Fortunately an element of fairness , if not decency, has prevailed and Andrew Flintoff has been given the job.
I think that this is an eminently sensible decision: Flintoff stands head and shoulders over his teammates, as his part in yesterday's victory over the Kiwis showed. Strauss may be closer to the job description of the ideal English captain - public schoolboy, sound batsman and all that - but he's failed to make his mark on both the Ashes and (to date) the one day series. It's unfortunate that he's suffered from so many poor umpiring decisions but he's also not distinguished himself in the field. He's become England's Jonah.
While Cricinfo describes Strauss as the"logical choice" (why?) it does acknowledge some good reasons for reverting to Flintoff:
...[H]is reappointment is a welcome show of faith from a selection committee who are desperate not to portray their talismanic allrounder as a scapegoat for the team's failures on this tour. Though the logical choice would have been Andrew Strauss, whose poor batting form might be galvanised by the extra responsibility, it has been deemed that the long-suffering Flintoff does not deserve a second demotion.
England will struggle to make the finals of the competition and have Buckley's chance of winning it, so they need their best player to continue keep performing. Taking the captaincy away from him would be another kick in the guts, and will make it harder for them to be a force in the World Cup.