|
|
Post by heavybails on Apr 5, 2012 8:54:18 GMT
anyone clear up the law on switch hitting , didnt think there was any law against it
|
|
|
|
Post by swerveman on Apr 5, 2012 12:15:51 GMT
There's no law against it, it's a competition regulation. He's not supposed to change his stance until the bowler has entered his delivery stride.
|
|
|
|
Post by gooders on Apr 5, 2012 22:26:45 GMT
Is it right that they're thinking of banning the cover drive, because too many runs are scored from the shot?
|
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Apr 6, 2012 16:36:14 GMT
There's no law against it, it's a competition regulation.... An unusual example of the regulations making some sense! If the bowler has to let the batsman know which mode of delivery he's using it's reasonable to say that the batsman's starting point ought to be known up to the point where the ball is delivered. If the batsman changes position in time for the bowler to refrain from delivering the ball the bowler is justified in stopping. The sanction against the bowler who doesn't say he's going round the wicket (etc) is that it's a no-ball and the warning procedure for time wasting is the only way to penalise a batsman who goes too far. It's been mooted that a batsman who switches position ought to be vulnerable for LBW to a ball which pitches either side of the wicket. What do others think about that? |
|
chiggers
Regular Contributor
DCCL
Posts: 16
|
Post by chiggers on Apr 6, 2012 20:37:36 GMT
Is it right that they're thinking of banning the cover drive, because too many runs are scored from the shot? I thought that more runs came from the streaky edge past slip. Thank goodness they never thought of banning that - it would have reduced my scoring by about 90%! |
|
|
|
Post by cramizzy on Apr 30, 2012 23:01:14 GMT
There is another side to this question which I have not seeen.
The bowler balls four fast deliveries - is he then committing an offence by bowling a slow ball without letting the batsman know his intentions?
This is an underhand trick by the bowler to fool the batsman is it not?
|
|
|
|
Post by mrsinghIndia on May 22, 2012 16:51:57 GMT
It's been mooted that a batsman who switches position ought to be vulnerable for LBW to a ball which pitches either side of the wicket. What do others think about that? This seems a good solution to the problem of the batsman disadvantaging the fielding side. |
|
|
|
Post by Reggie Duff on May 23, 2012 3:32:59 GMT
I don't know about other readers, but I can't see that the fielding side is disadvantaged by a switch hit. It's a very risky shot, and I would be happy to see a batsman play it frequently. Annoying when it comes off?, yes of course, but you'll be in there with a good chance of a wicket too. I think the MCC's approach to wait and see how it unfolds before jumping in and meddling with the laws, only to have to revisit the issue in the near future, is the right approach. www.lords.org/data/files/paper-on-switch-hit-for-website-10193.pdf |
|
