The Asia Cup match between India and Pakistan in Dubai didn’t just produce fireworks on the field—it stirred controversy off it too. The usual handshake at the toss and at the post-match presentations became a flashpoint when Suryakumar Yadav, India’s captain, declined to engage in the customary handshake, citing solidarity with victims of the Pahalgam terror attack. This decision, though aligned with emotional weight and political sensitivities, drew sharp criticism and a formal protest from the Pakistan team management, which called the act unsportsmanlike.

Things escalated when Salman Ali Agha, Pakistan’s captain, skipped the presentation ceremony in response. He and his team felt that the spirit of the game had been compromised. Yadav defended his course, saying that some moments are bigger than the traditions of sport; in his view, honoring victims and standing by national concerns took precedence. He made clear that government and board decisions were in sync with his stance.

The match itself saw India dominate, winning by seven wickets. But instead of celebration uniting both sides under the sportsmanship banner, the handshake controversy has stirred debate about where sport ends and diplomacy begins. Critics argue that competitions should transcend political tensions; supporters counter that athletes are also citizens with convictions. For now, the gesture or its absence has become far more than just an after-match formality. It underscores how in contests like IND vs PAK, every handshake (or lack thereof) carries symbolic weight.