Scotland can’t afford to host Pakistan before the Women’s World Cup 2026– Should the ICC or bigger boards step in?

[zaidbk]

Steve Snell, the Performance Head at Cricket Scotland, has confirmed to Wisden that Pakistan’s women’s team won’t be touring there this July — not because of scheduling or logistics, but because Scotland simply cannot afford to host them. All this because they didn’t qualify for the Women’s ODI World Cup.


Here’s the kicker: Pakistan were really keen to tour. And given how closely fought the qualifiers were — Pakistan vs Scotland was a tight match, and Scotland even pulled off an upset win over tournament favourites West Indies — a short bilateral series could’ve been a great build-up for Pakistan before the World Cup. But now that Scotland are out, the funding has dried up.


This could really affect Pakistan’s preparations — they’re headed to a World Cup with fewer competitive games under their belt. And for Scotland, it’s a missed opportunity to build experience and visibility for their women’s team.


One has to ask: should Pakistan invite Scotland to play in Pakistan instead? Or better yet, should the ICC or the Big Three (India, England, Australia) step in and fund these kinds of tours? It makes no sense that two teams willing to play can’t, just because one of them can’t afford to host.


Also — with 16 nations actively playing women’s ODIs, is an 8-team World Cup format really fair anymore? Aren’t we holding back the growth of the women’s game by limiting such big stages to just a few?


Would love to hear what others think. Should cricket boards with more resources do more to support situations like this? And what’s a fairer model for global women’s tournaments going forward?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Yes. ICC should step in. Just like they should have stepped in when Cricket Ireland was struggling with the same issue last year. Will they? Nope. But that just reflects where international cricket is today in the hands of the ICC.

It's all about lining your pockets, rather that doing what's best for the future of the game.

 

[SportsWarrior]

Why should anyone step in? These are first world Rick countries who have sports culture and spend billions on multiple sporting infrastructure. If they are struggling then there is no demand for cricket. Why prop up a sport which no one wants to watch? I fit were a poor or a developing country it makes sense.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Why should anyone step in? These are first world Rick countries who have sports culture and spend billions on multiple sporting infrastructure. If they are struggling then there is no demand for cricket. Why prop up a sport which no one wants to watch? I fit were a poor or a developing country it makes sense.

The ICC ( and cricket playing countries) have to try to create a market too, and grow the game by spending money.

The ICC has stipulated that for full membership you have to have a womens team and for associate members you have to have a pathway for women. Clearly, they want to grow the womens game and should step in to support it where needed. If it just becomes about money eventually we will have a situation where only India plays cricket.

 

[Kianig89]

Ali Tareen should step in and sponsor Scotland cricket , will be good philanthropy and will help him in his global image

 

[cricketjoshila]

Yes. ICC should step in. Just like they should have stepped in when Cricket Ireland was struggling with the same issue last year. Will they? Nope. But that just reflects where international cricket is today in the hands of the ICC.

It's all about lining your pockets, rather that doing what's best for the future of the game.

Lining whose pockets?

Any questions about what Scotland did with its share of icc money?

 

[Rana]

Ali Tareen should step in and sponsor Scotland cricket , will be good philanthropy and will help him in his global image

@topspin

 

[topspin]

@topspin

Was he being serious?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Lining whose pockets?

Any questions about what Scotland did with its share of icc money?

Ran the game on a shoestring, built pathways, and kept the sport alive without TV revenue or FTP guarantees.

What exactly were you expecting them to do with the scraps the ICC throws their way?

Are you really that dense that you don't know who I'm talking about when I say 'lining their pockets'? C'mon, no need to play around.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Ran the game on a shoestring, built pathways, and kept the sport alive without TV revenue or FTP guarantees.

What exactly were you expecting them to do with the scraps the ICC throws their way?

Are you really that dense that you don't know who I'm talking about when I say 'lining their pockets'? C'mon, no need to play around.

They are developed country with a GDP per capita of $50K. They can divert some the funds from other sports if they really care about cricket.

Its not ICC's job to fund the sport in country's where there is very little interest.

Maybe ICC should ask ECB and CA to part with their money given how those two restricted the grown of the sport for almost a century

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

They are developed country with a GDP per capita of $50K. They can divert some the funds from other sports if they really care about cricket.

Its not ICC's job to fund the sport in country's where there is very little interest.

Maybe ICC should ask ECB and CA to part with their money given how those two restricted the grown of the sport for almost a century

The ICC isn’t just a voluntary charity for rich cricketing countries. It’s the global governing body of cricket... its mandate is to develop and grow the sport worldwide, including in Associate nations.

Whether Scotland has a high GDP or could theoretically divert national funds is irrelevant to ICC’s responsibility. The ICC exists to ensure cricket thrives everywhere, not just where it’s already popular or profitable.

 

[rpant_gabba]

The ICC isn’t just a voluntary charity for rich cricketing countries.

agree. Icc should be run by equal contribution from each permanent member. Many of the cricketing loving public from permanent member countries are greatly underserved.

It’s the global governing body of cricket... its mandate is to develop and grow the sport worldwide, including in Associate nations.

Yes, It can do with funds contributed by each permanent member

Whether Scotland has a high GDP or could theoretically divert national funds is irrelevant to ICC’s responsibility.

Yes it is. given how cricket was grown by many permanent without handouts form ICC. ICC shouldn't get to loot poor counties in the name of growing the sport.

The ICC exists to ensure cricket thrives everywhere, not just where it’s already popular or profitable.

Then ICC deserves to die. looks like that is on its way.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Growing and nurturing industries is how the world works. Cash is spent in the hope that ultimately the area being spent on becomes self sufficient.

So really it depends on your perspective. If you see cricket as a balance sheet or accounting statement then sure yeah you can tell Scotland to get stuffed. But if you want the game to actively grow, reach new audiences, become more exciting, then money needs to be spent to ensure it's growth.

Afghan mens team is a great example. Cricket is richer with them being involved and they could only be involved through assistance from others. If we use the argument that they really care about cricket then they should go and grow their economies we wouldn't have an Afghan team.
Nobody really organically cared about cricket apart from England. Even in united India it was handed by hand outs from princes. You gotta spend money to build a base of active interest.

 

[sweep_shot]

I don't expect anything better from BCCICC.

They have ruined cricket as we know it.

They only look after India and not world cricket. Cricket is currently an Indian sport run by the Indians.

 

[nish_mate]

Growing and nurturing industries is how the world works. Cash is spent in the hope that ultimately the area being spent on becomes self sufficient.

So really it depends on your perspective. If you see cricket as a balance sheet or accounting statement then sure yeah you can tell Scotland to get stuffed. But if you want the game to actively grow, reach new audiences, become more exciting, then money needs to be spent to ensure it's growth.

Afghan mens team is a great example. Cricket is richer with them being involved and they could only be involved through assistance from others. If we use the argument that they really care about cricket then they should go and grow their economies we wouldn't have an Afghan team.
Nobody really organically cared about cricket apart from England. Even in united India it was handed by hand outs from princes. You gotta spend money to build a base of active interest.

more than 100 years of cricketing history and how much has it grown beyond the ex empire? As for England caring, is this the same England that took cricket away from terrestrial telly to Sky and reducing the audience by circa 40%. Unfortunately even the English do care about the £££ primarily, else would have done more to give cricket a broader appeal beyond the private school cohort and ex empire immigrant communities....

Getting back to the point, ICC should spend more on developing cricket in promising nations like Scotland and Ireland rather than pumping it into non sporting nations like Bangladesh.....

 

[rpant_gabba]

more than 100 years of cricketing history and how much has it grown beyond the ex empire? As for England caring, is this the same England that took cricket away from terrestrial telly to Sky and reducing the audience by circa 40%. Unfortunately even the English do care about the £££ primarily, else would have done more to give cricket a broader appeal beyond the private school cohort and ex empire immigrant communities....

Getting back to the point, ICC should spend more on developing cricket in promising nations like Scotland and Ireland rather than pumping it into non sporting nations like Bangladesh.....

now now don't go throwing facts at a britistani. it breaks their brain.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

more than 100 years of cricketing history and how much has it grown beyond the ex empire? As for England caring, is this the same England that took cricket away from terrestrial telly to Sky and reducing the audience by circa 40%. Unfortunately even the English do care about the £££ primarily, else would have done more to give cricket a broader appeal beyond the private school cohort and ex empire immigrant communities....

Getting back to the point, ICC should spend more on developing cricket in promising nations like Scotland and Ireland rather than pumping it into non sporting nations like Bangladesh.....

Yes of course they care about money. My point was it's the only country where cricket has grown organically initially. Everywhere it has been imposed and propped up before it has managed to be taken by the masses. It is the type of game that needs to be nurtured because it is largely inaccessible due to various constraints.

If we want the game to grow then the ICC and all member nations have a responsibility to help it grow, create pathways so teams can become strong and competition increases.

Merely hoping market forces should be solely responsible for it's growth will result in the game being finished in a few years.

 

[topspin]

Ali Tareen should step in and sponsor Scotland cricket , will be good philanthropy and will help him in his global image

Were you being serious?

 

[rpant_gabba]

Yes of course they care about money. My point was it's the only country where cricket has grown organically initially. Everywhere it has been imposed and propped up before it has managed to be taken by the masses. It is the type of game that needs to be nurtured because it is largely inaccessible due to various constraints.

propped up by who?

If we want the game to grow then the ICC and all member nations have a responsibility to help it grow, create pathways so teams can become strong and competition increases.

Merely hoping market forces should be solely responsible for it's growth will result in the game being finished in a few years.

What is the point of growing the game? so more people will play it? or more people will watch it to increase the money in the sport?

The most marketable form of the game is least like by proper fans. IS that what you want? more t20s?

 

[nish_mate]

Yes of course they care about money. My point was it's the only country where cricket has grown organically initially. Everywhere it has been imposed and propped up before it has managed to be taken by the masses. It is the type of game that needs to be nurtured because it is largely inaccessible due to various constraints.

If we want the game to grow then the ICC and all member nations have a responsibility to help it grow, create pathways so teams can become strong and competition increases.

Merely hoping market forces should be solely responsible for it's growth will result in the game being finished in a few years.

I reckon everyone's fingers have been burnt after gifting Bangladesh full membership and seeing them performing below Scottish Womens level even post crica 30 years of full funding and mapping pathways, that ICC is now treading carefully with future investments...

Scottish lasses need to whoop Bangali asses for their plight!

 

[DeadlyVenom]

I reckon everyone's fingers have been burnt after gifting Bangladesh full membership and seeing them performing below Scottish Womens level even post crica 30 years of full funding and mapping pathways, that ICC is now treading carefully with future investments...

Scottish lasses need to whoop Bangali asses for their plight!

You just hate Bangladesh lol

 

[nish_mate]

You just hate Bangladesh lol

Naah mate, who can hate such comedians....

 

[DeadlyVenom]

propped up by who?

What is the point of growing the game? so more people will play it? or more people will watch it to increase the money in the sport?

The most marketable form of the game is least like by proper fans. IS that what you want? more t20s?

Propped up initially by aristocratic classes or imposed by British.

More teams playing the sport makes matches and tournaments more exciting for fans. More money in the sport as a goal in and of itself is not something that I'm concerned with.

T20 is the best way to grow it and spread it. There aren't enough proper fans to keep tests afloat beyond big 3 and SA.

 

[Red-Indian]

Growing and nurturing industries is how the world works. Cash is spent in the hope that ultimately the area being spent on becomes self sufficient.

So really it depends on your perspective. If you see cricket as a balance sheet or accounting statement then sure yeah you can tell Scotland to get stuffed. But if you want the game to actively grow, reach new audiences, become more exciting, then money needs to be spent to ensure it's growth.

Afghan mens team is a great example. Cricket is richer with them being involved and they could only be involved through assistance from others. If we use the argument that they really care about cricket then they should go and grow their economies we wouldn't have an Afghan team.
Nobody really organically cared about cricket apart from England. Even in united India it was handed by hand outs from princes. You gotta spend money to build a base of active interest.

While I agree in principle the ICC should be spending money to popularise cricket and take it to wider audiences, I'm really uncomfortable with the likes of Scotland getting more money.

Scotland has had a chance to look at cricket closely for 200+ years now and has never gotten too interested in it. Pouring more money in there to make it popular is just a waste.

Besides, all they have is a population is 5.5 million. Even if a few get interested as a result of this tour, how much will it benefit world cricket? The city I live in - Pune has a roughly equivalent population (a bit more in fact). While men's cricket is doing fine, even with India's cricket riches, putting the same money into women's cricket here will yield you better results in a bunch of young girls keen to make a career in cricket. Whether the BCCI spends it or the ICC does is a different matter.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

While I agree in principle the ICC should be spending money to popularise cricket and take it to wider audiences, I'm really uncomfortable with the likes of Scotland getting more money.

Scotland has had a chance to look at cricket closely for 200+ years now and has never gotten too interested in it. Pouring more money in there to make it popular is just a waste.

Besides, all they have is a population is 5.5 million. Even if a few get interested as a result of this tour, how much will it benefit world cricket? The city I live in - Pune has a roughly equivalent population (a bit more in fact). While men's cricket is doing fine, even with India's cricket riches, putting the same money into women's cricket here will yield you better results in a bunch of young girls keen to make a career in cricket. Whether the BCCI spends it or the ICC does is a different matter.

The focus for the previous 200 years was misplaced.

First class cricket never really caught on and there was no infrastructure to support it nor appetite but this was for a long time seen as the only way to become a proper cricketing country .

Focusing on shorter formats will resp more rewards. In the men's game they have caused upsets.

As far as women's game. I'm sure having a plan to develop women's cricket is a requirement for associate membership. The ICC have made this a necessity so should help to support it where possible.

5 million population is small, but it's the same as New Zealand's. If cricket catches on and the teams ( mens and women's) become competitive will it not enhance the fans enjoyment of the game?

 

[rpant_gabba]

Propped up initially by aristocratic classes or imposed by British.

Didn't realize there was aristocracy in India since 1947.

More teams playing the sport makes matches and tournaments more exciting for fans. More money in the sport as a goal in and of itself is not something that I'm concerned with.

Since the stadiums are empty even in many established countries, why exactly are you expecting slow boring sport (compared to Soccer Rugy etc) to catch on?

T20 is the best way to grow it and spread it. There aren't enough proper fans to keep tests afloat beyond big 3 and SA.

wouldn't that kiil the proper form of the game? guess you prefer quantity over quality