A brewing controversy has taken center stage before a ball has even been bowled in the upcoming semifinal showdown between India and New Zealand. The venue in the spotlight is Mumbai’s Wankhede Stadium, where a late pitch switch has raised questions regarding the BCCI and Indian team management’s influence on such decisions. At the heart of the debate is Rahul Dravid’s reported insistence on the last-minute change, guiding the match to be played on a pitch already warmed up by previous games rather than a brand-new surface.
This narrative, however, is countered by governance from the top tier of international cricket. In response to the situation, the International Cricket Council (ICC) has approached the matter with a level of normality and routine. An ICC spokesperson revealed to Cricbuzz, saying “Changes to planned pitch rotations are common towards the end of an event of this length, and has already happened a couple of times.” They further clarified that the pitch change was recommended by the venue curator and agreed upon by the host, with the independent pitch consultant briefed on the alterations and seeing no issue with the performance of the surface.
Given ICC protocols, there isn’t a stringent clause dictating the selection of pitch strips. According to a knowledgeable source, venues bestowed with the responsibility of holding a match are expected to present the finest pitch and outfield conditions possible. The undertone of this expectation is the implication that the curators are trusted to make these decisions without undue influence.
There is a historical precedent for this decision, with both semifinals at the last T20 World Cup played on used surfaces, and the 2019 World Cup semifinals played on fresh ones. In the laws laid down for this World Cup, clause 6.3 states the ‘Ground Authority shall be responsible for the selection and preparation of the pitch.’ In the present instance, this role is shouldered by the Mumbai Cricket Association, in conjunction with the independent ICC pitch consultant – Andy Atkinson.
However, reports from The Daily Mail indicate that Atkinson has expressed frustration over the deviation from the initial pitch selection, suggesting that an email leak disclosed his concerns regarding the final match in Ahmedabad. Allegedly, Andy Atkinson’s leaked email expressed disappointment that the final would have a pitch “specifically chosen and prepared to their stipulation at the request of the team management and/or the hierarchy of the home nation board.”
When scrutinizing past global events, some veterans of the Indian cricket team have observed that host teams often exert some degree of influence. They cite the 2019 semifinal, where two English umpires officiated the India-New Zealand match as a subtle example. The implication here is that although it appeared neutral, with England in contention for the final, the umpires could have ideally been from a different, completely neutral country.
Experts reflect on marginal decisions that might have influenced the outcome, advocating for adherence to impartiality. Despite these rumblings, the consensus among past players is if a pitch is changed, it is still the same playing field for both teams.
As the controversy simmers, the eyes of the cricketing world are fixed on Wankhede, where India and New Zealand are geared up for an epic bout. With the pitch chatter in the backdrop, the true challenge remains on the field, where strategies will unfold, and the skills of two formidable teams will clash to secure a spot in the highly anticipated final.