THE ASIAN INDEPENDENT UK
Bal Ram Sampla
Geopolitics
England recently won a thrilling Ashes Test match against Australia by just 4 wickets. It sounds exciting, and it was – but there’s something unusual about this thriller. The entire match was over in just two days.
Look at the scores: Australia made 152 and 132. England replied with 110 and then chased down the target, finishing on 178 for 6 wickets. No team even reached 180 runs in any innings. Josh Tongue was named player of the match for his excellent seam bowling.
Now, imagine if this exact same match had happened in India. Same scores, same two-day finish – but with the ball spinning sharply instead of seaming. What would the reaction be?
There would almost certainly be an international outcry. The ICC match referee would likely give the pitch a “poor” rating. Headlines would scream about “unplayable conditions” and a “lottery, not a Test match.” Experts would question whether India had deliberately prepared a substandard pitch to gain unfair home advantage. There would be serious discussions about pitch doctoring.
But when this happens in England on a seaming pitch, the story is different. It’s called “classic Test cricket” or a “bowlers’ paradise.” Josh Tongue’s performance is rightly celebrated as brilliant bowling. The conditions are described as “challenging” rather than “unfair.” There’s praise for old-fashioned, competitive cricket.
This reveals a clear double standard in how cricket judges playing conditions. When matches finish quickly on turning tracks in Asia, it’s seen as a pitch failure. When the same thing happens on seaming tracks in England, Australia, or other pace-friendly countries, it’s viewed as proper Test cricket.
The truth is simple: both situations are the same. In both cases, the pitch is offering extreme help to bowlers. In both cases, skilled bowlers are exploiting those conditions well. And in both cases, international batsmen from both teams are struggling badly.
If we’re going to criticize pitches that end matches in two days, that criticism should apply everywhere – whether the ball is spinning in Mumbai or seaming in Manchester. If we’re going to celebrate such matches as exciting contests, then that celebration should also apply everywhere.
A bowler who takes wickets on a helpful pitch deserves credit, whether that bowler is Josh Tongue with a seaming ball or Ravichandran Ashwin with a spinning one. Neither should have their achievements dismissed as “the pitch did all the work.”
Cricket is a global game played in different conditions around the world. Some places naturally suit pace bowling, others suit spin. This variety is part of what makes cricket interesting. Home advantage exists everywhere – fast, bouncy pitches in Australia help their pacers just as turning pitches in India help their spinners.
The problem isn’t home advantage or different conditions. The problem is applying different standards to judge them. When three out of four innings don’t reach 155 runs and a Test match finishes in two days, that should raise the same questions regardless of location.
Fair governance means consistent standards. If the ICC is going to rate pitches and potentially penalize venues, those ratings must be applied equally. A match finishing in two days with collective scores under 180 is either acceptable everywhere or nowhere.
Until cricket’s authorities and commentators apply the same standards to all conditions, the sport will continue to show bias toward certain styles of play over others. This isn’t just unfair – it disrespects the rich diversity of conditions and skills that make cricket a truly global game.
England won a thriller, and that’s great. But let’s be honest about what the reaction would have been if the same thriller had unfolded in Asia with a spinning ball instead of a seaming one.
Australia 152 & 132
England 110 & 178-6
England win by 4 wkts
