Kevin Pietersen

Am i missing something here, whats so wrong with what he did changing his stance to play left handed?

Players do something simular when they play a reverse sweep dont they?

 

Just messing with bowler's head!

Either that or he's just a flash git! Either way it worked! (england)

 

Pietersen's strokes were different from the conventional reverse-sweep because he changed his grip before the bowler delivered, effectively making him a left-handed batsman. Since a bowler isn't allowed to change his bowling hand without informing the umpire, some have suggested that the same should apply to the batsmen.

 

theres nothing in the rules of the game, however there is something in the spirit of the game section of the handbook. well in the south yorkshire league there is, i think it would constitute as un-gentlemanly behavour but he is exploiting a very grey area in the rules so let it be in my opinion.

 

The MCC are meeting tomorrow about it, so expect a change in the law!

 

Yeah ive just seen that, it is a very grey area ive just checked it up theyl probablt close that loophole i should imagine seeing that they are very traditionalists. However i like controvercy and i like to see improvisation from batsmen so a part of me hopes that they dont, but they will because it will open a can of beans regarding bowlers changing hands or bowling round/over the wicket without informing the opposeing batsman or the umpire.

 

Don't see the issue with it myself.

It's a high risk venture. Plenty of bowlers would be happy to see him trying that kind of shot against them.

 

RE: Don't see the issue with it myself.

I agree, also spinners spin it both ways and don't tell the batsmen which way it's going, bowlers have many variations like slower balls etc.

Also, cricket is here for entertainment and I'm sure most of the viewers remember those shots the most and enjoyed them.

 

RE: Don't see the issue with it myself.

On LBW- I think that if he decides to change hand then LBW should be given if it hits his pad and is going to hit the stumps and forget the other rules.

 

It's the unexpected - it's great !

Similar to what yousaid - bowler's don't show their grip on the ball to show which way they are going to swing it or if they are going to pitch it up or pitch it short. It's a battle - bowler v batsman - they are just trying to get one up on each other and psyche each other out!

 

RE: It's the unexpected - it's great !

Definitely, he's managed to find a way to score 6runs so well played!

 

He would have looked soft if he hadn't!

 

RE: He would have looked soft if he hadn't!

I'm sure he will miss one one day, then he will look a pillock but that's part of the risk.

 

I agree - Couldn't play that shot to a yorker

which begs the question why the bowler didn't change the bowl he let down. A reverse sweep is normally premeditated, but to actually change stance and hands has to be done while the bowler is still running in.

As for the legality/morality issue of the shot - I don't see a problem with it in one-dayers - they are more traditionally crowd pleasing spectacles where the crowd want high scores, so why not do the unexpected to excite/interest the crowd - the rules are different regarding wides in both forms of cricket, so they could let this go.

 

The problem is

He changes the grip to left handed. If a bowler decides to bowl left handed or around the wicket he has to warn the umpires and batsmen in advance whereas batsmen don't have to.

Also, there is a problem with LBW. You cannot be given out LBW if the ball pitches outside leg stump. By changing his grip to left handed which then becomes the leg stump and off stump?

I think if you have the talent to do it then you should be allowed, similarly if you can bowl left handed you should be allowed without warning.

However, I think the MCC will work out how to clarify the rules to the umpires, particularly the LBW issue, rather than banning the shot altogether.

 

The difference between a reverse sweep and what KP did is that a reverse sweep is a change of hand position, not a change of stance. What KP did was to change both his hands and stance.

One potential issue is that the bowler sets a field to a batsman knowing that he is right or left handed. These fielding positions cannot, by law, change during the bowlers run-up yet the batsman in this instance has the advantage of negating the field set to him by changing his stance from right to left handed. The issue becomes more prevelant with slow/spin bowlers, as the batsman has more time to change position and thus gain a larger advantage. If the batsman can change, why can't the fielders also move whilst the bowler is running in?

There's no doubt it's a great piece of skill and it was great to watch, but the game should not entirely be subject to pleasing the crowd and people sat at home. I personally think it should not be allowed and I say this as someone who plays the game, as a batsman.

 

So a sport, something people go and watch to be entertained, should not be about the spectatators and fans?

 

That's not what I said though.....

 

But what else should it be about?