[Richard]

BTW, I might as well, being on a roll. From those games which I mentioned were drawn with interference from the weather, to have a quick look at who missed-out. We'll have to assume that, rather than the question "if it hadn't rained" the question will be "if extra time were to be played" because clearly most matches had their direction altered by the rain and accompanying weather. What's more, this is far from entirely scientific because if teams knew time would not be lost they'd sometimes play differently to how they did. But nonetheless:

• The Oval 2005: had another 140 overs been available, you'd have to say England would've been big favourites with Australia chasing 342. But you'd also have to ask would the last day have gone differently if the players had known 2 more would've been available.
• Old Trafford 2005: pretty well beyond question if England had had 75 more overs available, you'd think they might have taken the 1 wicket they needed.
• Basin Reserve 2004/05: near enough unquestionably Australia's game had they had the extra overs.
• Chennai 2004/05: India were certainly big favourites until rain washed-out the last day, but it could possibly have been close.
• The 'Gabba 2003/04 vs India: Australia would've had to have been favourites here. They ended-up declaring 199 runs ahead with 7 wickets left. There were, should 444-over-min be applied, 178 overs left in this game, so Australia could easily have set India plenty and plenty. India, equally, would have had a fair chance of chasing 300, even 350, the way they batted and Australia bowled and caught that summer.
• Bellerive and The 'Gabba vs New Zealand 2001/02: Australia would've been favourites for both these games, though NZ competed better than many.
• SSC and Galle 1999/2000: substantial chance Australia and Sri Lanka were each robbed of a victory.
• The 'Gabba 1998/99: hard to conceive Australia wouldn't have won this but for the last-session thunderstorm.
• Bellerive vs New Zealand 1997/98: New Zealand were 9 down in their second-innings (this after Australia had declared 2 down in their second-innings and they had declared their first- 149 behind) after 4 sessions had been washed-out in the first 3 days. However, had both teams batted on, the way New Zealand's second-innings went tends to suggest Australia would probably have won.
• Lord's 1997: Australia would almost certainly have won this.
• ARG 1995: very interesting one this could possibly have been. In theory, 156 overs remained, and Australia ended-up declaring 7 down to set West Indies 257 (by the time of the declaration all chance of a result were gone). What might have happened had West Indies had the time to bowl Australia out and chase would have been fascinating, as batting (as you might expect at this ground ) was getting easier by the innings.
• SCG vs England 1994/95: virtually a full day's play lost here in a match which it's near inconceivable England would not have won but for it (took a first-innings lead of 193 then declared on 255 for 2).
• MCG vs South Africa 1993/94: impossible to say here, just 4 hours' play on the first 3 days. Just 231 overs bowled in which time Australia scored 342 for 7 and South Africa 258 for 3, almost all of which came when a draw was already certain.
• The WACA vs New Zealand 1993/94: this is an interesting one; just 21 overs would have been left with a 444-over minimum, and with New Zealand just 4 down no result appears imminant. But New Zealand's last 4 were Watson, Morrison, Su'a and Blain, and with 2 quick wickets Australia might just have been in business.
• Basin Reserve 1992/93: another interesting one. With 92 overs in theory remaining, New Zealand led by 241 with 3 wickets left and every innings being smaller than the previous one. They could just have won this.
• The 'Gabba vs West Indies 1992/93: 21 overs left here, West Indies 8 down (Walsh at the crease, Patterson to come, Ian Bishop having already lasted 82 balls). Australia should've won this. Subsequent happenings makes it even worse that they didn't.
• Moratuwa 1992: 141 overs left, Australia led by 334 with 2 wickets left - fairly safe to say they might have won this had more time been available.
• Some ground in Columbo, 1992: 86 overs left, Australia having declared 286 runs ahead 6 down. Probably a decent chance they'd have converted this with more time.
• SCG vs India 1991/92: 67 overs left, Australia 3 ahead with 2 wickets left - get the feeling India would've added some small comfort to a wretched summer with more time in this game.
• Queen's Park Oval 1991: loads of play lost on the opening 2 days, but with Australia leading by 190 with 7 wickets left, they might have had possibilities had time been made-up.
• Sabina Park 1991: particularly annoying this one, as it was poor covering that meant as many as 130 overs were lost here. At the end of the game West Indies were 227 ahead with 7 wickets left, Richardson and Richards at the crease, and the possibilities endless. Could've been fascinating, though you'd have to have had the home side as favourites.
• Adelaide 1990/91: just 26 overs left here and a superb partnership between Gooch and Atherton appeared to have saved England. But with 5 down, DeFreitas having already lasted 61 balls, and a last 4 of Small, Fraser, Malcolm and Tufnell hardly being confidence-inspiring, you'd have to say Australia might just have won this had those overs been bowled.
• The SCG vs Pakistan 1989\90: this was a virtual non-starter, but Australia had much the better of it (replying to 199 with 176 for 2).
• The WACA vs New Zealand 1989/90: 31 overs left here, New Zealand led by 32 with 3 wickets left. Australia might just have won this.
• The Oval 1989: 110 overs left here, Australia needed 5 wickets to win. Hard to believe they wouldn't have managed that.
• Edgbaston 1989: 140 overs left, Australia 340 ahead with 8 wickets left. But for rain in these Tests this would almost certainly have been the only 6-0 whitewash in history. A shame it didn't happen really, because if it had maybe this catastrophic summer would've been seen for the low-point it really was.

By my calculations, that's 9 potential defeats they were saved from, and 17 (maybe 18) victories denied. Out of 28 games. Vaguely interesting.