I can't believe this hasn't been started yet. Anyway, my thoughts so far. England picked a too conservative side, not playing Monty Panesar was insane. The Gabba has always been a good spinning wicket, and is one of the reasons that Shane Warne averages 19 there. Panesar's average of 32 is not that terrible for a left-arm orthodox (It's better then Harbhajan Singh, Nicky Boje and Daniel Vettori) and more importantly better then Ashley Giles. England need all their bowlers to perform to have any chance. Harmison was terrible on the first day, James Anderson wasn't any better. Hoggard was ok, but never looked like taking a wicket. Flintoff was the only one who looked dangerous and with his injury he should be using himself sparingly, not having to bowl every over of the day. They got better near the end, but by that time Australia was 500 runs infront. Australia not enforcing the follow on?! It's the craziest thing I ever heard. It's not like England have these formidable spinners who will rip Australia apart on a 5th day wicket. Chances are the way the England batting collapsed they wouldn't have made it to day 5 anyway. And although unlikely, Australia gave England the opportunity to even win the game, because they only needed a run rate of ~3.70 for the last two days, which is not impossible if a couple of batsmen got set.