Scaly piscine said:
That's exactly how it seems to be when Australia lose - must be Australia out of form, or it's just some meaningless game, or it was the toss being 'decisive'.
Or maybe I actually watch the games and make a reasoned judgement based on what happens in them, rather than assuming every instance of winning the toss must be exactly the same value as every other instance of winning the toss, every game must be of equal significance and so on?
You would know, if you paid any attention, that I've have nothing but praise for Flintoff with the ball in this series, and I also think Harmison has bowled exceedingly well at times. Collingwood used the conditions perfectly at Headingley, too, while Flintoff, Pietersen, Collingwood and Jones have all had moments of brilliance with the bat. England for the most part have fielded better than Australia aside from the last two games, their first and second change bowlers have been much better, and they've fought back brilliantly from situations where Australia looked certain to win on two occasions. I pointed out the significance of the toss at Headingley because, you guessed it, the toss was extremely significant. Inserting Australia first on such a pitch was an advantage to begin with, but when the conditions changed so dramatically between the innings it only made it more noticable. The toss in the other games has been no more significant than it usually is in a one day game, which is to say it mattered, but it didn't put any particular team at a
massive advantage off the bat.
Scaly piscine said:
I didn't actually mention the Australian bowlers at all, mostly because the pitch is so good that it doesn't figure much into the equation - all you can do is avoid bowling long-hops or half-volleys and hope for the best.
Rubbish. Bowlers like McGrath have made a career out of taking wickets on flat pitches. You don't just put it in the right area and hope for a mistake, although that helps, you can work for wickets as well. You would know if you watched the game that the ball that got Strauss straightened to a significant degree off the seam, and turned what should have been a regulation defensive push into an edge to Gilchrist. It was brilliant bowling by Kasprowicz, and dismissing it as "poor batting" just shows how readily you attack your own players, and how blatantly you refuse to give the opposition any credit. Pietersen batted brilliantly, but was removed by a brilliant slower ball. Trescothick too, was removed by a clear plan from the Australians in the same way Martyn was in the first game. Vaughan fell to brilliant fielding.
