India, Sept. 27 -- Cricket becomes an extension and expression of nationalism each time India and Pakistan face off on the pitch. That's been more or less the case ever since the teams first clashed in a Test series in 1952, and is not surprising considering the tense and complicated relations between the neighbours. So, coming in the wake of the Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor, the conduct of players during the ongoing Asia Cup was to be expected. It started with the refusal of the Indian captain Suryakumar Yadav to shake hands with his Pakistani counterpart after the toss. And after the game, he dedicated the victory to the Indian armed forces for their role in Operation Sindoor. Pakistan complained about both the match referee's conduct (alleging that he told the Pakistan captain that there would be no customary handshake with the Indian captain) and Yadav's comments to the International Cricket Council (ICC). Yadav was fined 30% of his match fee by ICC on Friday, according to reports. India on Wednesday had complained to ICC about the gestures of two Pakistani players Sahibzada Farhan and Haris Rauf referencing the Pahalgam terror attack and the downing of Indian jets during Operation Sindoor after the second game between the two sides on Sunday. India won that match too. On Friday, there were reports that ICC has fined Rauf 30% of his match fee and warned Farhan. With both teams set to clash in the final on Sunday, the last word on the matter will have to wait. For all the talk about sportsmanship, competitive sports has always mirrored politics. The India-Pakistan cricket rivalry is not an exception, but in step with a trend that in the past roiled even the Olympic Games. In the specific case of India and Pakistan, bilateral cricket exchanges were non-existent between 1961 and 1978, a result of the breakdown in political relations and two wars (1965 and '71), and for a decade between 1989 and 1999, when cross-border terrorism and the Jammu and Kashmir insurgency dominated the headlines. Both countries haven't played a bilateral series since 2007, the year before the Mumbai terror attack. The cricket rivalry, however, has continued in multilateral forums, including the World Cups. India has won most of these matches. Over the past 17 years (since the Mumbai terror attacks), the bonhomie that once characterised interactions between Indian and Pakistani cricketers has frayed, perhaps normalising a rivalry that, until then, stood in contrast to sporting rivalries that were an extension of bilateral political tensions or global power politics. There are several reasons for this. The terror attacks of 2008 are one. India's increasingly muscular response to terror attacks from across the border, and the success of such responses, is another. And the aging and disappearance of the Partition generation - scarred by the division, but still in the grips of nostalgia - is a third. This is a new, young, and more confident India, proud of its history and heritage, but also optimistic about its future. Sports greatness is tied to national prestige and character. Nation-States see in a sport a glue to hold their societies together, to inspire their people. At one time, sport may have held the potential to heal, build bridges between people, even defuse political tensions. That sounds horribly old-fashioned today....