It’s funny how whenever this topic comes up, the default response is either to call it “conspiracy theories,” bring up old losses, or start waving the flag. None of that changes the central point: (fair cricket requires neutral broadcasting.)
I’m not talking about hackers sitting inside Hawk-Eye machines or every decision being rigged. I’m saying when the (broadcaster, the technology operators, and the rights holder are all under the same flag), the conflict of interest is obvious. If the feed is delayed, if certain frames are skipped, if Hawk-Eye margins are presented in ways that always seem to tilt one way, fans have every right to question it.
Even if you want to quote Cricbuzz numbers, stats don’t capture the key moments. A single dubious overturn in a knockout game swings more than ten routine decisions in Tests. It’s about timing and optics, not just volume.
And let’s not ignore fixtures either: India being scheduled to play the (last group game in almost every ICC event) gives them the net run rate advantage. That’s not paranoia, that’s a documented pattern. Add to that broadcasters conveniently avoiding awkward moments (like the toss handshake incident), and you have a system that simply isn’t neutral.
You can mock, call it “paranoia,” or wave the “we’re rich” card. But if cricket wants to be trusted globally, it needs neutral production, the same way football, tennis, and even rugby separate governing bodies from broadcasters. Otherwise, you’re not defending India, you’re defending a system where (the referee, the cameraman, and the scoreboard operator all wear the same jersey.)
FAIR CRICKET FOR EVERYONE = NEUTRAL BROADCAST. That’s the beginning and the end of the argument.
