The Asia Cup 2025 is just around the corner, bigger than ever before, with eight teams participating, including three Associate Nations: UAE, Oman, and Hong Kong. While this expansion is being celebrated as a step towards inclusivity in Asia Cricket. Debate continues, how relevant is the Asia Cup when compared to the actual cricketing Associate Nations? And who really makes profits from it?
At its core, the Asia Cup has become a commercial giant. With massive broadcasting rights, sponsorships, and advertising revenue, the tournament is a goldmine for full member boards like the BCCI, PCB, and Sri Lanka, along with the Asian Cricket Council ( ACC) and broadcasting companies. The high voltage clashes between India and Pakistan alone attract millions of viewers worldwide, ensuring that money flows steadily regardless of how the rest of the tournament unfolds.
For sponsors and broadcasters, the Asia Cup is less cricketing balance and more about entertainment value and market reach. The full member boards walk away with most of the financial benefits, further strengthening their dominance in world cricket.
Associate Visible but Not Valued
For Associate nations like Oman, Hong Kong, and the UAE, qualifying for the Asia Cup is a proud achievement. Oman's debut this year reflects the slow but steady rise of cricket in non-traditional regions. However, the tournament offers them little beyond fleeting exposure.
The structure of the Asia Cup does not provide these teams with enough matches or long-term opportunities to perform consistently at the highest level. For instance, Hong Kong and Nepal had breakthrough qualifications in previous editions but quickly disappeared from the larger cricketing calendar. With regular fixtures against full members, associate teams end up as token participants rather than equal stakeholders in the tournament.
A Cycle of Inequality
This creates a cycle where full members keep growing stronger financially and competitively while Associate Nations remain stagnant. The Asia Cup does not invest significantly in grassroot cricket in these nations. Even when they qualify through the ACC's men's premier cup, their journey often ends in a group stage, with limited visibility and no sustainable development programs attached to their participation. Contrast this with global events like the T20 World Cup, where associate teams such as Ireland, Scotland, and the Netherlands have made real progress due to consistent opportunities and upset victories. The Asia Cup, however, remains a tightly controlled space where revenue matters more than development.
The real winners of the Asia Cup are the big five boards (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan), the ACC, and broadcasters. They enjoy the revenue attention. Associate Nations, meanwhile, are allowed in the tick to box of inclusivity but rarely see meaningful cricketing or financial growth from the event .
Relevance in Question
This raises a fundamental question: if the Asia Cup does little to accelerate the progress of Associate nations, how relevant is it in shaping Asian cricket's future? New tournaments remain highly relevant commercially, but weak development. It boosts the brand value of cricket in Asia, ensures blockbuster clashes, and generates huge profits for broadcasters. Yet its role in bridging the gap between established and emerging nations is still minimal. In fact, the imbalance is becoming more visible with every edition. While India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka continue to use the tournaments as preparation for bigger ICC events, the associates are treated as fillers. They are often praised for "making history" by qualifying, but that recognition rarely converts into long-term support such as bilateral tours, financial aid, or structural investment. The Asia Cup moved beyond a commercial showpiece to become a true development platform for emerging Cricketing nations. The Asia Cup 2025 profits big boards but offers little growth for associate nations without real investment.