Surely in this case, going for the win would be the obvious option, since you could say we(Aus) really should have won the series 3-2, not lost 2-1?
Australia didn't win any tests. If you count the Oval and Old Trafford tests as being Australia's, then morally England still win 3-2. If they didn't go off for light yesterday it would have been 4-0.
And when did outscoring the opposition by 140 in the first innings count as a moral victory? It's equivalent to doing Duckworth-Lewis over 200 overs and 20 wickets. Test cricket is played over 2 innings on the same pitch for a reason, the draw recognises the fact that being ahead over 2 days doesn't mean you'll win. If you can't play out 2 innings then it isn't a test.
Australia didn't win any tests. If you count the Oval and Old Trafford tests as being Australia's, then morally England still win 3-2. If they didn't go off for light yesterday it would have been 4-0.
And when did outscoring the opposition by 140 in the first innings count as a moral victory? It's equivalent to doing Duckworth-Lewis over 200 overs and 20 wickets. Test cricket is played over 2 innings on the same pitch for a reason, the draw recognises the fact that being ahead over 2 days doesn't mean you'll win. If you can't play out 2 innings then it isn't a test.