Bangalore: The Indian board's decision to doctor the pitch for the first Test has spectacularly backfired - again.
Three days after its national team was thrashed by Australia, Indian cricket was dealt another embarrassment by the International Cricket Council, which slapped the Board of Control for Cricket in India with a "poor" rating for the Pune wicket.
Match referee Chris Broad expressed his concerns with the quality of pitch in a report to the ICC. Under the governing body's pitch and outfield monitoring process, a pitch can be assessed as poor if it "offers excessive assistance to spin bowlers, especially early in the match".
India opened their bowling with spin on the first day of the Test, which finished inside three days, while 31 of the 40 wickets were claimed by spin.
Full advantage: Against the odds, it was Australia who took advantage of the bad wicket in Pune.Credit:AP
The BCCI faces a fine of up to $US15,000 ($19,500), which is loose change for the most powerful organisation in world cricket. They have 14 days to submit a response to the ICC's cricket manager Geoff Allardice and Ranjan Madugalle from the ICC's elite match referee panel.
There has been a push by the ICC for curators to be held more accountable for their pitches with a plan to "shame" venues and curators in the pipeline.
The finding is likely to escalate the tension between the BCCI and the Maharashtra Cricket Association after the venue's debut Test.
Officials in Pune are believed to be furious with the BCCI for pulling rank over them and its own pitch and curators committee and ordering a spin-friendly track.
The pitch at Maharashtra Cricket Association Stadium before the first Test.Credit:Andrew Wu
They felt BCCI officials had interfered without knowledge of the pitch, which needs grass to prevent the surface from drying out excessively and crumbling.
A grassy pitch would have advantaged Australia's quicks Mitchell Starc and Josh Hazlewood.
The dry Pune pitch.Credit:Andrew Wu
Australia's players were shocked last week when the Martian-like surface was unveiled.
The pitch quickly deteriorated and, as predicted by Australian captain Steve Smith, enabled spinners to dominate.
To the surprise of many, Australia adapted better to post a famous victory.
"I think it was certainly a wicket that would more likely suit the Indian players," said Smith.
"I think it evened up the contest a lot more.
"We saw the way our spinners bowled on that, they were able to generate good spin and good natural variation out of the wicket.
"It was up to them (the MCA Stadium curators) to prepare a wicket, they prepared a wicket that played in to our hands.
"It will be interesting to see what they come up with come Bangalore."
ICC chief David Richardson said curators would be "shamed" for producing substandard wickets. Only pitches rated "poor" are made public by the ICC.
"I think everybody accepts that if we want to have entertaining products, exciting matches, an attractive form of cricket, then the pitches need to be good and there needs to be a good balance between bat and ball, particularly in Test matches," Richardson said in February.
"For that reason, we have tried to focus on the member countries, or the venues that are producing these pitches for international cricket, (make them) more accountable, so in the future we will be incentivising them by saying: 'If you produce a good pitch, then go to the ICC website and you will see the result of the grade the match referee has given you and you will be rewarded in that way for producing good pitches. On the other hand, if you produce a below average or a poor, unfit pitch, then unfortunately you might be shamed'."
An assessment of "poor" is the second lowest of the ICC's six ratings, above "unfit", which is used for tracks deemed "dangerous".