We often get these stuff about "that was a bad pitch" and "that pitch was not of international standard".... I mean, they have protective equipment, they have covered wickets and they have the best medical attention and yet, they still moan about pitches. The last straw was people saying that the pitches for the CT were "bad" and that they weren't conductive for "good cricket". I am sorry, but is the bowler getting help off the wicket a bad thing? If the definition of a good pitch is a road, then we do have a problem. Let us take the example of the Mumbai wicket, it was a sub standard one, sure. ONe that allowed more than reasonabl turn, but it wasn't UNPLAYABLE. And it certainly didn't point any physical danger to the batters. My question is why are those pitches tabooed? So, it doesn't quite provide the even contest between bat and ball that everyone harps on, but then again almost 95% of the pitches don't provide such contests.
We all should probably just accept the fact that certain pitches will help seamers, certain pitches will help batters and certain pitches will help spinners and move on. To make a hue and cry about it (mainly I guess because of TV rights and everyone wanting to get full 5 days of the game) is just plain stupid. What does everyone think of this issue?