"would have reached" instead of "did reach"

India did reach the summit in ODI rankings also this year, but in the tournaments where it mattered, the team fell short. The Champions Trophy was the biggest ODI tournament of the year, and India exited in the first round, while the biggest bilateral series was the one against Australia, which was also lost 4-2. That Australia beat India with an almost second-string side was all the more damning. Some people have sought to point out that the scoreline could have easily been reversed, but the fact that we lost 4-2 rather than won by the same margin is, if anything, a more pressing worry. Champion sides have the ability to close out matches, to lift their games at key moments, to recognize the inflexion points in a game and seize them, but India did the reverse and lost all the key moments. The Test side has shown the ability to stamp its authority on the opposition at the moments that matter, and if the ODI side wants a more consistent run at the top of the charts, then it must do the same.

Source : http://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/22880/indian-cricket-more-highs-than-lows

I would have written as "India would have reached the summit in ODI rankings" instead of "India did reach the summit" because they are talking about the past failure. So I wonder why the author wrote "India did ............" is it incorrect?