We know that Inzi, how should I put it mildly, is not the most adventureous captain. He doesn’t take many risks, and on occasions all of us have felt that maybe the decision of a certain match would have been different had Inzi declared sooner etc.
However, after watching the 2nd ashes test tragedy that England had to go through, I am beginning to appreciate Inzi’s caution. What was Flintoff thinking when he declared at 551/5 in the first inning? Did he think he would get Australia out twice for less than that? Typically, if you are in such a strong position in the first inning, you would like to get to a score where you should bat only once. In case of England, they should have batted for atleast 100-150 runs longer.
Thank you Inzi. You dont get too much credit for your captaincy. We would like for you to be a bit more adventureous, but I’d rather have a drawn match than to suffer the nerve-wrecking defeat that England did.
flintoff did the right thing by declaring..he was looking for wickets in the tea session and he did get one.you cant do much if a team chokes the way england did.the real blunder was not selecting panesar and mahmood
Even another 50 runs (that would have meant 60-75 minutes for England plus another 60 minutes for Australia to score those runs) would have used up enough time (>2h) and saved the game for England. It’s easy to be wise in retrospect but Flintoff should have delayed the declaration until after England had gone past 600. Most teams collapse on a 5th day pitch ( India against England in Mumbai and Pakistan at Leeds recently) and it was a combination of an uneven last day surface and English nerves that helped Warne (http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2006-07/ENG_IN_AUS/STATS/ENG_IN_AUS_NOV2006-FEB2007_TEST_AVS.html) who had up until that point not looked so menacing. England were a bit negative and defensive with their selections. I am not so sure about Mahmood (leaks far too many runs) but I would most definitely have played Panesar instead of Giles.
It has to do more with their mindset. On 5th day, the English team started to look towards a draw, bat Australia out of match and went too defensive.... you can't play too defensive, it has happened times that teams crumble when being too defensive.
Actually i think we have always won the match even after so called "delayed" declaration... i think against India when we gave a target of over 600 runs and then against WI now...
and i totally agree that Inzi captaincy is not given a due acknowledgement.
I think Freddie made a good decision, but they spilled catches, Ponting was reprieved on several occasions, thus they loose the grip. Had Giles holding on to Ponting catchm when ponting didnt even scored a 50, or had they ran Hussey out, when he was out of the crease by miles. There was no way Australia could win it.
Also agree Eng batsmen choke in second innings. Also it is true, atleast they needed Monty for Giles. Also England started acceleration of their scoring very late in first inning.
