Sport allows for gut, glory and triumph but no triumphalism that takes victory for granted

First, a disclaimer. This isn’t a criticism of the proud, skillful and valiant men who appeared in the final donning the Indian jersey and ended up on the losing side. They were outmaneuvered and outplayed in the title clash by a clinical Australian side, but that is just the nature of the sport. In the white heat of despair, many may have already forgotten that this is the same Australia against whom India had registered a comprehensive victory in the group stages of the ODI World Cup. During that six-wicket win on 8 October that Rohit Sharma and his men registered with 52 balls to spare, the Aussies who dished out such a formidable performance in the final, had looked ordinary and clueless — signifying the glorious uncertainty that defines cricket. I have often wondered why quadrennial tournaments such as the ICC ODI Cricket World Cup, that feature an exhaustive round-robin structure, do not follow the ‘best-of-three’ format to decide who gets to lift the title. This isn’t the argument of a sore loser. The Indian skipper is an advocate for this format though he had made this suggestion for the World Test Championships. The logic, however, is clear. Every team, after all, is entitled to one bad day in the office, especially in such a long tournament. The staunchest and most partisan Indian supporter would be forced to admit that Australia won Sunday’s game fair and square but somehow, somewhere, it feels unjust. Even the most casual observer of the game would agree that this current Indian side displayed brutal domination of their opponents in the group stages and in the semifinal, winning nine out of nine with room to spare. They were led admirably by skipper Rohit who carried a lazy elegance and fearlessness while batting and displayed tactical nous and dynamic leadership while shuffling his resources on the field. Coach Rahul Dravid was the perfect foil. As an opener, Rohit’s breezy knocks stymied the bowlers, demoralized opponents and set the stage for other batters to build and capitalize on. This formula worked so well that India won all its matches in a canter up until the final, when nothing seemed to go the hosts’ way. While India brushed aside opponents and entered the final with a swagger, Australians suffered more than one bad day. They lost to India and South Africa by big margins and barely scraped through against the bravehearts from Afghanistan thanks to a superlative effort from Glenn Maxwell. Call me superstitious but this is why I wanted the Indian team to exhaust its mandatory ‘bad day’ quota in the group stages. It wasn’t to be, and the dreaded ‘law of average’ caught up with the Indians in the final. This is not to take anything away from the Australians. Regardless of their slow starts and troubles with team composition they are a different beast in the knockout stages. They keep finding a way to win. That is what champions are made of. The Australians have now won their sixth ODI World Cup title among which two came in India, and once each in Australia, England, South Africa and the West Indies. As ORF America’s Dhruva Jaishankar wrote on X (formerly Twitter), “With apologies to @GaryLineker, one day cricket is a simple game in which 22 players hit a ball around for 100 overs and in the end, the Aussies always win.” Many of us in Generation X who had been witness to the traumatic drubbing of Sourav Ganguly’ India by Ricky Pointing’s rowdy band of Aussies in 2003 were dreading the similarities and hoping for sweet revenge and redemption. We still remember how the supercilious bunch led by Ponting had pushed and shoved then BCCI president Sharad Pawar off the stage during the prize distribution ceremony that added humiliation to the bruising defeat. In contrast, Pat Cummins’s Australians are genuinely nice guys on and off the field. There is no shame to lose to such a thoroughly professional and mentally tough side, so even though I am heartbroken I shall maintain that the title went to the team that played better on the day, not to the team that had dominated the tournament except in the only match that mattered in the end. Tough luck. Though I have no complaints whatsoever against the Indian team — who deserve our unqualified praise and gratitude — I do have one grouse, however. Were the over-the-top pre-match celebrations necessary? This is not to suggest a causal relationship between the events and the outcome of the match, but the incredible amount of hype — that generated feverish expectations among a billion people and piled unnecessary pressure on the cricketers — was built on bottomless optimism that crossed all boundaries and stepped into the realm of delusion. We convinced ourselves that the Aussies would be blown away and all that the Indian side need to do was to turn up for the occasion. This unbridled optimism, even delusion, was tempered with zero circumspection. Calm-headed analyses were replaced by the meth-high of certainty. In the approach of more than one player it became evident that intimidation and the occasion had got the better of them. It seems churlish to point this out now but the act of organising a pre-match airshow by the IAF, the Bollywood performances, ‘laser and light show’ seemed excessive and smacked of misplaced arrogance and hubris. Perhaps the powers that be smelt an opportunity to cash in on the popularity of the sport. Sport, however, is a great leveller. It allows for guts, glory and triumph but no muscular triumphalism that overlooks the fact that the match is to be decided on the field, not off it. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views. Read all the Latest News, Trending News, Cricket News, Bollywood News, India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.