Tony Becca

Ian Chappell is remembered not only as a wonderful batsman, not only as a captain who stood up for his players, but also as a captain who would do anything, or almost anything, in order to win.

In other words, in his days in the sun, Ian Chappell was almost a law unto himself and he feared no one.

Based on his observations, as a commentator, however, he seems to have mellowed. His is one of those voices, one of the very few, defending the integrity of cricket, and he does it so often that, apparently, he still fears no one.

Changed stance

A few days ago, in a one-day match between England and New Zealand at Chester-le-Street in Durham, Kevin Pietersen, the South African now representing England, changed his stance during Scott Styris' run-up.

The right-hander turned left-hander hit two consecutive deliveries from the medium-pacer for two sixes, there was some protest and the MCC, the lawmakers of the game, ruled that the change was OK, that the strokes were "superb", that they were "exciting for the game of cricket" and that the shots were "fair to both batsmen and bowlers".

Not so, says Ian Chappell, who, like ace West Indies fast bowler Michael Holding, argues that "it is unfair to ask bowlers to nominate beforehand the way they are going to operate, to bowl the ball and then allow batsmen to change their mode of striking after the ball is in play".

According to Chappell, the change from right to left, or from left to right, is different from the reverse sweep - the stroke where the batsman, for example, standing as a right-hander and using his wrists, sweeps the ball past the slips - and although that, in my opinion, should also be looked at, he may be right.

Mockery of field placings

The change of stance, however, is so wrong that it is strange that the MCC could find it "fair to both batsmen and bowlers".

As Chappell argues, one reason is that it makes a mockery of field placings.

Unless there was no reason for them in the first place, unless the rule that says there should not be and there cannot be more than two fielders behind square-leg to a right-hander means nothing and was introduced by someone who had nothing else to do, the batsman who changes his stance, after the captain has set his field, after the bowler starts his run-up, must have a decided advantage.

In other words, and for example, a right-handed batsman, faced with a field placing of three slips, a gully and a backward point, having changed to a left-handed stance will have, not five players in catching position on the offside behind the bat but as few as two on the offside behind the bat with no one in catching position.

On top of that, although that could benefit the bowler, there will then be, against the rules, as many as five fielders behind square-leg.

Where is the offside?

According to Law 36.3, "the offside of the striker's wicket is determined by the striker's stance at the moment the bowler starts his run-up". It's that simple.

The question now, however, is this, where is the offside when a right-handed batsman changes his stance?

Obviously, it cannot be where it was when he was batting as a right-hander. That is not all.

If a batsman can change his stance at any time, if he can turn his leg-stump into his off-stump, what happens to the rule that says a batsman cannot be given out leg before wicket if the ball pitches outside his leg-stump, and what, and especially so in limited-overs cricket, will happen to the rule governing wides?

Good for the game

There is nothing wrong with the shot. In fact, as the MCC has said, has Pietersen himself has said, it is exciting and good for the game.

If a batsman is allowed to change his stance during the bowler's run-up, however, there should be no need for rules which, for example, insist that a bowler informs the batsman, through the umpire, which side of the wicket he is going to bowl and which arm he is going to use.

Fair is fair and it would not be cricket if a batsman can do what he wants to do in order to score runs and a bowler cannot do what he likes in order to get wickets.

If a batsman is allowed to change his stance after the bowler has started his run-up, then, as exciting as what follows may be, or could be, the rules governing the game must be changed.

They must be changed to deal with things like field placings, leg before wicket decisions and wides. And they must be changed to allow bowlers to bowl from any side of the wicket without informing anyone, as confusing as that may be, to change his mind and to bowl with either arm without informing anyone.