Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 63

Thread: Switch hitting

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    991

    Switch hitting

    Last night the umpire chatted Warner for changing his stance from left ot right handed while the bowler came in to bowl. The commies remarked that the bowler has to announce if he is bowling over or around the wicket so the batsman should not be able to change his stance.

    The bowler informs the umpire which side he is going to bowl so the umpire knows what side he will be coming from so he can monitor no balls and the non striker knows where to stand so as not to interfere with the bowlers run up.

    I dont see what the problem is here, the bowler can change his pace, length and grip to try and outsmart the batsman, some bowlers even hide the ball from the batsman to try and suprise him so I dont see what all the fuss is about when a batsman also trys to outsmart the bowler.

  2. #2
    International Debutant
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NZ
    Posts
    2,040
    What exactly is the umpire supposed to do about wides if the batsman changes his stance from left/right right/left as the bowler is running in? Fair call from the ump. I have no problem with batsmen changing the grip on the bat (Pietersen) but changing their stance to completely the opposite as the bowler runs in is a bit much.

  3. #3
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,773
    The real problem is field placement, lbw and wide laws.

    The off stump does not change, so the batsman by changing stances reduces the opportunity for the bowler to get them LBW and also increases the probability of a wide. Also by changing stance the batsman can find a gap that cannot be plugged behind square on the leg side.

    I do not mind batsmen reverse sweeping, but I don't think it's appropriate to change stances. If they do, then the wide and lbw laws need to treat both the leg and off stumps as off stump. Therefore a wide should only be called if the ball would have been a wide when bowled to the batsman's off stump and the "pitching outside the line" rule should be completely dropped. There isn't much you can do about the field placings though.

  4. #4
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    41,457
    What if the fielding captain has 2 slips and a gully, then all of a suddent he douchebag batsman changes stance so now there are three fielders behins square leg, and therefore the ball is a no-ball?

    Honestly, I don't think it should be allowed without the fielding side having an opportunity to change the field. Fair enough reverse sweeps or whatever, but not a fan of this tbh.
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
    "People make me happy.. not places.. people"

    "When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson

    "Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn


  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    991
    Quote Originally Posted by Polo23 View Post
    What exactly is the umpire supposed to do about wides if the batsman changes his stance from left/right right/left as the bowler is running in?
    There is already provisions in the laws for this, (i.e.) if a batman charges the bowler the height rule is judged from their original stance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Polo23 View Post
    Fair call from the ump. I have no problem with batsmen changing the grip on the bat (Pietersen) but changing their stance to completely the opposite as the bowler runs in is a bit much.
    Why, a bowler can bowl 5 balls at 90kph then suddenly bowl one at 135kph in an attempt to suprise the batsman. A bowler can bowl spin one minute then fast the next without informing the batsman.

  6. #6
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,773
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    What if the fielding captain has 2 slips and a gully, then all of a suddent he douchebag batsman changes stance so now there are three fielders behins square leg, and therefore the ball is a no-ball?

    Honestly, I don't think it should be allowed without the fielding side having an opportunity to change the field. Fair enough reverse sweeps or whatever, but not a fan of this tbh.
    The off stump stays the off stump, but changing stances takes the slips out of play unfairly IMO.

  7. #7
    International Regular stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    aus
    Posts
    3,773
    Quote Originally Posted by Streetwise View Post
    Why, a bowler can bowl 5 balls at 90kph then suddenly bowl one at 135kph in an attempt to suprise the batsman. A bowler can bowl spin one minute then fast the next without informing the batsman.
    And the batsman can play a cut or a drive without informing the bowler.

    A bowler cannot change hands or switch to around the wicket without informing the batsman.

    Seriously, the batsmen get enough advantages these days, why should they get any more?

  8. #8
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    What if the fielding captain has 2 slips and a gully, then all of a suddent he douchebag batsman changes stance so now there are three fielders behins square leg, and therefore the ball is a no-ball?
    36.3 comes into play

    The off side of the striker's wicket shall be determined by the
    striker's stance at the moment the ball comes into play for that
    delivery.

    The ball comes into play (23.4) at the start of the runup so everything is set (offside, legside) once the bowler starts to come in.
    Last edited by Goughy; 23-02-2010 at 07:29 PM.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

    Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)

    Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    991
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    36.3 comes into play

    The off side of the striker's wicket shall be determined by the
    striker's stance at the moment the ball comes into play for that
    delivery.

    The ball comes into play (23.4) at the start of the runup so everything is set (offside, legside) once the bowler starts to come in.
    didnt read it properly.
    Last edited by Streetwise; 23-02-2010 at 07:33 PM.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    991
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post

    Seriously, the batsmen get enough advantages these days, why should they get any more?
    Dont agree with this, just because in the 70's and 80's the bowlers had the avantage should not mean that the game should stagnate and stay the same for ever and ever. Investigate the reasons why people are flocking to the 20/20 games and not bothering with tests as much. Spectators want to be entertained and have excitement in the game.

  11. #11
    International 12th Man Julian87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ashfield
    Posts
    1,666
    What I didn't understand was how an umpire can be against something that has been deemed as legal.

  12. #12
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Julian87 View Post
    What I didn't understand was how an umpire can be against something that has been deemed as legal.
    Debatable.

    Law 10

    In normal circumstances
    the striker should always be ready to take strike when the bowler
    is ready to start his run up.

    A bowler is quite within their rights to stop their delivery, the umpire can warn the batsman for not being ready to take strike and time wasting penalties can be incurred.

  13. #13
    gwo
    gwo is offline
    U19 Debutant
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    308
    Warner was very much "ready to take strike" when Deonarine was bowling. I don't see how he wasn't / why it would be illegal?

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    991
    Quote Originally Posted by stephen View Post

    A bowler cannot change hands or switch to around the wicket without informing the batsman.
    No its the umpire that must be informed and its not because of the batsman its so the umpire knows which side the bowler will approach from and so the non striker will not stand in his way.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    991
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Debatable.

    Law 10

    In normal circumstances
    the striker should always be ready to take strike when the bowler
    is ready to start his run up.

    A bowler is quite within their rights to stop their delivery, the umpire can warn the batsman for not being ready to take strike and time wasting penalties can be incurred.
    Dosent apply, Warner was ready when the bowler started his run-up.

    Interesting also was the WI bowler was sometimes bowling from a meter or two from behind the popping crease. Watson spoke to the umpire about this.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Real Inventor Of Over The Top Hitting In ODI's
    By gunner in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 03-05-2007, 03:47 AM
  2. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 08-08-2005, 08:42 PM
  3. EA sports Cricket 2004 hitting bug!!
    By veeru300 in forum General
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 16-02-2005, 09:33 AM
  4. India lacks BIG hitting all rounder
    By alexkumar in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 19-07-2004, 05:12 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-01-2004, 01:08 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •