‘Travis Head century took away any chance of Perth pitch being rated shit’: Sunil Gavaskar

Gavaskar then lamented that the pacer-friendly pitch is never “bad”, but the strip that offers turn is a “disgrace”, a sentiment shared by many around the world.

“Their narrative that a pitch with bounce and danger to life and limb is never bad, but that a pitch where the ball turns and keeps low is a disgrace, is sadly still believed even by the complexed ones in the sub-continent. They will rate a batter only if he scores tons on pacy, bouncy pitches, but if a batter from their part of the world doesn’t get a century in the sub-continent, he will still be called great,” his column reads.

England’s pacers had put them ahead in the game, with the visitors taking a 49-run lead by the end of Day 1, and it seemed they would push Australia into a corner. However, the collapse of nine wickets before Tea saw the team set a paltry target of just 205, which the home side chased in 28.2 overs courtesy of Head’s 69-ball century.

According to Gavaskar, a batter cannot be called “great” if one doesn’t score on the surfaces that turns and requires more talent and footwork than playing pace. He writes, “For me, playing on a turning pitch requires more talent and footwork than playing pace. That is why, if you don’t score runs on such surfaces, you are not a great batter. Since top-quality spin is seldom, if ever, seen in these countries and their pitches, the moment they see spin in the sub-continent, they get uncomfortable and question the quality of the pitch. That’s typical, but unless you score in foreign conditions, how can a batter be called great?”