After days of uncertainty, we finally have a resolution regarding the India-Pakistan T20 World Cup match scheduled for February 15. In the late hours of Monday (February 9), the Pakistan government and Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) did a U-turn on their initial stance of boycotting the India fixture. It means that the marquee clash will go ahead as scheduled.

This result was on expected lines after key ICC officials landed in Lahore on Sunday (February 8) for an emergency meeting with PCB boss Mohsin Naqvi. The meeting also had BCB boss Aminul Islam as PCB's invitee and the extensive meeting went on allegedly for over six hours, following which positive signs were deduced from insiders.

On Monday, the PCB officially put the ball back in the court of the Pakistan government and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has given the green signal for reversing the boycott stance. While there isn't an official statement on what were discussed during the ICC-PCB meeting, a series of demands were placed by the Pakistan board, most of which were reportedly declined by the ICC. 

It must be noted that the PCB's official letter to the ICC regarding the boycott stance included the invoking of Force Majeure, a clause that can help to defend non-participation, provided that the party can provide the unexpected nature of events that led to the eventual non-participation.

PCB were unable to convince the ICC of this clause and were under fire due to the enormity of the potential financial losses that were on the cards if the match were to be abandoned. Sri Lanka Cricket had also expressed their disappointment at the boycott call because Sri Lanka had often supported Pakistan by travelling for bilateral series in recent years. 

From the outset, Pakistan's boycott stance in itself has come as a superficial show of aggression, because trustable sources have all confirmed that none of PCB's alleged demands were accepted by the ICC. However, the fact that the ICC chose to be patient in their negotiations has ultimately served them well. 

Disclaimer: Comments posted here are the sole responsibility of the user and do not reflect the views of THE WEEK. Obscene or offensive remarks against any person, religion, community or nation are punishable under IT rules and may invite legal action.