India, Feb. 3 -- Stepping into the world of cricket increasingly feels like stepping into the theatre of the absurd: Some characters are often spouting gibberish, situations are downright bizarre, and nothing seems logical. The latest is the threat by Pakistan, which has confirmed that while it will play the ICC T20 World Cup, it will boycott its league game against India. The announcement, resulting from Bangladesh's decision not to play in India (but which began with the Indian board's order to an IPL team to release one its Bangladeshi players), is ludicrous. On Sunday, India and Pakistan played in the U-19 World Cup in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. It too was a World Cup, and it too featured India and Pakistan. So, why did Pakistan allow its juniors to play in a neutral venue if it won't let its seniors do so? Then, there is the matter of what Pakistan will do if it boycotts the league match but runs into India in the knockout rounds. Will it pull out of that game? But there are other larger questions as well? ICC is yet to offer a satisfactory explanation on why India was allowed to play the Champion's Trophy in the UAE (instead of in Pakistan, the host country), and why the same courtesy wasn't extended to Bangladesh. The two situations (and countries) may not be comparable - India and Pakistan were just coming off a military fracas sparked by the Pahalgam terror attack by Pakistan-supported terror groups, and Dhaka really had nothing to complain about - but ICC hasn't exactly covered itself in glory over its handling of Bangladesh. Ironically, ICC has said (in the context of the latest crisis) that this position of "selective participation is difficult to reconcile with the fundamental premise of a global sporting event where all qualified teams are expected to compete on equal terms per the event schedule". But even more bizarre is Pakistan's approach (it has written itself into a crisis it wasn't originally part of). After all, the decision could cripple Pakistan's cricketing economy....