Australia: 2007 World Cup winners

We said that Australia hadn't really been tested. Now they have and they've triumphed. We're more than happy to give them credit. Actually, we've been vomiting blood all morning at the prospect of lauding them, but we're still going to do it because we like to at least pretend that we're fair.

We've had to split this into two because we've just realised that we've written too much for one post.

Australia's World Cup winning batsmen
Australia's World Cup winning bowlers

Australia were far and away the best side in this tournament. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the aftermath as well. The inevitable cull will be a lesson in cold-hearted planning for all the other nations. Australia's success is no accident.

Brad Hogg is sure to go, but bigger names like Matthew Hayden and Adam Gilchrist won't be appearing at the next World Cup. Will they get another one-day game? Expect a rash of jump-before-pushed retirements shortly.

Australia's World Cup winning batsmen

Australia went through the entire World Cup without once requiring Mike Hussey, their most rounded one-day batsman. The only time he batted, it was because he was shoved up the order so that he could keep his eye in.

If a batting line-up can win all of their matches and have someone like him in reserve, it's some batting line-up. It's a batting line-up that boasts Brad Hogg at number eight - a man who averages 34 in first-class cricket.

We genuinely believed the Australians would struggle when confronted with Vaas, Malinga and Murali, but only Malinga took wickets and he still went for more than six an over. The way Australia's batsmen went about their task in the World Cup final was exemplary. The openers first sized up the situation and when Adam Gilchrist took off, Hayden and Ponting both recognised that they didn't need to do anything special. A risk-taker and an accomplice - the perfect one-day combination.

Australia: 2007 World Cup winners

Australia's World Cup winning bowlers

We're reserving any 'all-time greatest' tag, because we weren't convinced by Australia's bowling attack. They inevitably had huge totals to defend, so their opponents had to take risks. Having said that, this is effectively criticising the efficiency of the team. Shouldn't an all-time greatest side be efficient?

Perhaps we should be more specific. Raving Metrosexual, Shane Watson, is a terrible bowler compared to his team mates. It's not that he's incompetent. It's just that he doesn't do anything with the ball. He doesn't move it; he rarely changes pace. He's asking for trouble. The greatest-ever one-day side would have a better fifth bowler.

Shaun Tait was crucial in many of the games with his ability to take wickets, but he's one in particular who you wouldn't want to bowl if you were defending a smaller total. It's strange to say considering his success, but not many teams other than Australia could accommodate him.

Brad Hogg's similar. He takes a lot of wickets, but perhaps on the back of batsmen trying to force the pace. However, we're led to believe that nobody picked his wrong 'un. We know this because every single commentator said this during every single Australia match. Presumably they're all correct.

Australia: 2007 World Cup winners

Adam Gilchrists's World Cup Final hundred

In an uninspiring tournament defined by incompetent administration and limp performances, at least the final was decided by something exceptional.

There are a number of fine players in this Australian side, but Adam Gilchrist is the one on whom everything is built. He's been keeping wicket and scoring bucketloads of runs for as long as we can remember, but has he ever played a better one-day innings than this?

In any circumstances 149 off 104 balls is something. In a World Cup final it's ten times as good. There's infinitely more pressure, but there's infinitely more impact as well. (Infinity multiplied by infinity equals ten, it seems. Our maths isn't all that good.)

It was a good pitch for batting, but Adam Gilchrist reduced both Matthew Hayden and Ricky Ponting to sleepy-looking bystanders. The middle of Gilchrist's bat must take more of a pounding than any other in world cricket, because that's invariably where the ball makes contact.

It's a fantastically simple method: Swing bat, middle it. Runs ensue.

And that's what he did. He won the World Cup for Australia with that method.

Australia v Sri Lanka - World Cup final 2007

Finally - FINALLY - we might get a match which isn't totally one-sided AND where the outcome actually matters. So far we've had even-but-meaningless contests or one-sided drubbings.

Australia drubbed South Africa so comprehensively yesterday, we don't really have anything to say about it. Australia were far, far better than South Africa - what can you add to that? It means Australia will play Sri Lanka in the final, which is the final we predicted (to ourself) after the first round of matches back in December or whenever it was.

Our money's literally on Sri Lanka, but Australia are favourites. Sri Lanka were far and away the best of the rest during the tournament and deserve their place, but, to us, Australia seem to have a stronger middle and lower order which should mean a decent total even if the top order fail for once. Sri Lanka's innings will be more dependent on one of the top four batting through.

Still, Australia haven't yet been tested. You can take this as a sign that they're miles better than everyone else, or alternatively you can take it that in spite of 500 matches, we still haven't seen them up against anyone decent. How can that be?

Australia beat Sri Lanka in the group stages, but Sri Lanka rested virtually their entire bowling attack for that game. Australia also missed out on facing another great bowler of merit during the group stages - Shane Bond. It'll be interesting to see how their top order cope with Lasith Malinga's pace, Chaminda Vaas's nous and Murali's retina-scorching brilliance.

So Australia's batsmen finally get tested; we finally have a decent game in the offing; and it's finally the final. It's been a long and uninspiring tournament. Hopefully the final match won't be representative of that.