KARACHI: The International Cricket Council (ICC) has drawn criticism from cricket fans after sharing a social media post highlighting chairman Jay Shah’s inclusion in a list of the most powerful Indians. The ICC Jay Shah controversy emerged after the governing body promoted Shah’s 22nd position in the IE100 list for 2026, prompting questions about the relevance of such content on official cricket platforms.
The post, shared through the ICC’s official social media accounts, described the recognition as well-deserved and expressed confidence that it would motivate Shah to further contribute to the sport. However, the content triggered backlash from sections of the cricket community, who argued that the governing body’s channels should prioritise cricket-related updates.
Fans question ICC’s communication approach
Several users on social media criticised the ICC for sharing what they viewed as a personal achievement of its chairman rather than information directly related to the sport. Some described the move as inappropriate for an international governing body, while others called for a clearer distinction between institutional communication and individual recognition.
How to watch PSL 11 live in Pakistan and worldwide
Critics suggested that such content could raise concerns about the use of official platforms, with some urging the ICC to maintain a focus on cricket operations, tournaments and development initiatives.
Previous criticism over promotional content
This is not the first time the ICC has faced scrutiny over content involving its chairman. Last year, the organisation was criticised after Jay Shah appeared multiple times in a promotional video for the World Test Championship (WTC) final between Australia and South Africa.
In the 45-second video, Shah was shown repeatedly, including during his arrival at the venue and while presenting the ICC Test mace at the closing ceremony. The video attracted negative reactions from viewers and was later removed from official platforms.
The ICC has not issued a detailed response to the latest criticism.
Today's E-Paper