Australia Cricket / Ed Hawkins / 29 October 2007 /

The Hawkeye view - The Racing Post's Ed Hawkins explains why the stats suggest Australia just aren't the same without these two

Ask any Australian why their cricket team has dominated the world for the last 20-odd years and they will more than likely tell you it is because they are have a greater will to win, they are more aggressive and are better prepared. In short it is down to their culture.

The benefits of living in a sporting superstate where champions roll off the production line because at kindergarten they had a four-year-olds questioning the parentage of their fellow players in a knockabout in the yard, gives the average Aussie a warm cosy feeling.

Very, very rarely will he acknowledge that the reason for the success is that Australia have enjoyed freakish fortune by being able to include two of the finest bowlers ever ... in the same team ... at the same time.

Cricket aficionados and one-eyed Australians can bang on all they like about how competitive cricket at school, grade and state level has given them the edge over every team on the planet. But in reality it was Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath who gave them superiority.

Sure they were products of the system but they are also gloriously, brilliant one offs. Warne, despite Muttiah Muralitharan catching up, is still the highest wicket-taker of all time while McGrath, with 563 victims is the fourth best.

Australia's celebrated culture is about to be severely put to the test with both legends retired and home series coming up against Sri Lanka and India. The following reading may make Australians feel less than warm and cosy.

Simply in matches when Warne and McGrath were unavailable, Australia were brought back to the pack. Instead of being great, they were above average. That is the gulf that the two geniuses provided.

In the seven matches against established nations when Australia were without the Big Two during their careers, Australia won three, lost two and drew one. True, it is hardly an expansive study but nonetheless it is a record which will not fill their supporters with confidence at prices of around 1.33 to beat Sri Lanka.

Indeed, one of those defeats came against India at Adelaide in 2003. It is a hugely important historical result not just because the sides will meet again at the same venue in January.

Australia were shown to be hopelessly vulnerable without their star men in that game. They posted 556 batting first but still were defeated, going down by four wickets. At the time it was the second highest first innings total by a side which lost until England pushed it back to third with their horrible second-innings collapse on the ground last winter.

More importantly, Australia failed to win that series, drawing 1-1. Although bear in mind India's much-vaunted batting line-up was younger, hungrier and, well, better, than they are now.

Perhaps surprisingly McGrath is likely to be more greatly missed than Warne. In the 29 matches without the tall paceman Australia won 48 per cent of their games compared to 53 per cent minus Warne. They lost more matches, too. Eight defeats were suffered when McGrath had his feet up as opposed to six without Warne.

The retirement of the deadly duo doesn't suddenly mean Australia are going to become a bad side. Merely one which will be nowhere near as good as it was. Crops of great players come and go. It is a fact in all walks of life. One year the harvest is bountiful, the next not so. Every culture should understand that.

'.$sign_up['title'].'

'; } } ?>

:

:

:

?

: