HOW TWENTY20 FAVOURS THE UNDERDOGS

When Twenty20 was invented... and particularly when international T20 matches began... a lot of people said that this format of the game will really bring the minnows into the game and that it will give a chance for them to cause upsets.

In 2007, Zimbabwe beat Australia and Bangladesh beat West Indies. In 2009, Netherlands beat England and Ireland beat Bangladesh. The theory was vindicated. In 2010, no minnow managed to beat a top-8 team. So, was it a tournament without any upsets? I don't think so. It had one of the biggest upsets of them all. England winning a World Cup tournament... it has to be an upset.

England were never the favourites... they were just 'strong contendors'! How many strong contendors have we seen fall by the wayside in many a World Cup tournaments... India in 2010, Australia in 2009, West Indies in 2007, Pakistan and India in 2007 ODI World Cup, South Africa in 2003 ODI World Cup... the list will never end.

But in my books, the English team was not even a strong contendor. South Africa and England could never be strong contendors for me... atleast till now. England have managed to change that.

All through these years, England had not managed a single ODI World Cup dsepite having reached the finals in 1979, 1987 and 1992. There is no specific reason why they could not win it... especially in 1992... they had a strong team then. So it should not be surprising that their first big win in a World Cup has come in the Twenty20 format... the format that is meant to suit the 'underdogs'!

So what say? Is someone placing their money on South Africa for the next Twenty20 World Cup? Someone said they were 'underdogs'...