Two major cricket rivalries have fallen short in the T20 World Cup, but there is still one to watch

Two of cricket’s biggest rivalries – India vs Pakistan and Australia vs England – are played over a 24-hour period during the 2024 T20 World Cup.

While this fierce rivalry still generates great excitement, the Australia vs England matchup fell short of expectations, with Australia winning the T20 match comfortably. India versus Pakistan always creates hysteria and again this happens even in New York as many expats from both countries live in the US.

Coming into the heavyweight showdown India had lost only once in the World Cup to Pakistan and that was in the T20 format in 2021.

This imbalance was partly explained years ago by an accomplished Indian cricketer: “Pakistan were trying to impress India,” he explained, “while we were only interested in impacting the West.”

Pakistan’s past cricketing history may also help explain India’s grip on the World Cup. In early 1973 the Pakistan team was described as “Panikstan” due to the suicidal nature of their 92-run defeat to Australia at the MCG. They then confirmed their new nickname by losing the third Test at the SCG by 52 runs despite only chasing a moderate target of 159.

The nickname “Panikstan” came to the fore again in the 2024 World Cup when Pakistan lost an important match to India in New York. After maneuvering into a strong position where they were expected to win, Pakistan capitulated and lost the low-scoring encounter by six runs.

This is a typical big brother winning over little brother and this syndrome weighs heavily on Pakistan in World Cup matches.

There is still very competitive cricket to be played in the Super Eights – India vs Australia. It has become a blockbuster contest in recent years.

But in Toronto in 1996 the two teams mingled amicably in a series at the appropriately named Toronto Cricket, Skating and Curling Club. The five-match series ended in a two-all draw when an Indian player hilariously stated: “Soldiers are marching on the border armed with stones but they don’t know where to throw them.”

So good are India and Pakistan that I asked a diverse group of players, “Why are the two countries at war when the players can socialize comfortably?”

The answer is revealing but also concerning. “We understand each other and eat similar foods,” said one Indian player, “and society generally gets along well, but the politicians in each country want to keep the aggro burning.”

Courses in the US again caused controversy, particularly the New York location, which attracted much negative publicity and proved difficult for hitters. In many cases, a score exceeding 100 proves to be the match winner.

The US reputation for making dodgy deals is nothing new. In September 1999, I covered the India A vs Australia A five-match series in Los Angeles, with the respective captains being VVS Laxman and Adam Gilchrist, both of whom would go on to enjoy illustrious international careers.

The throw on that occasion can only be described as “rope”, especially when a genuine pacemaker like Brett Lee is



operating. Clever pitching was taken for granted in 1999, but with the US team having qualified for the Super Eights and being promoted as a viable cricketing nation, this was not enough. Remember, American cricket has long been plagued by organizational turmoil and this could be another example of the chaos brewing in their administration.

While T20 pitches should not be completely in favor of the batsman, there is no excuse for the surface to be considered dangerous.

There is still very competitive cricket to be played in the Super Eights – India vs Australia. It has become a blockbuster contest in recent years.

Even if these two teams put up another interesting match, that won’t disguise the US’ problems. If cricket is to make progress in the US, it must improve its administration and pitches, while convincing local players that the game is worth playing.