Innovation Nation

Of all the sometimes absurd arguments that are raised by the sport of cricket, surely this is the most pointless and irritating. Last Sunday, Kevin Pietersen, whilst making a cracking hundred in a one day international against New Zealand, played two shots with a left handed grip, both of them going for six. And, as superb and innovative as those shots were, commentators and pundits are calling for a ban on this type of shot as it gives a unfair advantage to the batsman. For the life of me, I cannot understand this logic.


Now, the reverse sweep is a more common shot in world cricket, with players using their hands to manoeuvre the ball into their off sides as opposed to where a conventional sweep would go. What Pietersen did was similar but more staggering. As the medium paced Scott Styris was in his delivery stride, Pietersen changed his hands on the bat and spun around so he was pretty much batting as a left hander. He then thumped the first ball over the deep square leg boundary and the second over the ropes at long on.


The shots were not sweeps - more like left handed slogs. It was a tremendous sight and, of course, aided Pietersen in his search for a century. However, is this ‘switch-hitting’ entirely within the legality of the game? Many are now saying that the stroke should be outlawed as the batsman is changing his batting stance.


I cannot believe the stupidity in this. Innovation is one of the fundamental facets of limited overs cricket. Players have to find as many ways as possible of getting runs, not all of them conventional. Pietersen has extreme talent in the power he needed to clear the rope the way he did and he has come up with a new way of getting runs, a way that only a handful of players in the world could achieve.


Yet, we are now trying to ban him from doing it. Why would we want to stifle our best batsman? How does this make it unfair for the bowler. Test cricket witnesses the reverse sweep being played all the time - is this not what Pietersen did? Did he not simply change his hands so he could hit the ball the other way? I can’t see how this makes it unfair for the bowler. It is possible for him to see that batsman turning and deceive him with his delivery. It is also possible for Pietersen to miss-time the shot and scoop it straight up in the air for a catch.


In a contest between bat and ball, Pietersen had the extra edge and the boldness to play an extremely risky shot. It came off for him. Twice. How this shot is now facing extinction when it is so valuable and such a joy to watch is so far beyond me. With all the new idea’s and new methods being introduced to cricket every day, this is simply part of the process. And don’t forget how much the crowd enjoyed it either!


I’m all for the preservation of the basics of cricket and for Test cricket and its classical nature to remain at the forefront. But, this is surely another example of failing to keep up with the times. I’m sorry, but I feel cricket is shooting itself in the foot here.