Cricket Scotland refuses non-ICC matches against Afghanistan; reason revealed

Cricket Scotland Rules Out Men’s Bilateral Matches Against Afghanistan

Cricket Scotland has announced that its men’s team will not play Afghanistan in bilateral series or other cricket fixtures outside competitions organised by the International Cricket Council (ICC). The decision reflects the board’s concerns about the treatment of women and girls under Afghanistan’s Taliban-led government, while preserving Scotland’s commitment to follow ICC competition schedules.

Under the policy, Scotland will still face Afghanistan if the teams are drawn against each other at an ICC event. The board says that participation in such a fixture should not be interpreted as support for Afghanistan’s government or its policies. However, it will not proactively arrange bilateral matches or take part in tri-series involving the Afghanistan men’s team.

Why Scotland is limiting cricket ties

Cricket Scotland’s position is linked to continuing restrictions on women’s rights and opportunities in Afghanistan. The board has said it is deeply concerned about the circumstances facing women and girls, including their access to education, public life and sport. By declining to schedule non-ICC matches, it aims to make clear that these concerns remain central to its approach to international cricket.

The restriction applies specifically to Scotland’s men’s cricket activities. Cricket Scotland has not announced an equivalent policy concerning its women’s national team. It has also indicated that the decision is not limited to formal bilateral series: Scotland will not arrange or participate in other non-ICC fixtures against Afghanistan, including tri-series and practice matches.

The board has left open the possibility of reviewing its position if there is meaningful progress on women’s cricket and broader human rights in Afghanistan. In the meantime, ICC events remain an exception because participating teams are governed by the tournament’s official schedule and competition regulations.

ICC fixtures remain an exception

Scotland’s announcement draws a distinction between choosing to arrange a match and fulfilling obligations within an international tournament. If the ICC schedules Scotland to play Afghanistan, the Scottish team will take part in accordance with the competition rules.

Cricket Scotland has stressed that this participation should not be seen as an endorsement of the Afghan regime. The distinction matters because international tournaments bring teams together under a shared governing framework, whereas bilateral tours and invitational series are arranged directly by cricket boards.

For supporters, the policy means Scotland could still meet Afghanistan in a World Cup or another ICC competition. A prediction about whether the teams will face each other would depend on the tournament draw, qualification and results—not on Scotland arranging a separate series. The board’s position changes the context for future fixtures, but it does not remove Afghanistan from ICC competitions.

Scotland joins a wider debate in international cricket

Cricket Scotland is not alone in raising concerns about women’s rights in Afghanistan. The England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) has also opposed arranging bilateral matches against the Afghanistan men’s team, although England has played Afghanistan in ICC events. Cricket Australia has likewise suspended bilateral cricket relations with Afghanistan.

These decisions highlight a difficult question for international sport: how should governing bodies respond when a country’s policies conflict with the principles of equal participation and access to sport? Boards must weigh their human-rights concerns against their duties to players, tournament organisers and the wider international game.

There is no single approach across cricket. ICC tournaments continue to provide opportunities for Afghanistan’s men’s team to compete internationally, while some national boards have chosen not to organise separate tours. As a result, the distinction between tournament participation and bilateral engagement has become an increasingly important part of cricket’s diplomatic landscape.

Could Scottish players take part in the Afghanistan Premier League?

Cricket Scotland has also been asked whether it would issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for a Scottish player selected in the Afghanistan Premier League (APL). George Munsey was the only Scottish player picked in the league’s recent draft, bringing the question of individual participation into focus.

The board says it will consider any NOC request in line with its contractual obligations to players. It has also tied its decision to whether the APL receives ICC sanction. An NOC is typically required for a player to take part in an overseas competition, but it does not automatically mean that the player’s national board endorses the league or the government of the host country.

Cricket Scotland has said that, if an NOC is issued, the player’s participation should not be interpreted as the board’s approval of Afghanistan’s current regime or its policies. The wording leaves the final decision dependent on the tournament’s status, the player’s contract and the relevant administrative requirements.

What the decision means for players and fans

For Scotland’s men, the policy creates a clear boundary: no voluntarily arranged matches against Afghanistan outside ICC events, while scheduled ICC fixtures will be honoured. For players considering franchise opportunities, the position is less automatic, with NOC decisions to be assessed individually and in light of the APL’s ICC approval.

For fans, the immediate effect is likely to be fewer opportunities to see Scotland and Afghanistan meet outside major international tournaments. The broader significance, however, extends beyond the fixture calendar. Cricket Scotland’s announcement adds to a growing debate about how cricket boards can express concern over human rights while continuing to operate within a global competition system.

The board has not presented its policy as a permanent ban on all cricket contact. Instead, it has linked future non-ICC engagement to improvements in women’s rights and opportunities in Afghanistan. Whether that leads to a change in policy will depend on developments beyond the pitch—as well as on how cricket’s governing bodies respond.