ICC World Twenty20, Religion and myth-busting

Myth 1: This is a World Cup: ICC has clarified that this is ICC World Twenty20 and NOT a World Cup. There is only one World cup in cricket, held every four years and Australia are the current champions. ICC World Twenty20 is a biennial event replacing ICC Champions Trophy, so Indian media would do well not to proclaim the team as 'World Cup Winners' to sell more copies (or catch more eyeballs). TOI even goes to the extent of saying Patahn brothers playing in a final is third such instance in a World Cup final after Chappel and Wuagh brothers. Please! We have won the tournament so there is a reason to celebrate, and moreso because this team showed a spirit which we dont associate with our team, but this just doesnt make this tournament more important than it is - how dismissive would we have been if had been knocked out early (actually our cricket board had been dismissive of it, was almost forced itnoTwenty20 by ICC)? So how come a tournament become 'THE World Cup' just because we won it?

Myth 2: Matches are won in heaven or by religions: "In 1992 Pakistan won the World Cup in the holy month of Ramadan after beating New Zealand in the semi-final" was Shoaib's pre-match statement expecting the repeat of the same in finals in Wanderers on Monday. Then after the match followed it up with another howler "First of all I want to say something over here. I want to thank you back home Pakistan and where the Muslim lives all over the world."

I dont know the ways of the almighty, but if he had to be one someone's side based on his religious affilitations, then he would/should be on the side of two brothers who were born to a muezzin father and grew up in a mosque compound - Irfan and Yousuf - at least empirical evidence suggests so as one of them was man-of-the-match and other chipped in with a quickfire 15 and a very economical over, all critical in the context of the match. I will be delighted if divine interventions decided cricket matches, as in India we will be hedged against supremacy of one divine path against other. We will have enough numbers from all beliefs praying for His intervention, so whether Lord or Allah or Ganesha intervenes, we will always win!

Myth3: These players are good enough to replace Big 3 in other forms of cricket: There is a clamour for replacing the big-three with the yougsters who played this Twenty20 tournament. People forget that Uthappa was a big flop in the World Cup and Gambhir has had enough chances in test cricket as well as ODIs with success only against weaker teams. Sachin, Saurav and Dravid were 3 of top 4 run-corers for India in England. Let's look at rest of the Twenty20 team. Sehwag was inconsistent in this tournament as well, and anyway he, Yuvraj (183 ODIs), Irfan (73 ODIs, 25 Tests) and Harbhajan (157 ODIs, 57 Tests) are part of old establishment and not new. So who are these new players who will bring the dawn of Indian cricket? RP Singh was most consistent Indian bowler on England tour as well, and while he has grown in stature, his find cant be attributed to Twenty20. Rohit Sharma could be only find of this tournament, who with his technique and temparament, has the potential to do well in longer versions of the game and can challenge the big-three (and not to forget Laxam, who in my books should be on the team sheet before Saurav in a test match).

Tonking sixes off hapless bowlers with 3 overs to go and no fear of man or God, is a different proposition to walking in to bat at the WACA with team 3 down for 20-something the first morning of a test match, with four days and two sessions to play. Let us celebrate the spirit of this team, the fact that Indians can field well if they want to, and that we have a captain who will now have the confidence and authority to deal with all kinds of egos on his own terms, and the fact that we had a few uplifiting evenings. And then prepare for the reality of the Boxing Day at MCC.