CAN Weighs ICC Complaint Over PCB NOC Dispute

A report says Nepal's cricket board is preparing to take its NOC dispute with the PCB to the ICC, after a reported $25,000-per-player demand left only one of seven Pakistani signings able to play in NPL Season 3.

The ICC Escalation Report

A report carried by CREX on 30 October 2026 says the Cricket Association of Nepal is preparing to raise the Pakistan Cricket Board's handling of no-objection certificates (NOCs) with the International Cricket Council, after a reported demand of $25,000 per player left most of the Pakistani signings in Nepal Premier League Season 3 unable to play. The report, attributed to Nepal's Rhinos Army, says CAN officials consider the PCB's conduct "unacceptable" and are preparing to raise the issue with the ICC as tensions between the two boards continue to escalate.

That escalation has not been confirmed by a public CAN statement or an ICC filing, and this article does not present it as one. What is firmly on the record is the dispute underneath it: the PCB is reported to have demanded $25,000 per player for NOCs at the last minute, and only one of the seven Pakistani players signed for Season 3, Hussain Talat, has actually played. The ICC report matters because it would move a franchise-level clearance row into a board-to-board argument, at a moment when Nepal is about to host the ICC Asia Conference in Kathmandu from 19 to 21 November, alongside the closing stages of the NPL.

CAN president Chatur Bahadur Chand is quoted in the report as saying: "PCB demanded payment of $25,000 per player from CAN within 48 hours and threatened to cancel Pakistani players' NOCs if the payment was not made." The PCB has not publicly confirmed a fee, and its NOC guide in place since 2020 makes no mention of a $25,000 payment for participation in foreign franchise leagues, according to ProPakistani's 30 October report, which cited The Kathmandu Post.

Seven Signings, One Player Cleared

The Kathmandu Post counted seven Pakistani players signed by three franchises for Season 3. Karnali Yaks signed Pakistan T20 captain Sahibzada Farhan and Hussain Talat; Janakpur Bolts signed Iftikhar Ahmed and Hunain Shah; and Chitwan Rhinos signed Usama Mir, Hasan Ali and Mohammad Nawaz. Of those seven, only Talat has played, after Karnali completed what its officials described as the necessary procedure for his clearance.

The human cost of the row is clearest at Janakpur. Iftikhar and Hunain arrived in Kathmandu, sat with the squad for the opening match against Karnali Yaks, and still could not take the field. Janakpur Bolts chief executive Niroj Khatiwada told The Kathmandu Post: "This is definitely a disappointment for us. In a broader context, it is a big blow for overall Nepali cricket." Khatiwada confirmed neither player would represent the franchise this season, although both would stay briefly for training sessions and to share their experience with younger players, with travel and accommodation covered by the franchise but no match fees paid on appearance-based agreements.

Chitwan, meanwhile, had to rebuild on the move, bringing in Tom Taylor and Daniel Richard Mousley as replacements after losing its Pakistani signings, with Mir having already arrived in Kathmandu before being ruled out. The franchises have already demanded a foreign-player draft to control recruitment costs and make financial planning easier, a direct response to being left exposed by a clearance decision they did not control.

Farhan Return Question Ahead of Karnali Match

The most immediate open question concerns Farhan. He had already arrived in Kathmandu before the PCB called him back for national duty, and reports said he could return to Nepal after 31 October, when Pakistan's ODI tri-series against Sri Lanka and England reached its final. A further report said Farhan was willing to have the reported $25,000 deducted from his own contract fees to honour his Karnali commitment. None of that amounts to confirmation that he has returned, and no franchise announcement of his return had appeared by the time of writing.

The timing is what makes the question live rather than academic. Karnali Yaks face Kathmandu Gorkhas in Match 10 on Monday, 2 November at the TU Ground in Kirtipur, and the schedule leaves no room for a delayed arrival to be quietly absorbed later in the week. If Farhan is cleared and available, Karnali regain the tournament's most high-profile Pakistani signing at the top of the order; if he is not, the Yaks continue with the squad that has already carried them to the top of the early points table, and the NOC row remains a story about a signing that never became a season.

CAN's own public line has been more cautious than the ICC report suggests. Secretary Paras Khadka told Kantipur that it was up to the franchises, saying: "If the franchises fulfil the rules of PCB, which is essential, Pakistani players can play. We must respect the rules." That position sits uneasily alongside a reported ICC escalation, because it concedes the PCB's authority over its own players while the escalation would challenge how that authority was exercised. Both can be true at once: CAN can respect the NOC system in principle and still argue that a last-minute fee, applied after deals were signed and players had travelled, was not a fair use of it.

What an ICC Referral Could and Could Not Do

An ICC referral would not, on its own, put a Pakistani player on the field at Kirtipur. Member boards retain authority over their own players' NOCs, and the ICC does not set a standard clearance fee or routinely override a board's workload and availability decisions. What a referral could do is force a conversation the PCB has so far avoided in public: whether a reported $25,000-per-player demand, imposed at short notice and without a published rule behind it, is consistent with the way boards are expected to treat each other's leagues. The precedent cuts both ways for Nepal, because the same NOC system that blocked these players is the one that protects Nepali players' availability for their own national commitments.

That is why the more durable consequence of this row may not be decided in an ICC room at all. Franchises have already changed their behaviour, signing replacements at short notice and calling for a draft system, and the Post's analysis argued that Nepali teams will increasingly have to diversify overseas recruitment towards boards with more flexible NOC policies or towards non-contracted internationals who do not face strict board restrictions. Former Pakistan fast bowler Shoaib Akhtar, who pledged to raise the row with the PCB, struck a more hopeful note during the NPL's opening-day coverage, saying: "I am sure Pakistan will look into this matter and I think they will allow players for the next year. Hopefully." Hope and a draft system are very different answers to the same problem, and the franchises, for now, are pursuing the practical one.

For supporters, the distinction that matters is between a report and a result. A report that CAN is preparing to raise the issue with the ICC is a sign of how seriously Nepal's board now takes the dispute, and it raises the stakes for any future Pakistani signing. It is not yet a filing, a ruling, or a clearance, and until CAN or the ICC says otherwise, the seven signings remain what they have been since the season began: one player cleared, two sent home from Janakpur, one captain in limbo, and a league learning, in public, how much of its planning depends on another board's signature.