Australia are in the final of an ODI World Cup. Experiences in this century alone tell us that they can hammer 281/4 in just 38 overs when rain affects proceedings and cruise to victory even if it’s a farcical climax in fading Barbados light. They can discard the opposition’s most dangerous player in the very first over, skittle the entire team for 183 and win with more than 100 balls remaining in Melbourne. If that opposition is India, as it was at the Wanderers in Johannesburg in 2003, they can plunder fours and sixes on way to 359/2 and waltz to a 125-run victory. So, they are almost invincible in a World Cup final, right?

Try telling that to the current Indian team — particularly when the roles seem to have reversed.

The similarities between the last time they met are uncanny: India go into the final now on the back of a 10-game winning run, just like Australia did in 2003. Australia suffered a heavy defeat to India at the start of this campaign, just as India lost to Australia by nine wickets early. And India regrouped to go on an impressive eight-game winning run on the way to the final; just as Australia have made it 8-0 here since losing to South Africa in their second game.

While Australia have won a World Cup more recently than India, they boasted of a line-up in 2003 that was hard to match. Adam Gilchrist, Matthew Hayden, Ricky Ponting occupied the top three, and Glenn McGrath and Brett Lee spearheaded the pace pack. India, led by Ganguly and brimming with stars themselves, seemed to be so overwhelmed by the big occasion that there was no way back from an error-strewn start. Zaheer Khan, inexperienced and not yet immune to the nerves of a final, conceded 15 runs in a 10-ball first over as Gilchrist and Hayden blazed away to an opening stand of 105 in 14 overs. Ponting went berserk thereafter and crushed any faint hopes of an Indian fightback.

While Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli, R Ashwin and a few others of the current bunch must have been left heartbroken watching the game on television as youngsters in their mid-teens, it is unlikely to have any bearing in Sunday’s context.

“Honestly, I mean look, that’s the beauty of this team. Half of the guys were not even born when we won our first World Cup. And then when we won our second World Cup in 2011, half of the guys were not even playing the game,” Sharma said before the semi-final versus New Zealand. “I mean, for us, this current crop of players, they’re very much into what is happening today, what can happen tomorrow. Those are the things they try and focus on. I don’t see them talking about how we won the last World Cup, how we won our first World Cup.”

So, if things from two decades ago should strike a chord at all, it may be only because India are as dominant as Australia were back then. Their batters dominate from the onset, the bowlers hunt as a pack and the fielding is sharp enough to ensure opportunities are seized.

Australia, on the other hand, have clawed their way into the final without looking completely convincing. Yet if Pat Cummins and his team mates have booked their tickets for the showdown in Ahmedabad on Sunday, it’s because their innate nous and know-how to tackle such occasions serves them well.

That’s what may leave neutrals hoping for an evenly contested final. But make no mistake: India start as clear favourites. It may seem strange for an Australian team with five titles to settle for secondary status in a World Cup final, but the balance of power has steadily tilted towards India over the past two decades.

That transition of clout in world cricket between 2003 and 2023, both off and on the field, will be complete should they claim victory in a World Cup final against Australia. A feat no team has managed this century.