“Sri Lanka Cricket Board Bankrupted by Shammi De Silva?”
Billions Earned, Empty Accounts, and a Nation Asking: Where Did the Money Go?
The collapse of institutions in Sri Lanka rarely arrives with a dramatic explosion. It comes quietly — hidden behind smiling press conferences, luxury hotel meetings, foreign tours, and glossy sponsorship banners. By the time the public realises the treasury is empty, the officials responsible are already boarding flights to Dubai, Melbourne, or Singapore.
Now, serious questions are being raised over the financial state of Sri Lanka Cricket under the leadership of Shammi Silva.
For years, Sri Lanka Cricket collected billions of rupees from ICC tournaments, broadcasting rights, sponsorship deals, bilateral cricket series, and international events. The game remained one of the few functioning entertainment industries in a bankrupt nation. Yet today, insiders, club officials, and frustrated supporters are openly asking an uncomfortable question:
If the board earned so much money, why are players and clubs allegedly struggling to receive payments?
Even more troubling are persistent allegations circulating within cricketing and political circles:
Was cricket money diverted into luxury land projects in Unawatuna? Were overseas properties quietly purchased in Australia? Was money transferred into offshore accounts in Dubai? And if the board was financially healthy, why did Shammi Silva reportedly leave office with virtually no meaningful cash reserves available?
The public deserves answers — not carefully choreographed media statements.
The situation became explosive after the Auditor General’s report submitted in September 2023 painted a devastating picture of financial irregularities, procurement violations, and questionable expenditures within Sri Lanka Cricket. The findings read less like the accounts of a sporting institution and more like the audit trail of a collapsing state corporation.
Among the most shocking revelations was the procurement of five “Super Sopper” machines in 2019, where Sri Lanka Cricket allegedly overpaid USD 185,000 through what investigators described as a fictitious manufacturer arrangement. Two officials were also reportedly sent abroad twice for the same procurement exercise, costing Sri Lankan cricket supporters an additional LKR 3.5 million.
Then came the luxury travel culture.
During the 2022 ICC T20 World Cup in Australia, executive committee travel expenses allegedly ballooned to more than LKR 68 million for 14 officials. Only a fraction of that amount was ever repaid. Meanwhile, CEO Ashley de Silva’s overseas trips reportedly included thousands of dollars in questionable allowances.
Ordinary Sri Lankan cricket fans watching matches from tiny televisions in power-cut-ridden homes were unknowingly funding what critics now describe as “sports tourism for administrators.”
The Auditor General’s report also described astonishing governance failures. Fifty-six visas were allegedly issued for the T20 World Cup delegation, including executives, associates, and non-essential individuals with little or no operational necessity. One individual reportedly never returned to Sri Lanka.
The handling of ICC hospitality tickets became another national embarrassment. Out of 100 complimentary tickets, only three reportedly went to players, while executives and officers consumed the overwhelming majority. Several tickets were allegedly destroyed. Additional tickets worth millions of rupees were purchased, yet dozens remained unused.
In any professionally managed sporting institution, such revelations would trigger resignations, criminal investigations, forensic audits, and parliamentary scrutiny.
But in Sri Lanka, accountability often disappears faster than a batting collapse at the Wanderers Stadium.
Critics argue that Sri Lanka Cricket increasingly became a private kingdom dominated by politically connected administrators rather than a transparent sporting body accountable to players and supporters. While school cricket grounds deteriorated, club cricketers struggled financially, and grassroots development stagnated, the administrative elite appeared to enjoy international travel, VIP privileges, luxury accommodation, and extraordinary influence.
The irony is painful.
Sri Lanka once produced world-class cricketers through discipline, sacrifice, and raw talent. Legends emerged from dusty school grounds and modest coaching systems. Today, many fear the administrative culture surrounding cricket has become more lucrative than cricket itself.
Several former players and observers have privately questioned whether the board’s finances were handled with sufficient transparency during the peak years of ICC income distribution. Sri Lanka hosted major tournaments, secured sponsorship agreements, and benefited from television rights revenues worth billions. Yet there remains little visible evidence of long-term infrastructure transformation proportional to those earnings.
Where are the high-performance centres?
Where are the provincial academies?
Where is the sustainable investment pipeline for future generations?
More importantly — where is the money?
The silence surrounding alleged overseas assets and offshore financial connections only deepens public suspicion. At present, many allegations remain unproven and require proper investigation. But in the absence of transparency, speculation fills the vacuum.
That is precisely why an independent forensic audit is now essential.
Not an internal committee.
Not a politically appointed inquiry.
Not another report buried inside a ministry cupboard.
Sri Lanka needs a full forensic financial investigation into Sri Lanka Cricket’s accounts, procurement systems, overseas transactions, travel expenditures, sponsorship arrangements, and asset declarations covering the entire tenure of the previous administration.
Because cricket in Sri Lanka is no longer merely a sport. It is a public institution carrying enormous emotional, cultural, and financial significance.
And if billions vanished while the game itself deteriorated, then the greatest scandal in Sri Lankan cricket may not have occurred on the field — but inside the boardroom.