Does David Lewis rate Sri Lanka's chances?

It’s here at last. After that vicious wait, the Final. The two best teams; both in form and both hungry. I have been asking people around here for their predictions, and although the consensus is that Australia will win, most people are at least giving Sri Lanka a chance. Almost everyone wants the Lankans to win, but they’re all so accustomed to Australian domination that they can barely even conceive the possibility of a different outcome.

I think a good case can be made for Sri Lanka's chances of victory in the final, much better than the chances the odds-makers and the general public seem to give them. In order to make the case, I think it would help to appeal to a useful tool commonly employed in metaphysics: the theory of Possible Worlds.

The theory of Possible Worlds deals primarily with issues of possibility and contingency. According to the theory, for every possible (and conceivable) occurrence in the universe there exists a Possible World (PW) in which such an event will occur. When one says, "it is possible that event X will occur," that would be equivalent of saying, "there is a Possible World in which X will occur." Our own world is in fact one of the countless possible worlds in existence -- it just happens to be the actual one. [PW’s of course are not real, in the way we understand the word “real”. They do not occur in space and time, they do not interact with our world; they are more like analogous constructs conceptualised to help deal with modal claims.]

But what does all this philosobabble have to do with Sri Lanka? Well, to say that Sri Lanka could win the World Cup final would be the equivalent of saying that "there is a possible world in which Sri Lanka will win the final." That last statement in itself is true, but it isn't very helpful. It merely re-states a trivial logical possibility. We can all imagine a world in which they could win. The question is whether PW_SL (the possible world in which Sri Lanka win the final) corresponds to the actual world in which we live.

So what exactly would PW_SL look like? If we were to look through, say, PW_SL’s edition of the Wisden Almanack from 20 years into the future, what would that look like? What would the chapter on the 2007 Cup say about the (victorious) Sri Lankan team of the time? Winning teams usually share a number of qualities – vague, non-specific virtues that are applicable to most sports (e.g. talent, depth, experience, all-round fitness, luck, etc), and also specialised traits that vary from discipline to discipline.

The “formula” for winning in cricket -- even the slapdash one-day variety -- is not too controversial, compared to that of other sports. For one, you need bowlers. Necessarily. You need at least two, ideally more, consistently threatening (and consistently fruitful) bowlers to be able to keep attacking in the field at all times. Fast bowlers tend to be more useful since they can also bowl at the death, but a good combination of new-ball pace and mid-overs spin can be lethal from some teams; Australia have in fact employed it more than a decade.

Second, you need some opening batters. It doesn’t matter how bottom-heavy your lineup may be, you are not going to get anywhere if your team sinks to 2 for 10 every innings. This has been the fault of both India and Pakistan in recent times. (Well, one fault amongst many, many others.) It also doesn't hurt to have one world-class, top-5 matchwinner in the top/middle order, á la Ponting, de Silva, Pietersen.

There are other requirements, naturally, but these are generally either extensions of other general ones (e.g. fielding in cricket, which is merely a by-product of the fitness and professionalism of a squad), or are simply too nebulous to justify.

When we look through all those qualities, it might soon become clear how many of them this Sri Lankan team already possess. They are a tested, experienced squad, combining talismanic old-timers, classy craftsmen at the peak of their powers, and clear-eyed, exuberant youngsters. Their bowling unit is as good as they come, with the raw fury of Malinga's thunderbolts, the humble professionalism of Vaas' swingers and slower balls, and the open-mouth majesty of Murali's spin. Their batting is varied and balanced, with some top-order belligerence in the form of Sanath Jayasuriya, solidity in the middle overs from the captain and vice-captain, and even depth at the bottom, with Vaas coming it at no. 8. If there is one thing they are missing, it's a raw biffer in the middle-order; someone with wide shoulders and a heavy bat, who can start hitting sixes at will if necessary. (I don't think Sri Lanka have ever had one of those in their lineup, and I doubt there are many people in their entire nation who fit that physical profile. You can't really blame a team for its country's demographics.)

In addition, their buildup throughout the tournament has been  ideal. They have beaten most teams convincingly, picking up confidence and form along the way; but have also lost a couple of good tight matches, staving off any hint of complacency. Although their recent record against Australia is mediocre -- yet still among the best in the world -- they are the last team to have beaten the Aussies in either the semis or the final of a major tournament (World Cup Final 1996; Champions Trophy Semi 2002).

And if all the empirical evidence is not good enough, how about the fact that they easily the coolest team to have come onto the scene in a long time? (At least since the Pakistan of the early 1990s.) History likes a colourful story... it picks the unique over the faceless every time. It's what makes victors memorable. Just think of how many once-in-a-lifetime characters this Sri Lankan team has -- do you think we're ever likely to see another Muralitharan again? Or a Jayasuriya? Or a Malinga? Hell, even another Russel Arnold! And if the weird and unorthodox are not your cup of tea, you need look no further than the middle-order duo of Sangakkara and Jayawardene; the classical beauty and grace of their batting is bound to make even the crustiest of purists cream their pants in delight.

As is plain to see, most of the qualities one would expect to observe in a winning Sri Lankan team (i.e. the Sri Lankan team from PW_SL) are also qualities shared by the actual Sri Lankan team. Or, to put it in different terms, PW_SL and AW (the Actual World) appear to be virtually identical,  in all relevant matters, up to this particular in time. As such, it wouldn't be too much of a rational leap to assume that relation will also hold for the Final, which would mean Sri Lanka will emerge victorious in the end.

In other words, Sri Lanka have now done everything that they had to do if they were ultimately destined to win this Cup. If they are not destined to, so be it -- no one can fault their effort. But if they are... the stage is now set for one massive, cathartic celebration tomorrow night. And if you don't believe me, just check the ontology