It's a shame that Kevin Pietersen's comeback innings will be slightly overshadowed by the controversy over his predilection for the 'switch hit'. Until Dilshan twice aborted his run-up seeing the batsman change his grip, and the umpires first consulted each other than warned KP, how many of the rest of us realised what the rules were?
OK, as it turned out, the ICC stated that two years ago it had adopted the updated directive "which prevents the batsman from altering his grip or stance before the bowler enters his delivery stride. Should the bowler see a batsman change his grip or stance prior to the delivery stride the bowler can decide not to bowl the ball." IN that case, there should have been no dispute. The bowler was well within his rights to pull up before his delivery stride on seeing Pietersen adjust his grip to play left-handed, and the umpires were correct to offer a formal warning. But is this directive fair?
At present, a bowler has to tell the umpire and batsman if he intends to switch arms or side of the wicket, and the field placements can't be changed once the bowler begins his run-up. So far, so gentlemanly cricket. On the other hand, a bowler doesn't have to warn the batsman if he is to suddenly bowl the doosra. The 'slower ball' remains one of the deadliest deliveries in the fast bowler's armoury; same goes for the well-executed bouncer. So is that fair, too?
There must be few more irritating sights to a bowler than the batsman changing his grip and reverse sweeping or even whipping the ball to a leg-side boundary when a second earlier it was the off-side. However, performing this switch is hardly an easy option and it takes guts as well as balance and skill to pull it off successfully. Pietersen is one of the greatest exponents of the switch hit, while others can easily get tangled up or just miss the ball altogether. It's becoming a more popular tactic against spinners, especially in T20 where every run counts and slow bowlers are strangling the scoring rate.
To my mind, it's perfectly legitimate and exciting to watch. The fan knows the batsman is gambling and we all love to witness a risk that pays off. I also understand the bowler's view that if a batsman shows early intent to change hands then the bowler should have the opportunity to adjust the field accordingly. Stalemate. And that's what happened today until the ruling was obtained and understood. I've no doubt KP was honest when he said he hadn't realised and that in future he would leave his switching until the bowler reaches his delivery stride, making very clear his intention to continue frustrating the bowler with the tactic.
Cheating? Not if he - or anyone else - abides by the directive. Cheeky? Certainly, and that's why we admire those who try to do something a little different. From Viv Richards' audacious move outside his off stump to plant fast/medium-pacer Mike Hendricks into the stand back in the '70s to the 'wrong-handed' slog-sweep, it all contributes to the entertainment value of an innings, and entertainment is what cricket should be about.
