I was happy to see India beat Sri Lanka yesterday. But two things are indisputable. One is that Sri Lanka did a good job of the chase, but just ran out of gas. They started explosively and if they had wickets in the hand, they may very well have won it. Second is that India did not do well on the field, missing catches, run-outs and stumpings. And they knew it too.

So imagine my surprise when I look up the reactions to the final and see some people write about “sweet revenge”.

Do people seriously believe that if Sri Lanka had batted first, India would have won? I don’t think India would have even chased down 273 (the score that the Sri Lankans made) or even 200 for that matter. The third match is proof enough.

The whole Cup has been a losing proposition, like the Bangladesh vs Gutted West Indies Test series. The only thing that could be proved from that series was if Bangladesh were even worse than we thought. But since Bangladesh beat the unofficial West Indies, nothing was resolved. We know that they are better than second-and-third-stringers, but are they capable of beating a Test nation? Don’t even ask.

In the same way, the only way India or Sri Lanka could have established themselves as the real champs were if they chased down the total. In this case, Sri Lanka failed. So we don’t really have an answer as to who the better team is. Each team won batting first. So the only difference was the toss.

Let’s wait till the Champions Trophy to figure out who the better ODI nation is. Until then, people really ought to quit screaming, “India is No. 1″ until we have more evidence, else there is no credibility left when India actually wins something.