Australia's dominance of all cricket for the past decade has turned the one-day game full circle since the World Cup's inception in 1975.

Fads have come and gone - but the modern Australian side, current holders of the crown, are succeeding not with mind-boggling plans or specialist personnel.

They are the best team, contain the best collection of individual players and are rightly favourites for the tournament in South Africa beginning in February because they are best equipped to win cricket matches.

Every four years the leading teams from around the globe have gathered in some place or other to compete for the World Cup in an attempt to declare themselves supreme.

True, there have been major changes in mindset and rules through the previous seven events - but the current Aussies are not dissimilar in attitude from that of their predecessors 28 years ago.

The theory is a simple one: dismiss the opposition for less than your score. The watchword: attack.

When the inaugural tournament took place in England there were no one-day strategies, restrictive circles or defensive modes.

The limited-overs game was played with the same temperament and tactics employed in Test cricket, the only difference being a limit of 60 overs per side.

Quite simply, the team best suited to the traditional form of the sport would, it was thought, be the one to prosper.

So it proved as the West Indies were the first winners on the back of their powerful middle order of Alvin Kallicharran, Rohan Kanhai, Viv Richards and Clive Lloyd, the captain who struckan unbeaten century in the final against Australia.

It was appropriate that those two teams met at Lord's to fight for the first official title to acclaim the best side in the world, in a format of the game not yet grown apart from its elder and more restrained brother.

Accordingly, the great Australian pacemen Dennis Lillee and Jeff Thomson hurled the ball down and rushed up and down the pitch with typical Antipodean bravado.

The West Indies went about things in a similar way, their fast men flat out and not a medium-pacer in sight.

They won the game thanks to Lloyd, a hulk wielding his blade like a wand and Richards, who pounced to run out a couple of Chappells.

Four years on, the Windies retained their title with another final victory at Lord's, this time over England.

Richards took charge of the whole tournament - in his day there was not a batsman whose natural game so suited a limited-overs contest - parading and imposing himself on the opposition, most notably in that final when England could not contain his majesty.

By that time, of course, the Windies had gathered together a four-pronged pace unit of Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Colin Croft and Joel Garner.

It was the perfect foil for their aggressive batting style and with such a battery of fast bowlers, the side was nearly always on the front foot.

Richards' imperious, unbeaten 138 marched them into position and despite a century stand for the first wicket between Mike Brearley and Geoff Boycott, who were separated by Holding, England folded in the face of an intimidating five-wicket burst from the giant Garner.

In much the same way as in Test cricket, Lloyd's men had stamped their mark on the sport.

Nothing appeared more certain than another West Indies triumph in 1983 - an Australian one in 2003 could run it close, however - until that beast of the one-day game, the upset, reared its head in the final and nodded in favour of India.

When the cup began its journey around the world in 1987, a new limit of 50 overs was set thanks initially to the troublesome dew on the subcontinent.

By the time Australia defended their trophy on home soil in the fifth World Cup coloured clothing, white balls and day/night matches were the norm.

Pinch-hitters had begun to find employment - Sri Lanka's success in 1996 was on the back of them - teams were packed with all-rounders and some captains even experimented by opening the bowling with spinners.

Even the Australians dabbled - but if it ain't broke what needs fixing?

Since their remarkable turnaround tournament in 1999 - when they lost two of their first three matches, edged past South Africa in the best one-day encounter of all time, the tied semi-final, by virtue of a better net run rate and consumed Pakistan at Lord's - Australia have re-embraced the basics of cricket in the shortened form.

The sight of seven close catchers in position to Glenn McGrath, Jason Gillespie and Brett Lee have the traditionalists - who for so long reviled the smash-and-grab - purring, reflecting on the similarities to the golden age of Lillee and Thomson.

Batsmen like Adam Gilchrist play with a freedom their confidence allows even in the five-day format, using angled blades and the full face of the bat in turn to pierce the field.

In the Australian psyche offence creates, defence procrastinates.

Each ball can change the course of the game, nothing is finite in the one-day arena, one which democratically offers everyone the opportunity to take their chance and have their hour, their day.

Australia enjoy theirs more than most because they are most willing to do just that; like the great sides of the past who seized the moment.