The financial disputes between Pakistan and Sri Lanka over the 2023 Asia Cup have come to the forefront, creating a tense situation that demands urgent resolution.

The genesis of the issue lies in the planning of the Asia Cup, which was initially slated to take place in Pakistan. However, due to India’s reluctance to play in Pakistan, the organizers shifted the matches to Sri Lanka, utilizing a Hybrid Model for the event. The tournament spanned from August 30 to September 17 last year, but financial disagreements between the host countries have lingered since then.

According to the details, during the Asian Cricket Council (ACC) meeting in Bali, Indonesia, Sri Lanka Cricket President Shami Silva highlighted the non-payment of hotel bills. In response, Jay Shah, the President of the ACC, instructed Silva to engage in direct discussions with the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) to address the matter.

Sources reveal that Pakistan’s stance revolves around pending verifications of numerous bills, impeding the progress of payments. Additionally, the issue of chartered flights remains a sticking point, with unresolved matters causing further strain in the relationship between the cricket boards.

The PCB argues that the decision not to host the entire Asia Cup in Pakistan was made by the Asian Cricket Council, and therefore, they should share the burden of additional expenses. The controversy deepens as the flights were booked through Classic Travel, a non-pre-qualified Sri Lankan company.

For the four chartered flights, the PCB paid an upfront amount of $281,700. Furthermore, they agreed to give Sri Lanka $2,069,885 for the venue hire, with 50% and then 25% paid before the event. The remaining balance was supposed to be settled post-event, as per the agreed terms.

Notably, the Asian Cricket Council was supposed to provide a hosting fee of 2.5 million dollars to Pakistan. However, the dispute intensifies as the estimated expenses for the event were around 4 million dollars.

The initial schedule, confined to Lahore, was altered by the PCB, adding Multan and organizing the opening match there. The ACC’s reluctance to cover these additional costs is a point of contention that further complicates the ongoing financial disputes.