Dhaka’s position, driven by the government-backed safety concerns after the Mustafizur Rahman IPL episode, is that Bangladesh should not travel to India for its group games and wants those matches moved to Sri Lanka, the tournament’s co-host. Bangladesh are scheduled to face the West Indies, England, Italy, and Nepal, with three games listed at the Eden Gardens, Kolkata, and one at the Wankhede Stadium in Mumbai.

How ICC would respond

The ICC has three realistic pathways, and timing will decide which one is viable.

Option one is a compromise: approve a venue switch for Bangladesh’s group matches to Sri Lanka without ripping up the tournament. That preserves the 20-team format and contains the dispute in logistics.

Option two, if the ICC refuses and Bangladesh still decline to play their games in India, is to let the event run with “awarded” matches. In practice, Bangladesh’s opponents would be handed wins and points, while their campaign is functionally dead.

Option three is full withdrawal from the competition. This would force the ICC to decide whether it can replace Bangladesh in time or treat Bangladesh’s fixtures as forfeits. Replacement is clearer for competitive integrity, but becomes harder.

Who replaces Bangladesh?

There is no publicly stated, automated reserve list for T20 World Cups that guarantees who replaces a withdrawing side. If the ICC needs a substitute, it would likely be a discretionary call shaped by fairness, readiness to travel, and the qualification pathway.

Scotland are the obvious headline name because they are a high-ranking Associate team, have World Cup experience, and are plug-and-play competitively. There is a precedent too: Zimbabwe withdrew from the 2009 T20 World Cup, and Scotland replaced them, with the ICC confirming the swap.

But Scotland were not Europe’s next-best finisher in the 2026 pathway. In the Europe Regional Final, the Netherlands and Italy qualified, while Jersey finished above Scotland. If the ICC prioritises qualification performances over rankings and reputation, Jersey can be the team that replaces Bangladesh.

Other near-miss teams from different regional qualifications could enter the conversation, but the ICC would likely favour a replacement that can mobilise quickly and does not create fresh scheduling headaches.

The real stakes

Behind the points tables, this is a governance test. The ICC must balance player safety claims, host obligations, and precedent: if one team can opt out of venues after the schedule drops, others will try it next time. For now, Bangladesh have asked for a movement; what happens next depends on whether that request turns into a withdrawal, and whether the ICC chooses to call the bluff with the start weeks away.