Not having a go at you as I know this is a common view, but I really don't understand how people can categorise individual shots as slogs in this manner. If you hit a 6 it's always going to be a slog by some definition, you're hitting it really far in the air and running the risk of being caught. At the same time, Marsh, Agar and Nevill hit the only sixes in the Australian innings and all of them except maybe the Nevill one were clean hits straight down the ground off spinners, hit to an area with minimal field protection and comfortably clearing the fence. What's an example of a shot that goes for six which is not a "slog" if those are? I don't really get it.
Anyway, my view is that for test cricket, I like variation in pitches but I do think wickets with decent carry (so dismissals behind the stumps from seamers are in play) tend to make for better games. Not really a fan of anything where the ball is dying on the way to the keeper on the first day. But in limited overs cricket, anything which makes scoring quickly challenging tends to make for more even and unpredictable contests, since the pressure to score quickly is already there, so you don't end up with attritional cricket. You end up with a situation where players need to score quickly but doing so it challenging.
I will acknowledge that it brings different skillsets to the fore though, and can result in a situation where Michael Hussey is as good a bowler as Dale Steyn. But t20 was never really about skillful wicket taking bowling anyway, it's about economy and variation, so I don't think that's a huge downside in this particular format.
