@Juro said:Yeah, Hussey did well, but largely thanks to the Pakistan team giving him so many lives. It was only thanks to this that we had any sort of lead to defend.
And does Australia winning justify Ponting's decision to bat first? It is like saying that the Australian rugby league selectors are justified whenever Australia win, regardless of whether they pick the best team. The unanswerable question of course is what the result would have been if we had bowled first. I would reckon we would have won far more comfortably…
I don't know. Whenever Pakistan lose from such a strong position, I always have that nagging doubt in the back of my mind. Amazing that Australia's 9th wicket partnership almost scored more runs than the entire Pakistani 4th innings...
Yeah I agree, its like for so many years Sheens would pick players that many felt shouldnt be there (ie Morris, Fitzhenry, Halatau, Galea). We still won games but many of us still felt they shouldnt be there.
As for Hussey, he went 15 Tests without a 100 (Or 20 from 21 tests), he's in the side for his batting, not for being a good team man and good fielder as Stryker suggests. The criticism was justified in my opinion. But he's scored runs this Summer and deserves to be there now.
@Stryker said:a lot of people who comment on here come from this greedy, i want everything now generation that has to have results always ending in their favour ….or else.
If that were the case I wouldve been calling for Hodge, Rogers, Clark, McGain, Lee and Nannes to be in the side for last years Ashes, not Phil Hughes, or even supporting the decision to play Clint Mackay in Perth.
As for Ponting's decision at the toss, his bacon was saved by Pakistani dropped catches, terrible captaincy by Yousuf, loose batting in Pakistan's first innings, and panicked batting in their 2nd innings. If he won the toss and bowled first, we wouldve won far more easily. That pitch on the last day was not a 139 all out mine field, and the Pakistani tail would not wag like ours did.