At 9.30am on Sunday, the morning after hammering England, the South African team left their Karachi hotel, boarded a midday flight for Dubai, and checked in to their new accommodation at 3pm.

Seventeen hours later, having barely had time to peruse the room-service menu, they checked out, and boarded a flight for Lahore, landing at 11am local time.

There are journeys to and from the cricket. And then there are journeys other teams are obliged to make because of India.

The journey between Pakistan’s two biggest cities Karachi and Lahore usually takes an hour and three quarters. This one effectively lasted more than a day.

Forget the carbon footprint caused by the charter flight, it was an insane – and, for South Africa, needlessly tiring – itinerary that no global sporting event should even countenance, let alone allow.

The explanation, in case you missed it, tells you everything you need to know about cricket’s power structure. Since India had refused to play any of their games in Pakistan, who the ICC chose as hosts more than three years ago, they have been billeted in Dubai for the duration of a Champions Trophy dubbed ‘hybrid’ by those who would rather not call it ‘hypocritical’.

The prevailing sentiments are fear and cowardice. Because if you upset India, who knows how that will end…

The more powerful India have become, the more latitude they seem to get, until the imbalance is so ingrained, so institutionalised, it no longer merits comment

And because India’s last group game, against New Zealand, did not take place until Sunday, it was unclear whether their semi-final opponents would be South Africa or Australia, who had flown to the Gulf on Friday after their rain-ruined game against Afghanistan.

South Africa, then, had to head to Dubai in case they needed time to acclimatise for today’s first semi; as it turned out, India beat New Zealand, setting up a semi against the Australians, and condemning South Africa to a ludicrous round trip for tomorrow’s second semi, in Lahore against the New Zealanders. Confusing, much?

Quite why the semi-finals couldn’t have been swapped over is anyone’s guess. These days, logic does not feature high up cricket’s agenda.

If all this has a whiff of the world’s politicians flying in to Washington to pay homage to Donald Trump, it’s because India keep behaving – or are allowed to behave – as if the rest of the world should be grateful for their patronage.

We keep being told that the money Indian cricket generates for the global game – anything between 75 to 85 per cent of revenues, possibly a touch more – means that the only conceivable response to the BCCI’s every deed is to be pathetically thankful. 

And, clearly, gratitude should be part of it. But the prevailing sentiments are fear and cowardice. Because if you upset India, who knows how that will end…

The tendency has become self-fulfilling, with schedules arranged – and ICC match referees’ decisions made – to avoid conflict. The more powerful India have become, the more latitude they seem to get, until the imbalance is so ingrained, so institutionalised, it no longer merits comment.

Is there one rule for India and one for the rest? A few recent examples. In 2021, they unilaterally cancelled the fifth Test at Old Trafford at the last minute, to ensure no late Covid infections for the upcoming IPL (that decision cost India a rare series victory in England). For the chaos they caused, there was barely a word of apology.

In 2023, India overruled the ICC’s independent pitch inspector, Andy Atkinson, and insisted on a used surface for their World Cup semi-final against New Zealand at Mumbai

Indian hero Virat Kohli scored a match-winning century to lead his team to the final on home soil

In 2023, they overruled the ICC’s independent pitch inspector, Andy Atkinson, and insisted on a used surface for their World Cup semi-final against New Zealand at Mumbai.

The story, broken by Mail Sport, was easy to dismiss because indifference was mutually beneficial: the ICC, embarrassed by their loss of control over an event bearing their name, happily played it down; the BCCI didn’t give a damn; as for the rest of the media, why credit a rival?

Last year, meanwhile, India knew in advance that they would play their T20 World Cup semi-final in Guyana, making it next to impossible for fans of their eventual opponents to make travel arrangements, and allowing the Indians to strategise far in advance.

Over the winter, Virat Kohli received a cravenly lame fine (20 per cent of his match fee) from Zimbabwean match referee Andy Pycroft for his petulant shoulder charge on Sam Konstas during the Boxing Day Test in Melbourne. Laughably, Kohli tried to blame Konstas.

And in late January, the Indian match referee Javagal Srinath waved through fast bowler Harshit Rana as a concussion substitute for batsman Shivam Dube during a T20 game against England in Pune. Even India’s social-media cheerleaders were embarrassed by that one when Harshit took three wickets and was the difference in India’s 15-run victory. 

And now, we have the lopsided farce of the Champions Trophy.

Taken in isolation, each of these moments might be dismissed as an aberration. Together, they form a travel of direction.

Yet point this out and you will be set upon – either by India’s vast army of online trolls, with their tirelessly aggressive nationalism, or by high-profile commentators, who know how to play to their audience.

Sunil Gavaskar is one of India’s most high-profile defenders whenever they are criticised

Nasser Hussain and Mike Atherton dared to question India’s advantages, and were hounded for it

When Nasser Hussain and Mike Atherton dared to suggest that India enjoyed an advantage by having to name a Champions Trophy squad for only one set of conditions (Dubai), when every other team had to pick for two (Dubai and Pakistan), they were mocked by Sunil Gavaskar.

‘Why don’t you actually look at why your team has not qualified (for the knockouts)?’ he told India Today, shifting the goalposts. ‘Rather than constantly focusing on India, are you even looking at your own backyard?’

Even by Gavaskar’s standards, he left a lot to unpick. The idea that Hussain and Atherton have ignored England, that England are ‘your team’, the idea that India can’t be criticised because England have struggled. Where do you begin with this stuff?

It’s nonsense, of course. And yet it matters. Because when someone of Gavaskar’s stature says it, hundreds of millions of Indian fans are emboldened, and sensible voices are drowned out by a tsunami of illogic.

Many fans argued, for instance, that India had been inconvenienced by playing each of their nine 2023 World Cup group games at a different venue …overlooking the fact that each game still constituted home advantage.

Indian cricket is one of the greatest forces in the history of any sport. But if bowing and scraping simply leads to inequity, it’s not unreasonable to ask whether, occasionally, a little pushback might help us all.

Pakistan’s damp squib 

Spare a thought for Pakistan. Hosting a global event for the first time since they shared duties with India and Sri Lanka at the 1996 World Cup, they have watched the Champions Trophy pass them by with indecent haste.

They began with a bloodless defeat by New Zealand, when the old-fashioned approach of star batsman Babar Azam (64 off 90 balls, despite opening the innings) cost them any chance of chasing down 321.

This was Pakistan’s first tournament as hosts for almost 30 years – and it was over in a flash

Then, because India had shacked up in Dubai, Pakistan’s second home game – and what an occasion it would have been in Lahore – took place over 1,000 miles away from their fans.

It went without saying that India were too good for them in any case. And when New Zealand beat Bangladesh next day, it meant Pakistan were out – after two matches.

To cap it all, their final match – against Bangladesh at Rawalpindi – was abandoned without a ball bowled. And that was that: their first home tournament for 29 years, and it amounted to a single match.

Sport and politics flirt again 

The politicisation of Indian cricket came with a twist when Shama Mohamed, a member of the opposition Congress party, fat-shamed Rohit Sharma on social media. 

In a post she later deleted, Mohamed wrote: ‘Rohit Sharma is fat for a sportsman! Need to lose weight! And of course the most unimpressive Captain India has ever had!’

It didn’t take long for a spokesperson for the ruling BJP to hit back: ‘Those who have lost 90 elections under the captaincy of Rahul Gandhi are calling captaincy of Rohit Sharma unimpressive!

‘I guess 6 ducks in Delhi and 90 election losses is impressive but winning T20 World Cup isn’t!’

But, sure: sport and politics don’t mix.

Rohit Sharma was fat-shamed by an Indian politician… but backed by the ruling BJP

Shama Mohamed, a member of the opposition Congress party, told Sharma that he needs to lose weight

Buttler’s fate was sealed early 

Jos Buttler was right to step down as England one-day captain.

But was the writing on the wall from the moment Brendon McCullum, at his unveiling as England’s white-ball coach last year, urged Buttler to cheer up?

His grins were never convincing after that, a talented man curiously uncomfortable in his own public skin.