Bangladesh's exit from the 2026 ICC Men's T20 World Cup was not the result of a single flashpoint or a last-minute breakdown in talks. It was a culmination of a to-and-fro that played out over several weeks after the Bangladesh Cricket Board decided to take a strong stance about not wanting to play in India. This came after seamer Mustafizur Rahman was released from the Kolkata Knight Riders squad on BCCI's insistence in the wake of the diplomatic standoff between India and Bangladesh.

What began as BCB's demand to relocate their matches to Sri Lanka soon became a test case for governance, precedence and the limits of accommodation for the ICC, which ultimately took the call to replace Bangladesh with Scotland for the marquee event.

The world governing body of cricket had allowed Bangladesh time to review its stance on playing in India, with CEO Sanjog Gupta constantly engaging with BCB members. During one video conference meeting, tensions even ran high when BCB chairman Aminul Islam vented out, making it clear he was unwilling to accept the ICC's reasoning.

In particular, the ICC did not want Bangladesh, as a cricketing nation, to feel left out of the ecosystem, while also being careful not to set a dangerous precedent where a member demands relocation of matches. Crucially, the ICC's independent assessments had concluded there was "no credible or verifiable security threat" to the Bangladesh national team, officials, or supporters in India. And therefore, the ICC was clear internally that it wanted to protect the sanctity of the World Cup fixtures.

That position was formalised after the January 21 board meeting, where all but two members (PCB and BCB) rejected Bangladesh's request to move their matches out of India and the ICC set the BCB a 24-hour deadline to reconsider. Bangladesh, however, did not comply. Instead, it raised fresh objections and questioned the ICC's security assessment, which had concluded that the threat perception to the Bangladesh team in India was moderate to low.

The BCB is understood to have countered that report and claimed the threat was moderate to high, a position Cricbuzz understands was widely seen by the ICC as hypocritical, given that the team had toured Pakistan last year for the Champions Trophy under a higher threat perception.

There was still a belief in certain quarters that the BCB was rethinking its intransigent stand, with some indications to that effect emerging during the Bangladesh Premier League final on Friday (January 23). The players, who were not consulted in the decision-making process, saw the World Cup as a significant tournament in their individual journeys and preferred to play. However, it is understood that the BCB remained relentless in its demand, continuing to flag a set of scenarios rather than engaging with the assurances already provided.

The BCB did write to the ICC after the 24-hour deadline had elapsed, but by then the governing body had little room left to manoeuvre. Finally, on Saturday (January 24), the ICC chief executive informed board members that, based on the January 21 decision, the organisation was compelled to replace Bangladesh in the 2026 ICC Men's T20 World Cup.

In an official statement released thereafter, the ICC said the Board had taken a "difficult decision" and that it was not feasible to meet the BCB's requests so close to the tournament.

"The decision follows an extensive process undertaken by the ICC to address concerns raised by the BCB regarding the hosting of its scheduled matches in India," the statement said.

"Over a period of more than three weeks, the ICC engaged with the BCB through multiple rounds of dialogue conducted in a transparent and constructive manner, including meetings held both via video conference and in-person."

The ICC added that it had commissioned and reviewed independent security assessments from both internal and external experts, and had shared "detailed security and operational plans covering federal and state arrangements, as well as enhanced and escalating security protocols for the event." These assurances, the statement noted, were reiterated at several stages, including during discussions involving the ICC Business Corporation (IBC) Board.

"In light of these findings, and after careful consideration of the broader implications," the ICC said, "it was determined that it was not appropriate to amend the published event schedule."