Normal service is resumed. Australia wrapped up the match before lunch in a very cool and professional manner. Having KP go in the first over was a bit of a disappointment, entertainment-wise, but so it goes. Now all of the attention focuses on Adelaide on Friday (or Thursday afternoon for those of us in the USA). And the talk is, of course, about selection.
Australia, I’m sure, could go into the match with the same team full of confidence, but if they do want to make changes, here are the obvious ones. In: McGill, Watson; Out: Martyn, Clarke.
England desperately need to make changes, but have a distinct shortage of talent to choose from. What they should do is this. In: Panesar, Mahmood; Out: Giles, Anderson.
You are, of course, free to disagree.
Cheryl
I have Dish at home. I had Dish coverage for the last world cup. Did not know DirectTV had cricket rights for broadcast in the US and you are right I dont want to watch the India-SA series. This is disgusting. Dravid is out for the series and hence my hopes have faded. Interesting take by Ponting on not enforcing the follow-On. He wanted to give his bowlers a break, wear out the Englishmen and that the wicket would be getting harder later. Although I am not sure having 400 plus runs in first innings was not big enough. I absolutely hate his guts!! But boy is he aggressive and he never seems to get out of form.
Ponting is still scarred by Kolkotta in 2000. Waugh was captain, but Punter failed with the bat in both innings. Australia put on 400+, rolled India for about 170, and then they put on 670, rolled Australia for 200 and won! It’s fear, not aggression, that motivates him on this. He’s only ever enforced the follow-on once as captain.
Good Observation! Considering the woeful way Indians are playing that test seems like it was eons ago. Perhaps what happened six years ago is still haunting him especially since last year’s ashes. I did find it interesting that Waugh did not agree with Ponting’s decision. Although, if Pieterson and Collingwood had batted slowly , they could drawn it out. I still think it was a risky strategy, although the aggressive adjective merits recantation. By the way, interesting observation on Ponting enforcing follow-on in his career as a captain. Did not know that.
One of the interesting things about the DirectTV coverage is that, while their live broadcast is from Channel 9 in Australia, their web site also carries the daily summary from BSKYB (Charles Colville and all). The reactions of the British commentators to Collingwood and Pietersen tended to be very different to those of the Australians. Basically the Poms were saying that you should never take any risks, while the Aussies were saying that you had to be aggressive or the opposition would get confident and then you’d lose. This may explain why Australians tend to win more often.