting triumph. It becomes the photograph that is framed, the image displayed in dressing rooms and yearbooks, and the physical symbol passed to the champions. When an organiser cannot place that trophy in the hands of the team that won its own tournament, something has gone seriously wrong.
Sunday night demonstrated just how badly things had deteriorated.
Naqvi faced chants of "trophy chor" from a section of the crowd as he left the ground. That was an ugly moment, regardless of one's position on the India-Pakistan divide. It ended what should have been a celebration of women's cricket on an unpleasant note. And it was something that could have been prevented.
The ACC president did not need to put himself, the organisation or the tournament in such a situation. Another presenter could have been chosen. The trophy could have been made more important than the individual presenting it.
Instead, the trophy ceremony itself became the main story.
That cannot be allowed to become routine.
BCCI NEEDS TO ACT TOUGH
BCCI secretary Devajit Saikia was present in Dubai to watch the Women's Asia Cup final. Courtesy: Reuters
This is where the BCCI now needs to move beyond expressions of disappointment and protest. India should formally and clearly tell the ACC that if Naqvi continues as president and insists on personally presenting the Asia Cup trophy to India, the Indian team should consider withdrawing from ACC competitions.
Such a decision would be significant and should not be made casually. But the ACC also needs to recognise the seriousness of a situation that has now occurred twice.
India's involvement is far more than simply another team's participation in the tournament. It is the biggest commercial attraction in Asian cricket. Indian matches generate enormous broadcast audiences, sponsorship interest, advertising revenue and digital engagement. India-Pakistan fixtures are among the sport's most commercially valuable contests. If India were to withdraw from the Asia Cup, the ACC would not merely lose one participant; it would lose a major portion of the tournament's commercial appeal.
That gives India leverage.
It should, however, be exercised carefully rather than recklessly.
The demand itself does not need to be complicated. India does not need to ask the ACC to change its constitution, remove Naqvi or turn every Asia Cup into a political dispute. The basic request should be a sporting one: the champions must receive their trophy.
If the ACC can guarantee that, India participates. If it cannot, India should consider staying away.
The issue is no longer simply whether India approves of Mohsin Naqvi. The larger question is whether the ACC can distinguish between the role of its president and the proper administration of its tournament. Naqvi may continue as ACC president, but no president, secretary, chairman or other dignitary should ever become more important than the team that has just won the competition.
India's men's team did not receive its trophy in 2025. The women's team suffered the same fate in 2026. The second incident makes it impossible to dismiss the first as an isolated occurrence.
The ICC should also be paying attention. The world governing body cannot be expected to intervene in every India-Pakistan disagreement, nor should it. But when champions finish a major tournament twice without being able to collect their trophy, it is reasonable to question whether cricket's governing organisations have adequate protocols for handling such situations.
Enough is enough. The farce needs to end.
