Former Indian cricket captain Sunil Gavaskar has launched a powerful critique against what he describes as glaring double standards in international cricket's pitch discussions. His strong comments came immediately following the opening Ashes Test in Perth, where Australia defeated England by eight wickets in a match that concluded within just two days.
The Perth vs Kolkata Contrast
The recently concluded Ashes Test at Optus Stadium witnessed an astonishing 32 wickets falling across only six sessions, with just one team managing to cross the 200-run mark throughout the entire match. Australia achieved this during their successful chase in the final innings.
Gavaskar's frustration stems from the dramatically different reactions to similar situations. Only one week earlier, the Eden Gardens pitch faced widespread condemnation after the first Freedom Trophy Test between India and South Africa ended in just two and a half days. Prominent figures including Michael Vaughan, Cheteshwar Pujara, and Anil Kumble had strongly criticized the Kolkata surface.
Similar scrutiny was notably absent for the Perth wicket, despite both matches ending prematurely. Gavaskar highlighted this inconsistency in his Mid-Day column, questioning why similar conditions receive different treatment based on their geographical location.
Technical Differences and Similar Patterns
One significant technical difference between the two pitches emerged in their behavior patterns. The Optus Stadium surface actually improved for batting as the Test progressed, while the Kolkata pitch offered unpredictable bounce right from the opening session, creating the opposite effect.
Gavaskar also referenced the Sydney Test between India and Australia earlier this year, where 15 wickets fell on the first day alone without significant criticism of the playing conditions. He further recalled last year's Perth Test between India and Australia, which saw 17 wickets tumble on the opening day despite the surface having an unusually thick layer of grass.
"I don't remember anyone attacking the pitch back then," Gavaskar observed, pointing out the selective nature of pitch criticism in international cricket.
The Unbalanced Argument About Playing Skills
Gavaskar presented a compelling logical argument about the underlying assumptions in pitch criticism. He noted that when complaints arise about bouncy tracks, it implies batsmen's inability to handle fast bowling. However, when similar criticism targets turning tracks, the same logic about questioning a team's capacity to play spin is rarely applied.
"If complaints about bounce imply an inability to handle fast bowling, then by the same reasoning, criticism of turning tracks should raise questions about a team's capacity to play spin," Gavaskar argued. He emphasized that this balanced perspective is almost never acknowledged in global cricket discussions.
The legendary batsman drew a parallel with historical biases against subcontinent umpires, whose mistakes were once labeled as dishonesty while similar errors elsewhere were simply dismissed as human error. He questioned why curators overseas are automatically assumed to be neutral while those in India are often portrayed as having ulterior motives.
Gavaskar welcomed the fact that some recently retired Indian cricketers have finally started questioning the 19 wickets that fell in a single day in Perth. "It's time to stop pointing fingers at Indian cricket," he concluded powerfully, "because three fingers on the same hand are pointing back at you."
