MCC to probe Pietersen switch hit

[The People's Hero]

A reverse sweep is still a right handed shot.

We're talking about something more important than the shot itself - it has certain implications as far as the umpire is concerned.

[Flynny]

But isn't it only the bowler who has to inform the umpire of a change of stance? I don't think it's the same for batsmen so surely Pietersen's technically doing nothing wrong?

Thats the point. Technically he's doing nothing wrong, no, because this hasn't been done before (as far as I know - and at least not so publicly and not so brilliantly). A new rule will probably be passed outlawing it or placing conditions on it or otherwise clarifying. I think it'll be banned and think the reasoning is pretty sound.

[The People's Hero]

It could arguably be classed as outside of the spirit of the game, although it would be labouring a point.

I don't like it. I don't care much for one-day or 20/20 cricket anyway. But then that's because I'm a self-confessed dourist.

[Joe.]

Thats the point. Technically he's doing nothing wrong, no, because this hasn't been done before (as far as I know - and at least not so publicly and not so brilliantly). A new rule will probably be passed outlawing it or placing conditions on it or otherwise clarifying. I think it'll be banned and think the reasoning is pretty sound.

I can undersand why it would or wouldn't be banned.

As said before, technically he's done nothing wrong by using the shot but it could possibly make life difficult for umpires e.g. when to call a wide- would he give a wide as if it were a right handed shot even though it was left handed?

I personally wouldn't like to see this type of shot banned. At the end of the day, it's very impressive from Pietersen- even Styris stood back and admired the shot as it sailed over the boundary It's players like Pietersen who attract people to come and watch cricket, especially the twenty-20 form, known for its big shots and flair.

[Flynny]

I can undersand why it would or wouldn't be banned.

As said before, technically he's done nothing wrong by using the shot but it could possibly make life difficult for umpires e.g. when to call a wide- would he give a wide as if it were a right handed shot even though it was left handed?

I personally wouldn't like to see this type of shot banned. At the end of the day, it's very impressive from Pietersen- even Styris stood back and admired the shot as it sailed over the boundary It's players like Pietersen who attract people to come and watch cricket, especially the twenty-20 form, known for its big shots and flair.

In that case, how do you propose getting around the very problems you just mentioned?

I don't like it. I don't care much for one-day or 20/20 cricket anyway. But then that's because I'm a self-confessed dourist.

Are you proposing a Boycott?

[The People's Hero]

Are you proposing a Boycott?

I'm boycotting that proposal.

Hang on - that was your joke wasn't it?

[Joe.]

In that case, how do you propose getting around the very problems you just mentioned?

I don't.

It really depends on how much it affects the game itself and the umpires, they should be the ones consulted about this before a decision is made. If they feel it prevents them from making correct decisions then the shot should be made illegal but otherwise not.

[C-man]

Again: that's simply not true. There wasn't a load of huffing, and his bowling action has been done for decades, it just happens to be rare. It's allowed by the rules. Slinging's fine.

Pietersen's shot is also allowed by the rules, but it wrecks the flow of the game to such an extent that it won't be allowed. If truely ambidextrous batsmen start to do it, and all batsmen start working on being able to do something similar, it swings the balance of the game so much in their favour that it could easily become quite ludicrous. Allowing it to stand would set a dangerous precendent, Malinga's bowling does nothing of the kind.

How does it wreck the flow of the game?

And how would it swing the balance in batsmen's favour? The shot is incredibly risky. Very few batsmen will be willing to try it because they'd look like complete twats if the bowler saw what they were doing and fired in a quicker yorker.

Let them do it, they'll soon realise that only a few batsmen will be able to do it against a very limited amount of bowlers.

I've seen one guy play similarly in my league before though. The guy wasn't hitting them for six he was just turning round and pulling them for four through point. He was soon dismissed by one that was pitched up though.

[AmericanScott]

I don't see what the big deal is with those shots.

I don't really follow nor like cricket but i thought it was fine to do that as i've seen it done before.

[SamL]

I don't see what the big deal is with those shots.

I don't really follow nor like cricket but i thought it was fine to do that as i've seen it done before.

It hasn't been done before. Players have attempted a reverse sweep which is still a right handed shot, but Pietersen changes his stance to that of a left hander which is something different.

As far as I'm aware he's the first player to try this.

[SamL]

Update:

The MCC will not rush a decision over whether the switch-hitting of England batsman Kevin Pietersen is legal.

Officials will discuss the issue at a meeting at Lord's on Tuesday but they are likely to refer the matter to a full committee meeting in August.

Pietersen hit two sixes in Sunday's win over New Zealand after changing his stance to left-handed and is free to do so in the remaining one-day games.

"You cannot redraft the laws of cricket overnight," said an MCC spokesman.

"This affects cricket across the world at all levels."

Pietersen's improvisation prompted some commentators to question whether it gives batsmen an unfair advantage.

But the Hampshire star rejected the claims as "absolutely stupid", adding the game must embrace innovation.

World governing body the International Cricket Council (ICC) had already raised concerns about the legality of the stroke before Pietersen's incredible hitting off all-rounder Scott Styris at Chester-le-Street.

The ICC's cricket committee made recommendations at its annual meeting in Dubai in May for the MCC, the custodian of cricket's laws, to review the switch hit.

And the MCC has also had reports of some club cricketers adopting a similar tactic.

The MCC's head of cricket John Stephenson, a former England Test player, and secretary Keith Bradshaw will be among those attending Tuesday's meeting.

But there will be no definitive ruling on the legality or otherwise until the MCC's rules committee meets on 12 August.

Unlike bowlers, a batsman does not have to notify the umpires and opposing team if they opt to reverse their batting style.

However, the shot raises a number of questions for umpires, including the lbw and leg-side no-ball laws.

Despite the controversy, Pietersen believed he has broken new ground with his stroke.

The first six flew over deep square leg boundary (for a left-hander) at Chester-le-Street, while the second bore more of a resemblance to a Marcus Trescothick slog sweep over the ropes at long-on.

"Reverse sweeps have been part of the game for however long, I am just fortunate that I can hit it a bit further," said Pietersen.

"Everybody wants brand new ideas, new inventions and that's a new shot." England one-day captain Paul Collingwood, who was standing at the non-striker's end as Styris bowled, admitted: "I covered my eyes as soon as he turned his body around.

"He did actually come up the wicket and said 'I was thinking about doing that in bed last night'."

And Pietersen, who hit Sri Lanka spinner Muttiah Muralitharan for a six in similar fashion in a Test match two years ago, added: "We were in a position where I needed to push the accelerator and it worked. Nobody has seen it before.

"On other occasions it might not work but the most important thing is a convincing England victory.

"I play to win, I would do anything to win and the most important thing is we are 1-0 up.

"The key to it is to try to raise the bar on Wednesday again, hit our straps on Saturday and if we have a good week we will have won a series."

Asked whether he thought his switch hits should be outlawed as he is effectively a right-handed batsman playing left-handed, he responded: "I don't agree at all." "To be honest, if you're playing right-handed you shouldn't even have the ability to hit left-handers for six like I do, so no, it's not a problem."

New Zealand had no complaints about Pietersen's innovation.

"If you're good enough to play it I think you should be allowed to go for it," said batsman Daniel Flynn.

"I don't see why he should be restricted in playing it so fair play to him. I've tried hitting right-handed shots myself but I can't hit them as well as that.

"I'm left-handed in nearly everything I do - golf, cricket everything except kicking a ball - so I can appreciate how good a shot that was.

"You have to give him credit because it was a great shot and he's obviously worked on it and it came off for him."

[James.]

What's the problem? The only problem I can see is a few old farts getting nervous about change.

Disadvantage to the fielding side? What a rubbish argument. The fielding side will get a chance to bat as well.

Let talent shine.

[Flynny]

How does it wreck the flow of the game?

And how would it swing the balance in batsmen's favour? The shot is incredibly risky. Very few batsmen will be willing to try it because they'd look like complete twats if the bowler saw what they were doing and fired in a quicker yorker.

Let them do it, they'll soon realise that only a few batsmen will be able to do it against a very limited amount of bowlers.

I've seen one guy play similarly in my league before though. The guy wasn't hitting them for six he was just turning round and pulling them for four through point. He was soon dismissed by one that was pitched up though.

It's not as risky as your making out, especially if batsmen all start practising it. Its also quite hard for the bowler to react mid-delivery, and as for field placings, it ****s them right up.

Having said that I've just seen that they've said they'll not be doing owt about it at the minute, so what do I know? I still think this swings the one-day game further in the favour of batsmen, but that seems to be what most people want to see. Something will have to happen eventually, even if its just regulating the umpiring surrounding such shots, because these will become much more common now.

[DBEightyFive]

Has been confirmed by MCC that shot is within the laws of the game

Linky Link

[Milky]

The change in grip from right to left hander is the key, not just the stance.

[Number 6]

To be honest it's more likely to make me watch cricket, and surely that's a good thing for the sport.

[SamL]

The MCC has said the controversial switch-hit tactic used by England's Kevin Pietersen against New Zealand is legal within the laws of the game.

Pietersen hit two sixes after changing his stance to left-handed but some commentators had asked whether it was in keeping with the spirit of the game.

"The MCC believes that the switch-hit stroke is exciting for the game of cricket," said a statement.

"It conforms to the Laws of Cricket and will not be legislated against."The MCC said the stroke had already been recognised by and dealt with by Law 36.3, and as it was a risky shot for a batsman to try and play, "it also offers bowlers a good chance of taking a wicket and therefore MCC believes that the shot is fair to both batsman and bowlers."

Pietersen said the decision was the right one for the future of the sport.

"It's important that we as players are innovative and if this shot helps make cricket more exciting and entertaining for spectators then that has to be good for the sport," he said.

"I am glad the MCC has recognized that cricket is always evolving and that this particular shot brings something special to the game.

"I have spent many hours in the nets working on it and I am pleased that all the hard work is not going to go to waste."

World governing body the International Cricket Council (ICC) had already raised concerns about the legality of the stroke before Pietersen's incredible hitting off all-rounder Scott Styris at Chester-le-Street.

The ICC's cricket committee made recommendations at its annual meeting in Dubai in May for the MCC, the custodian of cricket's laws, to review the switch hit.

And the MCC has also had reports of some club cricketers adopting a similar tactic. Unlike bowlers, a batsman does not have to notify the umpires and opposing team if they opt to reverse their batting style.

However, the shot raises a number of questions for umpires, including the lbw and leg-side no-ball laws.

Despite the controversy, Pietersen believed he broke new ground with his stroke.

The first six flew over deep square leg boundary (for a left-hander) at Chester-le-Street, while the second bore more of a resemblance to a Marcus Trescothick slog sweep over the ropes at long-on.

"Reverse sweeps have been part of the game for however long, I am just fortunate that I can hit it a bit further," said Pietersen.

"Everybody wants brand new ideas, new inventions and that's a new shot. We were in a position where I needed to push the accelerator and it worked.

"On other occasions it might not work but the most important thing is a convincing England victory.

"I play to win, I would do anything to win and the most important thing is we are 1-0 up.

"The key to it is to try to raise the bar on Wednesday again, hit our straps on Saturday and if we have a good week we will have won a series."

Styris, who was on the receiving end of the shots, said he had no problem with it.

"Sometimes you've just got to take your hat off and say "well played"," he said.

"We all admire good cricket and that's what it was. I don't view it in any other light, I don't believe it's against the spirit of the game or anything, I just take my hat off and say "nice shot"."

When asked if he had been tempted to try playing the stroke himself, he said: "It crossed my mind when I was out there but I thought if I'm out, it's a double blow for me."