I have a standing theory that the Pakistani way of problem-solving is throwing things at the problem and hoping something sticks. Which might be why we, as a nation, have such a preoccupation with fast bowling. It might also explain whatever has transpired since the Pakistan-India match last Sunday.

As has been the case for much of the past few years, this past subcontinental encounter was about nearly everything but the cricket. It just so happened that this time, it was about an actual war.

After years of using jang jargon to describe a rivalry that was increasingly leaning towards turning into an arm-wrestling contest between an ant and a gorilla, this was it. Broadcasters would finally get to have their cake to eat: a giant one shaped like a Pakistan-India cricket match, frosted with even more geopolitical context than before.

The broadcasters had hit the jackpot. Pakistan fans would probably just hit themselves in distress.

As it turns out, however, there is little that nationalistic fervour can do in the way of a skill deficit. Simply put, Pakistan were outplayed. Whatever impetus the team took from the conflict onto the pitch didn’t translate into better shot-selection, or particularly incisive bowling, or fielding that would make you want to take your head out of your hands.

But really, it shouldn’t have, because that’s what everyone says: that there is no place for politics in sports. By that logic, it is healthy for none of the war baggage to have added any more gravity to the type of cricket Pakistan plays against India.

Because sports and politics don’t mix. Not at all.

That is, if you ignore the fact that each team represents a nation-state, which is a fundamentally political category. And that being complicit in certain conflicts gets nations barred from competing in sporting events, or have their flags obscured.

You also have to disregard the Pakistan Cricket Board chairman being the interior minister of the country. And that the........

© Dawn Prism