former captain of india Sunil Gavaskar Has once again sparked a debate on pitch assessment by openly raising questions. International Cricket Council (ICC)The great batsman has highlighted that he believes there are double standards in the way pitch ratings are given, Recently the fourth Ashes test was completed At the Melbourne Cricket Ground as a prime example.
Two-day Test raises questions on pitch evaluation
Eyebrows were raised after the Melbourne Test ended in just two days, with the bowlers dominating from the first session. 20 wickets fell on the first day – the highest number on the opening day in Australia since 1951 – followed by 16 wickets on the second day. Overall, the match was completed in just 142 overs, an unusually short duration for a Test match at one of cricket’s most prestigious venues.
Despite the huge help given to the bowlers, Gavaskar feels the match officials are unlikely to be criticized on the pitch. Drawing comparisons to the series-opening Test in Perth, which was over in two days yet received a glowing assessment, the former opening batsman suggested the MCG surface may still survive scrutiny.
Sunil Gavaskar hints at referee-driven rating for MCG pitch
Gavaskar pointed out that the Perth Test pitch was given a ‘very good’ rating despite similar conditions, which allowed for a faster completion. He added a satirical twist by suggesting that the rating of a Melbourne pitch might depend more on who holds the referee’s clipboard than the actual nature of the surface.
Gavaskar noted this jeff crowe Instead of officiated in the Melbourne and Sydney Tests. Ranjan MadugalleThe wording of the rating can easily change. According to him, removing the word “very” from “very good” may be the only visible difference, even though Melbourne has seen more wickets fall than Perth.
“Since there is a new match referee for the Melbourne and Sydney Test matches, Jeff Crowe, the ratings may be different. Since 36 wickets fell in the Melbourne Test instead of 32 in Perth, Crowe might remove the word ‘very’ from the ‘very good’ given by Madugalle for the Perth pitch and give the MCG pitch a good rating. Of course, surprises never end, so we may get another rating.” Gavaskar wrote in his column for Sportstar.
The object of satire is the ‘terrible groundsman’ narrative.
The 75-year-old man did not stop here. He also took a dig at how Indian pitch curators are often portrayed by ICC match referees. Gavaskar sarcastically commented that although curators in Australia may occasionally commit “human error”, they are rarely labeled as manipulative – a sharp contrast to the harsh language often used for Indian groundsmen.
“The curator, or as we found out the person in charge of the MCG, the Director of Turf, can make a human error and get it a little wrong, but they are not hypocritical like those ‘terrible groundsmen’ in India who don’t even prepare the pitch and expect the batsmen to score runs on it. Tut tut,” Gavaskar added.
Also read: Ashes 2025-26: Ben Stokes and Steve Smith criticize MCG pitch after fourth Test ends in two days
