KP A SMASH HIT OR A CHEAT ?

[mal]

Kevin Fig Pieterson has done it again
The pragmatic sensationalist twice during a o/d game v NZ switched to left hand and slog sweeped drived 2 amazing sixes.
Many a time I have seen batters play that paddling reverse sweep but these reverse slogs ended up over the square and mid wicket fences!

QUESTION
________

Should a batsman controvene the laws or lack of laws and switch a batting stance to his opposite as the bowler delivers?
The MCC has ruled that this shot is legitimate
AND
Should a bowler be allowed to switch bowling arms as well ?

VERDICT
_______


Yes allow batsman to play these unorthodox inaudacius shots, they are thrilling to watch
NO to bowlers changing arms


DARREN LEHMANN
______________

SAGREAT cricketing legendary superstar has put his 2 bobs worth
" The cricket world should switch on to England STAR Kevin Pietersons innovative tatics rather than opposing enterprising thinking."

Well commented by Darren, I agree

Darren did raise an interesting topic
He says with the interpretation of the LBW rule that batters cant be given out LBW to balls pitched outside Leg stump.
By switch hitting this disadvantages the bowlers ?

SUMMARY
___________

I dont give an Esra Star if the KPSWITCHSLOG is legit, fair,cheating or whatever, its a breath of fresh air and shots like this and batters who have the courage to play need to flourish.
New shots are sensational
We have witnessed in recent times the amazing WATTOSWEEP that Shane Watson plays
People during the bodyline series saw Bradman step back virtually on the square leg umpire to cut bouncers
Players of this ilk must be encouraged to play like this

KP = CHAMP

[heater31]

Today's cricket is a batsman's game who would want to be a bowler.


I must inform the umpire who in turn informs the batsmen that I wish to change my bowling arm for the next delivery. The same should apply for batsmen

[am Bays]

Wrong Mal it isn't against the Laws of cricket to change batting stances

Whilst I admire his innovation and skill Heater is OTM, batsmen should inform the bowlers if they wish to swap stances to RH to LH - as bowlers are required to do.

[MAY-Z]

batsmen shouldnt have to say what they are doing- but the batsman should lose any claim to the lbw for pitching outside leg stump or the ball hitting outside teh line of off stump so basically if you miss it and its going to hit the stumps youre out. the batsman should also lose the right to any leg side wides

[rod_rooster]

I see no problem with it whatsoever. To play the shot you have to make the movement very early giving the bowler time to see what is happening. A good bowler will use that to his advantage and bowl it where the shot can't be played forcing the batsman into a very awkward position. On the LBW rule it should be ensured that the umpire interprets the off stump and leg stump in relation to how the batsman takes guard when the bowler begins his run up. Thus is the player switches as KP did his off and leg stumps are still considered the same as before he switched allowing for an LBW if the ball pitches outside the original off stump.

[Rik E Boy]

:roll: Today's cricket is a batsman's game who would want to be a bowler.

'Cricket'? KP's party trick was during a one dayer. That's always been a batsmen's game. Add to that the introduction of 20/20 bullshit and you've got guys rolling up in Test matches who have no idea how to build an innings. Have a look at the Kiwi v England series for a start. Who would want to be a bowler? Anyone who plays real cricket.

regards,

REB

[best on hill]

if this was ricky ponting or pup clarke would there be the same response

[rod_rooster]

:roll: Today's cricket is a batsman's game who would want to be a bowler.

'Cricket'? KP's party trick was during a one dayer. That's always been a batsmen's game. Add to that the introduction of 20/20 bullshit and you've got guys rolling up in Test matches who have no idea how to build an innings. Have a look at the Kiwi v England series for a start. Who would want to be a bowler? Anyone who plays real cricket.

regards,

REB

You make an extremelly good point REB.

[hearts on fire]

Who cares? It adds a little spice to the game and makes it very entertaining to watch!

I would love to see it stay!

[MightyEagles]

:roll: Today's cricket is a batsman's game who would want to be a bowler.


I must inform the umpire who in turn informs the batsmen that I wish to change my bowling arm for the next delivery. The same should apply for batsmen

exactly.

[Booney]

While innovative and entertaining,for mine,it is not in the spirit of the game.

Old gentlemen cricketers like yourself mal,I would have thought,would have been against such tactics.

Did any one see Michael Holding speak during the delay in play of the one dayer in England on Wednesday night,with David Gower and Nasser Hussain? If so,ignore this bit and comment.

Holding based his argumetn in the 'against Peitersens shot' on this.

Chris Gayle,a left hander,walks out for the first ball of a test and takes guard.Jimmy Anderson is running in from 25 meters away,but,when he goes into his stance (Gayle) he faces up as a right hander.So the Poms set the field for a right hander.As Anderson takes off,remember the fielders at this point cant move, and approaches the wicket,Gayle moves into the left handers position. Therefore,the three slips and a gully,set for a right hand batsman all of a sudden are all behind square on the leg side and the ball is deemed a no ball.Right? Well,sort of.With the Poms knowing Gayle is left handed they,although facing up right handed,they cant set the field (slips/gully) for a left hander,now they are behind square on the right handers leg side.No ball.

The clause states the ball is in play when the bowler,be it from a long run or one step begins his approach to the wicket.

Having said all that,the rules wont stop it but common sense should.Common sense aint so common.

[mal]

BOONEY
nice post
it throws the 3 behind square leg no ball into the equation
having read some of the posts there are plenty of fors and againsts
Im 50/50 after reading them
Whilst the KPSLOGSWEEP looks good , morally its a wrongdoing for the traditionalists.

[rod_rooster]

While innovative and entertaining,for mine,it is not in the spirit of the game.

Old gentlemen cricketers like yourself mal,I would have thought,would have been against such tactics.

Did any one see Michael Holding speak during the delay in play of the one dayer in England on Wednesday night,with David Gower and Nasser Hussain? If so,ignore this bit and comment.

Holding based his argumetn in the 'against Peitersens shot' on this.

Chris Gayle,a left hander,walks out for the first ball of a test and takes guard.Jimmy Anderson is running in from 25 meters away,but,when he goes into his stance (Gayle) he faces up as a right hander.So the Poms set the field for a right hander.As Anderson takes off,remember the fielders at this point cant move, and approaches the wicket,Gayle moves into the left handers position. Therefore,the three slips and a gully,set for a right hand batsman all of a sudden are all behind square on the leg side and the ball is deemed a no ball.Right? Well,sort of.With the Poms knowing Gayle is left handed they,although facing up right handed,they cant set the field (slips/gully) for a left hander,now they are behind square on the right handers leg side.No ball.

The clause states the ball is in play when the bowler,be it from a long run or one step begins his approach to the wicket.

Having said all that,the rules wont stop it but common sense should.Common sense aint so common.

In this scenario what happens is that Anderson should pull out of the delivery and continue to do so until the umpires warn Gayle for time wasting. If the batsman changes his stance before the bowling stride then the bowler has every right to pull out. If however the batsman is good enough to switch whilst the bowler is in stride then good luck to them. It's extremely difficult to do and realistically if a bowler is any good he will have any batsman attempting it in all sorts of trouble. More players will get out trying to do that than actually be successful. As i said in an earlier post the law should be that the stance a batsman takes when the bowler begins his run up should determine whether the batsman is right or left handed regardless of their stance when they play the delivery. This would eliminate the too many behind square on the legside issue. I'd like to have seen Pietersen play the ball if he'd been bounced.

[Grahaml]

I was very surprised this was deemed legal. I don't have a problem with it, but I was sure you weren't able to switch the top and bottom hands like he did. However, I would like the rules to be altered to reflect this. I think once the batsman faces up and the bowler starts running in his left/right handedness is decided. If he then changes hands, or changes the way he takes his stance then any rules that differentiate between being left or right handed, such as the ball not being able to pitch outside leg, leg side wides, men behind square on the leg etc all goes out the window. I think switching your stance removes all those provisions in the batsman's favour.

And I have no problem with the bowler no longer being required to advise the umpire of where and how they bowl. At that level it should be obvious whether the bowler is a lefty or righty and whether he's coming over or around, save for moving the sight screen. No longer will a bowler run in with a batsman not knowing anything about them.

[MAY-Z]

batsmen shouldnt have to say what they are doing- but the batsman should lose any claim to the lbw for pitching outside leg stump or the ball hitting outside teh line of off stump so basically if you miss it and its going to hit the stumps youre out. the batsman should also lose the right to any leg side wides

only taken them nearly 4 years but the icc must have finally read my post

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci-icc/cont ... 64249.html

[whufc]

Based on what bowlers are expected to do and fielding restrictions in place Pietersons shot should be outlawed in my opinion.

When he plays this shot does the fielding side get penalised for having to many fielders behind square on the leg side?

When bowlers can start their delivery run up directly behind the umpire and then last second choose to jump over or around the wicket then im happy for that shot to be part of the game.

[mal]

Wrong Mal it isn't against the Laws of cricket to change batting stances

Whilst I admire his innovation and skill Heater is OTM, batsmen should inform the bowlers if they wish to swap stances to RH to LH - as bowlers are required to do.

After 4 years I have this question AM bays
HUH ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Y am eye wronggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg?

I say in my opening post under QUESTIONS
""Should a batsman controvene the laws or LACK of laws and switch a batting stance.""
When I say LAWS or LACK of LAWS you can take this in three ways
A : Not the Mortien man
B : Not the guy who played for SA/QL/AU
C : Im saying law or lack of laws , which means Im not sure, not wrongggggggggggggggg

PS
I still dont mind these shots
David Warner is the latest Ive seen play a ripper shot of this ilk
Would be an interesting stat to see how many runs to wicket ratio this shot produces
Would Top Level bowlers be happy or peeved seeing batters play reversal shots ?