Ponting slammed the pitch at Bombay for the test ending in virtually 2 days. That is completely wrong. I think the wickets fell because of bad batting more than the pitch being bad.

Now, I agree that I have not seen the game at all, and my beliefs are based totally on news reports, which I have read in quite detail.

So here’s my retort to some of the stuff Ponting has said:

“I know lots of questions will be asked and match reports on this wicket will be sent to the ICC [International Cricket Council]. As a player you want to be tested in different conditions but this is going a bit too far. We played in three other venues where the conditions were different in all the matches and, apart from Nagpur, all of them were going into the fifth day.”

RPM: Why is this going too far? It was clear that the pitch suited the bowlers more than the batsmen. In today’s world, cricket is totally a batsman’s game. For a change there was a pitch that suited the bowlers. If your batsmen don’t have the patience to stick around, like true test match cricket warrants, it does not mean you blame the pitch. Not every pitch can be an ‘ideal’ pitch. That is one of the main features of cricket - the pitch is different at every place.

“We knew it [the target] was achievable but at the same time we knew it would be very hard. We had to get some partnerships going but, unfortunately, that didn’t happen. The first 15-20 minutes were very difficult but none of us got past that. We gave ourselves a chance to chase; 107 in any conditions you should be able to achieve. We were not good enough today and India put us under pressure.”

“You can’t say anything to any batsman who played on that wicket. It was all about calculated risks and you hope they come off, but it didn’t come off for any batsman.”

RPM: Thank you, my point exactly.


“It was a disappointing return for me, missing out on a huge part of history was disappointing I was hoping to get a five-day Test match and make some runs; play the same brand of cricket that we had throughout the series. But we didn’t win the Test match and I didn’t make any runs. It was a disappointing way to end the series.”

RPM: Yes, that is true. It was disappointing. But you missed the action in 3/4th of the series, and I hope you were not expecting to come in and start rollicking right away. That would be ideal, but not real. So just suck up and enjoy the series win. Take the Border-Gavaskar Trophy home and just be happy that it is not 2-2 but 2-1.

“He added that losing Shane Warne to injury for the Test was a big blow to the side, especially since India exploited the track fully with three very good spinners.

He said it would have been interesting to have Warne bowl on a wicket that afforded so much turn since he spins the ball a long way even on wickets that are not very helpful”

RPM: Yes, and looking at the way the Aussie fast bowlers bowled, it would have been interesting if Pathan were there in the Indian squad. Too bad. I think Warne/Pathan missing are wash and there is nothing to talk about. The other spinners in your side did step up, so don’t talk about who was not there and what could’ve been. If India had Gangs and Sachin for all the matches, who knows what could’ve been.

Summing up the series, he said the difference between the two sides was that India did some things well but didn’t do them for long enough, while Australia was consistent and able to put enormous pressure on their opponents.

RPM: Good conclusion. My thoughts too.