I scratch my head when people get going on technicalities. They do it all the time on fora like Nikonians. Over there they're a lot more interested in equipment and technique than they are in photographs. In this case I don't understand what all the fuss is about. Either the picture's good or it's not. As it happens, the picture is good, whether or not the "rays" are crepuscular (actually meaning "dim, like twilight") and whether or not they appear to line up with the exact angle of the sun.
Seems to me crepuscular rays are an illusion anyway. Under certain atmospheric conditions they appear to branch out from the sun, but the sun is far enough away that in a practical sense sunlight is collimated, meaning rays of sunlight can't really branch out unless something interferes with them. So the idea that crepuscular rays have to follow the path of direct sunlight doesn't hold up.