It was always on the cards that the Aussie media would go to town over the state of the wicket at Bombay. Of course, there are some fairly balanced views as well, but by and large, everyone felt that the pitch was a disgrace. I dont however recall a single Australian wicket caused due to the pitch exploding. In the 97 overs bowled on the final day, nearly 300 runs were scored. That doesnt look like a hopeless wicket, does it?

Australia's mistakes in their chase will be covered nicely amidst the talk about the nature of the pitch. What about allowing Tendulkar and Laxman to score rapidly during their partnership? How can a great team lose 10 wickets in 30 overs on the same pitch where India batted 69 overs for 205 runs? Why isnt anything said about Gilchrist's reckless sweep when there were three fielders placed for the mishit?

Justin Langer doesnt think this would be among his favourite tests. If I were in his place, I wouldnt think so too, after scoring 12 and 0, getting out to a seamer rather than a spinner on both occasions.
Peter Roebuck continues to croak about the pitch
McGrath calls it a farcical end to a great series
Greg Baum on how pitches affecting games are a unique thing to cricket.

Some Indian views on the test:

Harsha Bhogle feels that Australia batted as if it was a horror movie , no pitch is supposed to do that to a champion team.
Sunil Gavaskar wonders if Australia anticipated a Nagpur like wicket, furthering the generosity that has been doled out to them.
Polly Umrigar, who the curator at the Wankhede, rightly questions Ponting's use of the heavy roller before Australia batted.

Labels: aus v ind 2004, pitch