During the 2025 ICC Women’s ODI World Cup match between Pakistan and Bangladesh, held on October 2, 2025, at the R. Premadasa Stadium in Colombo, former Pakistani women’s cricket captain Sana Mir, now a commentator, referred to Pakistani batsman Natalia Pervaiz as being from “Kashmir, Azad Kashmir” when discussing her journey to play cricket in Lahore.
The term “Azad Kashmir” is Pakistan’s official designation for the region India calls Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (Kashmir), a disputed territory at the heart of the tensions between India and Pakistan.
This casual comment, meant to highlight Pervaiz’s resilience, sparked a controversy due to its political undertones, especially at a major global event co-hosted by India and Sri Lanka. Impact
The comment quickly went viral, amplifying the existing rivalries between India and Pakistan in cricket and overshadowing the tournament’s focus on women’s cricket.
Social media exploded within hours, with Indian fans and influencers tagging the ICC, the BCCI, and commentators such as Mir Raj and Anjum Chopra, demanding Mir’s immediate dismissal. Hashtags such as #RemoveSanaMir and #AzadKashmir trended on X (formerly Twitter), garnering over 50,000 mentions in the first 24 hours.
Pakistani supporters, for their part, defended it as an innocuous narrative, accusing the Indian media of hypersensitivity. The backlash extended to mainstream media: Indian channels such as India Today and Times of India aired segments labeling it “propaganda,” while Pakistani voices such as Arfa Feroz Zake called it a “failure of Indian media propaganda.”
This incident disrupted the narrative of unity in women’s cricket, which the ICC promotes as inclusive. It also highlighted bias in the sources of the commentary: Mir cited an ESPNcricinfo player profile that initially mentioned “Azad Kashmir” (later edited to “Pakistan-administered Kashmir”), raising questions about neutral fact-checking in broadcasts.
Personal scrutiny of Sana Mir: Mir faced intense online harassment, including death threats and calls for a boycott from Indian users. On October 2, she issued a clarification on X: “My comment… was only meant to highlight the challenges she faced… I have no ill intent or intention to hurt feelings. Please don’t politicize this.”
Despite this, calls for her dismissal persisted, with figures such as journalist Vikrant Gupta publicly urging a boycott. Mir, inducted into the ICC Hall of Fame in early 2025, saw her reputation as a pioneer momentarily tarnished, although the Pakistani fans rallied behind her.
The ICC and BCCI did not remove Mir from the panel, prioritizing the continuity of the broadcast. She continued to commentate on the important India vs. Pakistan match on October 5, 2025, alongside Indian legends such as Mithali Raj.
This decision drew criticism from Indian nationalists, who considered it lenient with the “provocation,” but was praised by neutral observers for upholding freedom of expression in sport.
The dispute fueled tensions ahead of the IND-W vs. PAK-W match, with some Indian fans threatening to boycott the broadcast. It also reignited debates surrounding the recent 2025 Asian Cup, where similar gestures (e.g., Haris Rauf’s provocative celebrations) had intensified friction between India and Pakistan. No matches were interrupted, but audience analytics showed a 15% increase in polarized online engagement, according to initial reports.
Indian media amplified the story for days, portraying it as “introducing politics into sports,” while Pakistani media dismissed it as an overreaction. This mirrored historical flashpoints, such as the 2019 World Cup handshake snub, which strained cricket diplomacy amid the disputes in Kashmir.
Neutrality in commentary is critical: Sports broadcasts must enforce stricter guidelines on politically sensitive topics. Commentators like Mir should rely on verified, apolitical sources to avoid inadvertent escalations.
The ICC could implement pre-broadcast sensitivity training, especially for Indo-Pakistani matches.
Social media amplifies the risks: In an age of instant virality, a single sentence can ruin careers and events.
Mir’s swift clarification mitigated some damage but failed to stem the tide, highlighting the need for platforms like X to moderate hate speech more quickly during live sports.
This episode underscores cricket’s dual role in Indo-Pakistani relations: a bridge to peace, but also a battleground for nationalism. The BCCI and PCB should collaborate on joint protocols to depoliticize commentary, ensuring that events like the Women’s World Cup focus on sporting achievements over geopolitics. Empowerment vs.
As a trailblazer, the Mir incident reveals the additional scrutiny female commentators face. It calls for greater institutional support to protect them from gendered or nationalist attacks, fostering inclusion in a male-dominated field.
Overall, while the controversy dissipated after the IND-PAK match (which India won resoundingly), it serves as a warning: in the context of cricket’s boom, words matter as much as wickets.
