This innings has been a great victory against the evils of rigid selection ideology.
Technique and form junkies would've dropped Dhawan before the World Cup, arguing that his poor tour of Australia (both Tests and ODIs) proved he was either out of form, not cut out for the conditions or likely both. While I actually believe both of things to be true, to drop him based on them would've ignored the strength of his ODI record and his proven ability in this format on the international stage. There was always a chance he'd find a way to adapt and overcome his poor form; his ability to play an innings like this always meant he was worth picking.
On the flip side, stats junkies would've dropped Rahane, citing his poor List A and and ODI record. This would've ignored his undoubted improvement as a batsman over the last year, including in one day cricket, and his suitability to the conditions.
The beneficiary of dropping either of these players would've been Rayudu -- someone who has neither a great technique nor a great record, but who doesn't have the high-profile weakness under either criterion that Rahane and Dhawan each do in one.
Most people, including the Indian selectors, lie somewhere in the middle of those ideological extremes and advocate a mixed selection policy. I've seen both of the above arguments on CW though, and advocates of each have pointed to the supposed 'inconsistency' of selecting both. Used multi-faceted criteria is not inconsistent, however; it merely recognised that each player has his own unique case for selection.
I loathe to ever use one game as proof of anything, but Rayudu is completely incapable of playing either of the innings we saw on display today IMO; not just unlikely to.
On the flip side to India's selection vindication, South Africa have hopefully learned that McLaren having a bad series against Australia did not suddenly mean he was a worse option than Parnell. That was a terrible selection that has been shown up for what it was today.
