0

1)India won the toss and decided to bowl.

why not

2)India had won the toss and decided to bowl.

As the event of winning the toss occurred first.

3
  • 2
    Hello, mannu. The events described by 'won the toss' and 'decided to bowl' are very close together in time, and in an obvious order to someone understanding the way these things are done (ie almost everyone). Using 'and' is a marker of sequentiality here; 'did X and Y' often means 'did X and then, almost at once, Y'. The past perfect is often used sparingly (or even avoided) when confusion about meaning doesn't arise. In fact, after 'India had won the toss and decided to bowl' you'd expect something like 'and now they were reaping the benefits' (ie A, A'; and then, some time later, B).... Commented Jun 16, 2019 at 16:45
  • (No partisanship intended; I just hope it's a good match tonight. I live near Manchester, and it might just rain.... And the Aussies look like they're the form team) Commented Jun 16, 2019 at 16:45
  • There is nothing wrong with "India had won the toss and decided to bowl." It's just that the "had" is unnecessary (the order of events is perfectly clear without it), and most of the time we don't put it in. Commented Jun 16, 2019 at 17:33

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .