The Dark Knight wrote:https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/bgt-aus-vs-ind-5th-test-scg-pitch-for-final-australia-vs-india-test-earns-satisfactory-rating-1468231
The SCG pitch has been rated Satisfactory.
Everyone will have a different view i know but for the 5 venues over the series to have 4 V Good ratings (The HIGHEST RATING POSSIBLE) and 1 Satisfactory rating (2nd HIGHEST Rating possible) is a JOKE imo and shows the Pitch rating system is pointless. 4 possible ratings is too few.
It's like giving 4 options to rate the weather Hot, Warm, Cool, Cold. So if you had a 25c Day how would you describe it given the options? Warm or Cool when its neither?
When assessing the SCG pitch they probably had 2 options, Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory as you couldnt possibly say it was V Good or Unfit.
I cant see how a pitch can be rated satisfactory when the match was over in 2 1/2 days , spin bowlers were non existent for a reason and batters become target practice for the bowlers encouraged by the variable bounce and movement throughout the match.
They'd probably get as much criticism if they rated it Unsatisfactory. Why wouldn't they have at least 5 ratings that included Average or Fair that indicates its not that great but not that good . Whilst Cummins somewhat endorsed the pitch i wander what response if they asked a batting captain like Smith? Cant help to think the response would've been different.
I'm all for pitches not being roads but when you have 3 out of 5 Tests barely go 3 days i think the Curators are getting far too much credit.
We all have no problem in criticizing pitches overseas when Aust get beaten inside 3 days but seemingly when Aust win at Home inside 3 days theres nothing wrong with the pitch.
End of the day the pitch ratings are a waste of time because the ICC are too useless to make any decisions unless it's rubber stamped by India 1st
