On the Wisden World Cup Daily Podcast soon after, I acknowledged how it did not look good at a World Cup game. For someone with nearly half a century of one-day hundreds, to briefly stall the backend of a straightforward chase was very uncharacteristic of Kohli himself, a man so deeply entrenched in the concept of a team man.

As the swathe of reactions began to pour in, I realised how extreme the pushback to Kohli’s century had been. He was branded a selfish ton-monger, one who had for his own convenience allowed sentiment to come in the middle of tangible metrics like balls to spare and net run rate. And my opinion began to change.

Firstly, it wasn’t even Kohli’s call. KL Rahul, himself deprived of a century by a shot hit too well against Australia, made up his mind to ensure Kohli got his ten days later. In Rahul’s words, Kohli was “confused” whether manipulating the strike would be perceived well, but Rahul goaded him to get his three figures when there was barely anything to lose.

Instead of celebrating a rather sweet moment of camaraderie, the aftermath became an all-out attack on the supposed breach of the game’s integrity. Compounded further by the widely debated non-wide call, the sequence just did not feel right for many.

Kohli was happy to forgo his attempt, if not for his insistent partner. Bangladesh made it clear there were no intentional wides and it was all a fair game. What is the uproar for, then?

India’s perceived power in cricketing circles is immense. They are, for many, the mean, big bullies of the sport with the power to contort anything. Kohli is often at the centre of that flexing, the poster boy of India’s global supremacy. As a result, anything that veers off expected lines is viewed with raised eyebrows.

You can question the wide call, you can even sigh at the calculative end to a commanding chase. But there’s very little for which to fault the man himself. Rarely, if ever, has he been found guilty of breaching the integrity of the sport. Eventually, it wasn’t even slow: Kohli scored 29 off his last 17, a strike rate of 170. If your argument is that someone like Rohit Sharma (unlike Kohli, not accused of “selfishness”) has been sacrificing himself for the greater good, ensuring the team’s gotten off to fliers, even he had a strike rate of 112 after the first ten overs.

[caption id=”attachment_588152″ align=”alignnone” width=”1200″] Virat Kohli, Rohit Sharma and KL Rahul of India celebrate India’s win against Bangladesh[/caption]

If net run rate is your concern, it doesn’t seem to be India’s. After the Afghanistan match, Jasprit Bumrah disarmingly stated that the team didn’t really care about it until the backend of the tournament. It’s the way they want to play this tournament, coasting along at their comfort, picking some milestones on the way, and keeping a team ethos that pushes one to have another’s back.

Bottom line, India cantered to a seven-wicket win with just under nine overs to spare. They sit comfortably on the second spot. They’ve got a seriously challenging lineup of games waiting for them after this, and it could be that, in a week’s time, this bubble of invincibility bursts.

Bring out the loudspeakers when the declined singles become the reason for a missed spot in the semi-finals. Until then, don’t let hypotheticals sour a perfectly good achievement.

Indian fans thrive on sentiment. It often conflicts with the analytical side of cricket, one defined by laws and numbers and team results. But even in those statistics, the centuries column remains a prominent number.

It might not matter to Kohli as much, but for fans deprived of one for three years, the recent burst of tons has been a personal relief and victory to many. It’s not that this century came on fans’ demand, but the manner, and the achievement, was a cause of celebration to many. Let’s not push disgruntled faces over smiling ones. The century harmed no one. And if you’re worried about the precedence it sets, we really need to find ways to stop great batters from being so much in control that they can manipulate international matches at will.

The fact remains that India are, so far at least, one of the top two teams of the tournament. The approach to Kohli’s century isn’t a route they will take when there’s more at stake. Neither was it selfish, nor an attack at the game’s integrity.

Save your loudspeakers for better cricketing topics please.