Beating Oz, the great and powerful

By B.R., R.L.W., J.S. and L.P.

Ahead of the Ashes, the balance of sporting power between Britain and Australia has changed

THE rest of the world might think Britain has gone a bit overboard in its reaction to Andy Murray's win at Wimbledon yesterday. But those bemused at the fuss about a young Scot winning a tennis match would do well to remember that Britain is a country obsessed with sport that has, until recently at least, been reliably abject at it. One way of measuring how poor it has been is to compare it with Australia, a country that has many of Britain’s sporting sensibilities, but a fraction of its population. The Britain-Australia rivalry is one of the oldest in sport. England first played cricket against the Aussies in 1877. The first rugby matches between the British Lions and Australia came 11 years later. Since then, the countries have become obsessed with beating each other. The rivalry lacks the political violence of others’—Honduras and El Salvador once used a football match as an excuse to go to war. But it does have all the characteristics of sibling jealousy. The ascendant nation is wont to gloat, and as our chart shows, for much of the 20th century, those wearing Australian badges have tended to own the bragging rights.

But times seem to have changed. The day before Andy Murray’s triumph, the British & Irish Lions rugby union team touring Australia won the deciding Test match in Sydney. This week, the most iconic of the countries’ sporting battles, the Ashes cricket series, resumes. After years of humiliation, England have won three of the last four series and are favourites to win again this summer. If they do so, Australians might want to lock themselves in their rooms until the next series rolls around in December.