Australia's last 5 World Cup losses

[stephen]

Australia has lost 5 World cup matches since 1999.

The most recent loss was against NZ at Eden Park in 2015 in an absolute thriller.

Before that was India in the 2011 quarter final where India trounced Australia and went on to win the tournament.

Before that was the group match in 2011 at Colombo against Pakistan, where Pakistan blew the Aussies away and got the total in a canter.

12 years earlier at Leeds Inzimam and Wasim lead Pakistan to a ten run victory over the Aussies.

Three days earlier New Zealand easily chased down a moderate total set by the Australians.

It's curious to me that New Zealand and Pakistan have twice beaten Australia since 1999 and only India have otherwise managed to beat Australia in a world cup match.

 

[TheJediBrah]

fascinating

 

[jimmy101]

You know a team is doing well when they've only lost 5 CWC matches in 20 years.

They only lost two matches in the '96 version as well. (Not including a forfeited match to SL).

 

[mr_mister]

I'd imagine South Africa probably haven't lost very many since 1999 as well, they just usually came in semi finals. Unless I'm mistaken

 

[GotSpin]

I'd imagine South Africa probably haven't lost very many since 1999 as well, they just usually came in semi finals. Unless I'm mistaken

Probably because they haven't won many

 

[Athlai]

NZ always punches aboves its weight in world cups IMO.

Except for maybe 2015 when we genuinely probably deserved to get to the final on paper and then choked. Twice.

 

[TT Boy]

I'd imagine South Africa probably haven't lost very many since 1999 as well, they just usually came in semi finals. Unless I'm mistaken

Recall at least 9 defeats in the previous three World Cups. India, Pakistan and New Zealand in 2015, England and New Zealand in 2011, New Zealand, Bangladesh and Australia twice in 2007.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

We should have beaten Australia in 2003 as well when Bond got a 6-fer (Australia were 84/7 but Bichel and Bevan got them over 200 and Lee rolled us for 100).

I actually thought our 2003 side was pretty decent but didn't even make the semis after we boycotted a game in Kenya for safety reasons and also lost to India. Australia were genuinely afraid of Bond at that time.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Recall at least 9 defeats in the previous three World Cups. India, Pakistan and New Zealand in 2015, England and New Zealand in 2011, New Zealand, Bangladesh and Australia twice in 2007.

We (NZ) are 4/4 in 21st century CWCs vs South Africa

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Ahh, forgot we lost to the Kiwis early in 99, now I remember. That was back when Geoff Allott randomly decided to be an absolute beast for 6 weeks

 

[_Ed_]

We should have beaten Australia in 2003 as well when Bond got a 6-fer (Australia were 84/7 but Bichel and Bevan got them over 200 and Lee rolled us for 100).

I actually thought our 2003 side was pretty decent but didn't even make the semis after we boycotted a game in Kenya for safety reasons and also lost to India. Australia were genuinely afraid of Bond at that time.

That India loss was frustrating - we had them 20-3 chasing a small total, and I remember McCullum dropping a sitter off Dravid soon afterwards.

 

[TheJediBrah]

NZ always punches aboves its weight in world cups IMO.

Except for maybe 2015 when we genuinely probably deserved to get to the final on paper and then choked. Twice.

That's what happens when MCG is so big

 

[Fuller Pilch]

That India loss was frustrating - we had them 20-3 chasing a small total, and I remember McCullum dropping a sitter off Dravid soon afterwards.

It also wasn't long after we'd destroyed them on green tops back here as well.

 

[jimmy101]

Yeah, had the final been played in NZ I believe the result would have been different. Scheduling screwed NZ in that World Cup.

Potentially would have screwed them in '92 as well had they made the final.

 

[Athlai]

That's what happens when MCG is so big

A lot of people see the major issue is when Baz got out right away. But the second collapse after we managed to rebuild was what disappointed me the most. We had a shot at getting 250-270 which would've given us a chance to come back and apply pressure but we went 3-150 to 183 all out. Absolute shambles.

Obviously losing McCullum/Guptill/Williamson early on in (with the form they were in especially) was massive, but expected more from the rest.

 

[OverratedSanity]

A lot of people see the major issue is when Baz got out right away. But the second collapse after we managed to rebuild was what disappointed me the most. We had a shot at getting 250-270 which would've given us a chance to come back and apply pressure but we went 3-150 to 183 all out. Absolute shambles.

Obviously losing McCullum/Guptill/Williamson early on in (with the form they were in especially) was massive, but expected more from the rest.

Even 250-270 seems on the lower end tbh. That Faulkner over is what lost nz the game.

 

[Athlai]

Even 250-270 seems on the lower end tbh. That Faulkner over is what lost nz the game.

I reckon we were set on the backfoot from the Starc delivery. Baz was a talisman in that worldcup. A quick 20 or 30 and everyone in the team would've played differently.

 

[stephen]

Yeah the feeling was that McCullum was only good for 50 anyway, you'd get him soon enough. It was what came after BMac that would decide how well NZ did.

Australia were scared of Bond and rightly so. He was a beast in both tests and ODIs. He's what we all hoped Brett Lee could be (either that good or permanently out with injury). It's a real shame Bond didn't get more cricket.

An all time NZ attack with Bond and Hadlee would have been a nightmare to face.

 

[stephen]

Even 250-270 seems on the lower end tbh. That Faulkner over is what lost nz the game.

It's such a shame Faulkner has completely lost it since then. He looked genuinely great in those couple of years leading up to that cup. Which might be the way Stoinis goes after lifting the 2019 cup.

I reckon we were set on the backfoot from the Starc delivery. Baz was a talisman in that worldcup. A quick 20 or 30 and everyone in the team would've played differently.

The mood of the ground definitely changed in that first over. The impact of BMac's wicket was worth a lot more psychologically than it was worth in runs.

It was a Tendulkar 2003 moment all over again.

 

[TheJediBrah]

A lot of people see the major issue is when Baz got out right away. But the second collapse after we managed to rebuild was what disappointed me the most. We had a shot at getting 250-270 which would've given us a chance to come back and apply pressure but we went 3-150 to 183 all out. Absolute shambles.

Obviously losing McCullum/Guptill/Williamson early on in (with the form they were in especially) was massive, but expected more from the rest.

McCullum wicket was bad. I know it's his game but Starc was bowling ATG levels and even from the first few balls that over it was clear that Baz was struggling to even see the ball, yet he still tried to smack a big quick inswinger. Guptill was even worse, missing a Glenn Maxwell short-of-a-length straight-break. Nerves all round that game.