New Delhi: If Barbados was about breaking a curse, Ahmedabad was about building a kingdom. Simply put, India’s current stranglehold on the shortest format is without precedent in cricketing history.
The home team’s 96-run thrashing of New Zealand in Sunday’s final didn’t just secure a historic first-ever title defence, it also signalled a ruthless new era of Indian supremacy in the T20 format.
More importantly, the on-field brilliance also moved the spotlight away from the diplomatic tensions that overshadowed the tournament’s buildup thanks to Bangladesh’s withdrawal due to “security concerns” and Pakistan’s threat to boycott their big-ticket group league fixture against India.
Given that India is the first team to win three T20 World Cups and clinch consecutive titles (2024, 2026), this claim of unparalleled strength makes perfect sense.
Add to this the BCCI — the game’s financial behemoth — and their incredible bench strength, and it becomes a heady cocktail of power and performance.
Besides emerging as the standout team of this World Cup, this Indian squad may well be the finest T20 side ever assembled internationally since the advent of the shortest format more than two decades ago.
India’s supremacy is a throwback to the time when the West Indies of the mid-1970s to 80s and the Australians in the first decade of this millennium called the shots, winning a bagful of global titles and series across the world.
Such has been India’s dominance that they have left the rest of the top-tier teams to fight for second place, something that is not good for the global game as it points to a lack of competition.
While the the manner and margin of India’s victory conveys the team’s superiority in the short format, evaluating the true depth of their cricket will require looking at the players who didn’t even make the squad for this tournament.
Even as the likes of Sanju Samson, Ishan Kishan, Jasprit Bumrah, Axar Patel, Hardik Pandya and Shivam Dube bask in the glory of their achievements, it would be wise to take look at those who missed the cut.
If one were to glance through the records of men like Yashasvi Jaiswal, Shreyas Iyer, Shubman Gill, Ruturaj Gaikwad, and the precocious 14-year-old Vaibhav Sooryavanshi, one would realise the frightening depth of Indian cricket at the moment.
One cannot find fault with the game’s experts when they say that India could very easily field a ‘B’ team and still win the World Cup, because they are stating facts.
The onus is now on the other major teams to stop India from dominating world cricket for years to come.
A combination of factors have contributed to India’s success, including the think tank’s adoption of a high-risk, high-reward strategy that prioritised rapid scoring over wicket preservation, near-perfect execution of plans on the field and clinching the key moments of the game.
And when a team is packed with a dazzling array of talents, including a certain Bumrah, the job gets much easier as they can singlehandedly change the direction of matches in a matter of few balls.
New Zealand the new chokers
With yet another abject surrender in the knockouts of an ICC white-ball tournament, New Zealand seemed to have inherited the tag of chokers from South Africa. The Kiwis have reached six finals in 13 ICC events since 2015, winning only the 2021 World Test Championship.
Some of the decisions made by skipper Mitchell Santner in the final were highly questionable, including the move to bowl first after winning toss instead of focussing on putting scoreboard pressure in the tournament’s biggest game.
Despite India’s top order showing vulnerability to off-spin throughout the tournament, New Zealand left out specialist off-spinner Cole McConchie, who had taken two key wickets in the semi-final against South Africa, for pacer Jacob Duffy.
Furthermore, Glenn Phillips was only given one over early on — despite conceding only five runs — and was not brought back.
Pakistan’s decline
The tournament also saw Pakistan cricket continuing its prolonged slump brought about by frequent captaincy shifts, lack of unity in the team and a lack of player development programme. The Pakistan Cricket Board, highly influenced by the country’s ruling establishment, also played its part in the team’s terminal decline in recent years.
Criticism around pre-seeding
The ICC’s pre-seeding system for the tournament, which locks Super 8 spots based on pre-tournament rankings rather than performance in the group stage, has drawn heavy criticism for favouring India and few other top teams.
This structure, which is designed for commercial broadcasting benefits, resulted in imbalances as all four group winners (India, South Africa, West Indies, Zimbabwe) were placed in one group, while the runners-up got an easier path.
The whole process eliminated the traditional suspense and fairness one associates with a global event in any sport, prioritising commercial gains over real action on the field.
Associates make a mark
Associate teams made a mark in the tournament though they are still a long way from closing the gap with full member nations. Highlights included the USA stretching India, the Netherlands nearly beating Pakistan, England’s close shave against Nepal, and Canada’s Yuvraj Samra scoring a century against New Zealand. Also, Zimbabwe beating Australia to knock the out in the group stage.
