The hallowed turf of the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG), a cathedral of cricket, found itself at the centre of a raging storm over pitch quality. The Boxing Day Test between Australia and England concluded in a whirlwind less than two days, sparking financial losses and a fierce debate on fairness, masterfully highlighted by batting legend Sunil Gavaskar.
A Spectacle Unravels: Carnage in Melbourne
What was anticipated as a five-day battle of attrition turned into a shocking display of batting carnage. The match was effectively decided on the very first day itself as all 20 wickets tumbled amidst extravagant swing and sharp seam movement. The surface, with its uneven bounce, made survival a herculean task for batsmen. The collapse continued on day two, with England securing a four-wicket victory—their first Test win on Australian soil since January 2011.
In a stunning statistic, 36 wickets fell in just 142 overs of play. This rapid conclusion delivered a severe financial blow to Cricket Australia. Chief Executive Todd Greenberg estimated a revenue shortfall exceeding AUD 10 million from the Melbourne Test. This disaster was compounded by the Perth Test earlier in the same series, which also finished within two days. This marks the first time in 129 years that a single series has witnessed multiple two-day Tests.
Curator's Shock and Gavaskar's Sting
MCG head curator Matt Page admitted to being in a "state of shock" as the match unfolded. He revealed that a decision to leave ten millimetres of grass on the pitch led to excessive seam movement and bounce, creating near-impossible conditions for batting.
Enter Sunil Gavaskar. The former India captain cut through the explanations with his trademark wit and sharp criticism. In his column for Sportstar, he pointed to the glaring irony in the official assessments of pitches in Australia. "They were astonished when the first Test match pitch in Perth was given a very good rating by the match referee Ranjan Madugalle," Gavaskar wrote.
Turning his focus to Melbourne, he speculated on the potential rating from the new match referee, Jeff Crowe. "Since 36 wickets fell in the Melbourne Test instead of 32 in Perth, Crowe might drop the word 'very' from the 'very good'... and rate the MCG pitch as good," Gavaskar suggested with biting sarcasm. He even playfully questioned whether Crowe's New Zealand background might influence his judgement against Australia, before noting the referee now lives in the USA and "the passion may have calmed down a bit."
Defending Staff, Attacking Double Standards
Gavaskar concluded by mounting a strong defence of the MCG ground staff while skewering the perceived hypocrisy in how pitches are judged globally. He argued that while curators in countries like Australia might make a "human error," they are never labelled as "devious"—a term often unfairly thrown at groundsmen in the Indian subcontinent. His final sign-off, a simple "Tut tut," carried an unmistakable and powerful message about the double standards in cricket's pitch-talk narrative.
The MCG debacle has thus ignited a crucial conversation that goes beyond a single match. It questions the consistency of pitch ratings, the financial viability of truncated Tests, and the inherent biases in how playing conditions are evaluated across different cricketing nations.
