MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA - DECEMBER 26: Usman Khawaja of Australia celebrates his century with Joe Burns (L) during day one of the Second Test match between Australia and the West Indies at Melbourne Cricket Ground on December 26, 2015 in Melbourne, Australia. (Photo by Michael Dodge/Getty Images)

I feel like we all owe Usman Khawaja a debt of gratitude for finally disproving one of the great myths in cricket, that the T20 code is “ruining” test cricket.

The 29 year-old's brilliant 144 on Boxing Day followed an unbeaten 109 in the short form, his first hundred in the format.

Prior to his match winning Big Bash knock for the Thunder, the test number three plundered two massive hundreds against New Zealand before succumbing to an injury that ruled him out of the third test, as well as the first against the West Indies.

So what exactly does this prove?

That good form is good form, regardless of the format of the game.

Despite the hit and giggle format that is T20 cricket, you still need to play shots, dominate the bowling, and find gaps.

It’s the same basic formula, albeit much more difficult, in the five-day format.

Since the introduction of one-day cricket, some players have been pigeon holed into being considered for only one form of the game.

The emergence of T20 cricket has caused an even greater number of players to be looked upon as either short form players, or test cricketers.

Don’t get me wrong, some players are tailor made for certain forms of the game.

Raul Dravid, one of the best test batsmen in the modern era, is a player that would surely not be on the top of many T20 shopping lists.

I’m sure that had T20 had been what it is today in his era he could have adapted his style to match the shorter format, but this is a man you’d have in your top five batting for your life in a test environment.

For many years David Warner was seen as a ODI and T20 specialist, and although his innings against the West Indies on Boxing day is not a good example, he has been able to somewhat curtail his attacking instincts to earn a baggy green.

Aaron Finch is one of the first players chosen for any short form competition or series, yet has never been chosen to represent the test side.

Some players are built for shorter form cricket, some are built for the long slog of test cricket, but in general, good form can take a player across all three formats of the game.

Chris Gayle, arguably the world’s most famous T20 specialist and one of the premier players in the game, tours the world as a gun for hire of sorts.

With 103 tests under his belt and an average of 42, it’s fair to say he was able to succeed at all levels of the game.

Once again I really understand the thought that some players struggle to make the switch.

However, with a test series coming up against New Zealand, if a player was scoring runs for fun in the Big Bash, while a test batsman was struggling to score, which player would be better played to enter the test series?

Obviously this is a hypothetical as the Aussies are tearing through a Windies side stuck in a rebuilding phase.

On one hand you would have a batsman struggling to score, but one who had been in test conditions. The other would be free scoring and clearing boundaries, BUT would not be tested in the harsher conditions of test cricket.

If it were me, I would take a chance on the inform batsman, no matter what form of the game they were plundering runs in.

For back up to this theory you need look no further than the man who has top scored for Australia in a test where four batsmen have hit hundreds.

Less than a week ago he was wearing electric green for the Thunder, now he’s swapped the green for white.

He is in such supreme form right now that no matter how many overs he faced or what field he was set I’m confident he’d find a way to score.

There will be bigger tests ahead for the rejuvenated Khawaja, but being that you can only play what is in front of you, he has done incredibly well.

Across the two forms of the game that could not be more different in terms of conditions.