Australia's inability to defend 300 plus totals in ODIs

In the last decade, the six of the top seven 300-plus run chases have come against Australia. Out of the top ten, 8 have resulted in a defeat for Australia.Whenever Australia have managed to put over 300 batting first – a total of forty-two occasions since January 2006 – they have struggled to defend it. Even if you consider the occasions when they have come out victorious, six ofthose have been won by a margin less than 25 runs. These numbers look outlandish for a country that has two World Cup wins, and a semi-final appearance in ODIs in the last ten years. An alarming fact that comes to the fore here: in matches Australia have lost after setting a target of over three hundred, they have been beaten fairly comprehensively by their opposition.

Barring one ODI against New Zealand where they lost by only a wicket, all other matches have been lost by Australia when the opponent team has lost five or fewer wickets.It's evident that the mighty Australians has teetered whenever they've been asked to defend big targets. Most recently, this almost turned-chronic fragility of their bowling attack was exposed by David Miller in Durban when he sealed the second highest run-chase of all time for South Africa.The proponents of Australian cricket might argue that the surfaces where Australia played those games did not lend much support to the bowlers. In hindsight, this could have been a fair justification given the venues they have played were batting heavens. Auckland, Hamilton, Jaipur, Nagpur, Harare, Sydney and Durban – barring Sydney, where the wicket is known to turn in the second half of the match, all other games were played on flat decks. But a further probe into Australia's weakness to defend targets will tell you the problem is more than just playing on batting-friendly wickets.Since the senior players have left, Australia's transition – especially in the fast bowling department –  hasn't been all hunky dory.

Once legends like Glenn McGrath and Brett Lee retired, it left a huge void that the recent lotof Australian pacers have not been able to fill yet. Australia have struggled tostructure the core of their bowling attack, even though bowlers like Mitchell Johnson and Mitchell Starc have tried extremely hard match the greats of the bygone era.Constant injury to pacers is distressing Unlike previous generations of Australian cricket which possessed a strong bowling core, recent Australian squads have seldom fielded the same bowling attack in two consecutive series'. A major reason for this being their key pace-bowling resources in the last few years - Patrick Cummins, James Faulkner, James Pattinson, and Ryan Harris - breaking down regularly with injury issues.Since January 2006, a total of 39 pace bowlers have represented Australia in ODI cricket (criterion here being a minimum of one wicket), a list that includes Glen McGrath and goes on till Joe Mennie. This is the highest number of pacers fielded in a ten year period by a major Test playing side, followed by England, who's next on the list having fielded 30 pacers in the last ten years.  But if you try and assess the talent of the recent lot of Australian pacer, it's pretty much up there with the best.

Earlier this year, Steve Waugh mentioned that the quartet of Pattinson, Cummins, Starc and Hazzlewood was the best fast bowling attack in the history of the game. Given Waugh spent most of his career facing the mighty West Indian pacers, his comments cannot be ignored.But the problem for Australia is that not even once have these four pacers played together – one possible explanation is Nathan Lyon's inclusion given in the squad – but many times, it's been due to an injury to one these four bowlers.Australia's pace attack have been hoarded with injuries in the last few years, and even the selectors don't seem to have a clear strategy to deal with this lingering issue.Only recently have the selectors tried to rectify the problem by investing in youth. The inclusion of Joe Mennie, Daniel Worralland Chris Tremain for the South Africa series was a noble move by the selectors.

The start for these young turks was not the most ideal, as in their first international outing, they received a battering by the hands of South Africa. Even though the conditions were tough for bowlers, the young pacers didn't seem to look ready yet to compete at the highest stage.But irrespective of the pasting they received, bringing in young fast bowlers should auger well for the future of Australian cricket. The selectors realize that both 2017 Champion Trophy and the 2019 World Cup will be held in seam friendly English conditions, and the fast bowling resources should ideally be tested and be well in place by next year.Also read: Joe Mennie speaks about his surprise selection in the Australian ODI sideLack of a genuine fast bowler in the line-upOne major trouble with these current fast-bowlers is they don't bring the tormenting pace that the previous generation of Australian fast bowlers used to possess.After Starc, the most experienced pacer currently in the line-up is Mitchell Marsh, and Marsh isn't express pace, and at best, can tie the batsmen down from one end. Ever since Johnson blew away England in the Ashes of 2013, not one Australian quick has exhibited the ability to demolish opponent batsmen with his sheer pace.

Bowlers like Cummins and Hazzlewood rely on accuracy more than speed, and so when Starc isn't playing, the bowling attack looks unable to pack a punch.The rising number of T20I games played by these cricketers aren't helping either. More often, the role for bowlers is restricted to a containment job rather than a wicket-taking one, and this often leads to bowlers working more on subtle variations, and not on sublime speed. And at the looks of it, bowling in ODIs and T20s would further become a craft that requires damage-control skills, rather than wicket-taking ones.As Australian cricket moves forward, the selectors have their task cut out – to strengthen acurrently frail-looking bowling attack.

They would need to unearth some hidden talents if they want to keep the legacy of McGrath, Lee and Gillespie alive.And it's not just about legacy, Australia are the number one ODI outfit atthe moment, and their inability to defend gigantic totals have disrobed a major chink in their armoury to their oppositions. This could be something that teams like South Africa and India will exploit more often in future, if the Australian selectors don't act soon enough.