Pietersen and flip flops...

[THX_1138]

Yeah the reference is crude, but you know what i speak of: Pietersen's improvised shots to hit Scott Styris' abysmmal pie tosses for deserving sixes... And even before Pietersen's dirty laundry and returned from the washers, there was speculation about the dragoonian ICC moving to ban his shots. I sincerely oppose such regulation. As an utter shyte batsman i think such improvisations are beneficial for just about anyone. Yes, they look silly when they fail (Mike Gatting, enuf said), but usually they yield desirable results. But at the end of the day, they are within the rules of cricket, for instance, the bat makes a legitimate contact with the ball, the batsman does not gain any disernable advantage, i.e. the bat does not swing due to some foreign agency etc etc... Besides, such dragoonian micromanagement would know no end... whats next? ban the slower ball? as a bowler, the first delievery i every perfect, if indeed you can call my limited skill perfection, was the marginally over pitched leg cutter. now that mixes the skills of a fast bowler and a spinner, must that delievery not be banned? or for that fact, the slower ball! is that anyway less deceptive or disembling than a switch hit? you proclaim to be a fast bowler and then ball a slow ball? wtf man... anyways, what are you opinions?

[Sachinism]

I agree batsmen should be allowed to play like that Its a risk they take, batting in a fashion that isn't normal to them

[Gambit]

Ok, but then also do the following. Get rid off the one bouncer per over rule. Let batsmen who switch grips be candidates for LBWs which they normally wouldn't be(pitched outside leg). Umpires shouldn't signal wides for legside wides if a RHB switches grip and attempts a reverse sweep.

[Desi Cartman]

what about wide deliveries then ? what about the rule of 2 behind square ... what about 7-2 fields I think reverse sweep is still ok but to change stance and grip and everything else is not fair

[Tapioca]

what about wide deliveries then ? what about the rule of 2 behind square ... what about 7-2 fields

Second part is easy - that would be in reference to the batsman's original stance. Wide should perhaps be called only if it is a wide in both the batsman's initial and final positions. That's what the umpires now do already if the batsman moves around - if a batsman backs away a couple of feet outside the leg stump, he won't get a wide if the ball is just outside the offstump , or even if the ball is a foot outside the leg stump.

[Sachinism]

Pietersen switch-hit given all-clear The MCC - the guardian of the laws of cricket - has concluded that the controversial left-handed shot that Kevin Pietersen successfully executed during the first ODI between England and New Zealand at Chester-le-Street on Sunday is "exciting for the game of cricket" and conforms to the laws of the game, and consequently will not be legislated against. The issue was raised during a scheduled meeting of the MCC Cricket Committee, which was attended by Keith Bradshaw, the club secretary and chief executive, and John Stephenson, the head of cricket. The committee concluded that the "superb execution" of the stroke should not disguise its difficulty. "It incurs a great deal of risk for the batsman. 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." In a statement, the MCC pointed out that such a shot had already been acknowledged in the 2000 revision of the laws, in which Law 36.3 defines the "off side of the striker's wicket as being determined by the striker's stance at the moment the bowler starts his run-up." However, the success of Pietersen's strokes could lead to two significant alterations to the laws. As things currently stand, under the provisions of Law 36.1.b, a batsman cannot be given out lbw if the ball pitches outside leg stump, an issue which will clearly require some review if leg and off stumps are to be swapped in this manner mid-delivery. And Law 25, which relates to wides, will also require some scrutiny, particularly in one-day cricket when anything that drifts past leg stump is liable to be called. Some commentators, notably the former West Indies fast bowler Michael Holding, had questioned the double standards at play, seeing as bowlers are not allowed to switch their style mid-over without informing the umpire. The MCC acknowledged this, but added: "They do not provide a warning of the type of delivery that they will bowl (for example, an off-cutter or a slower ball). It therefore concludes that the batsman should have the opportunity - should they wish - of executing the 'switch-hit' stroke." source: cricinfo