The upshot of India’s deservedly early exit from the World Cup is that the India-Sachin-India-Sachin bulldung has come to a deservedly early end on television. And the discussions on ‘Extraaa Innings’ have become better, with the likes of Ian Chappell, John Wright, and sometimes even Arjuna Ranatunga striking a higher intellectual note.
Today, while reviewing the close encounter between England and Sri Lanka, Paul Nixon‘s very effective reverse sweeping came under scrutiny. And Chappell showed just why he is such a great thinker of the game with his point-blank observation that the stroke is illegal and should be removed from the game.
Reason: “If the bowler has to mark his guard and announce to the umpire and thus to the batsman whether he is bowling right arm or left arm, over the wicket or around the wicket, how can the batsman change his grip or the position of his feet without announcing it to the bowler, who has set the field for his natural position?”
How, indeed?
Reverse sweep should be banned or not – I cannot say. But I can say that Chappell is thinking very innovational. :)
Just as you’d say “right arm over” and end up bowling underarm!
Perhaps the greatunknown doesn’t know that much after all. It was Greg Chappell, not Ian, who got Trevor Chappell to bowl underarm. Ian Chappell slammed Greg Chappell on air and in print for the graceless gesture.
Its a batsman’s game as they say…
Besides, the reverse sweep is not a ‘percentage’ shot… High percentage of getting out as compared to low percentage of actually getting runs for it. Sure, when it is pulled off it looks great, but can be countered too easily with a short fine leg, and a little clever bowling, and not every batsman can do it without looking like a complete idiot (cue Gatting)
It is like saying a bowler should not bowl a doosra, googly, chinaman, bouncer. reverse swing………………………………
The batsman is perfectly right to play any shot in the manner which fetches him maximum runs, especially in one day cricket.The great Musthaq Ali improvised and scored a four onehanded and brought victory for India. Of course he was injured injured and had to play onehanded.Australia’s Watson has improvised a shot which goes above the legslip and sometimes above the wicketkeeper for which it is impossible to set a field.It is a tricky shot like the slower one bowled by a fast bowler during death and which is again very effective.
Hi Aatmasakshi!
I am aware of the ‘underarm’ incident and mentioned it for comic relief, with regard to the question: ‘How, indeed?’
Pray, where have I claimed to be omniscient in any of my comments here that you chose to say: “Perhaps the greatunknown doesn’t know that much after all”. Or can I put that down to your poor hold of the English language?
I didnt watch Paul Nixon reverse sweeping. I dont know if he changed his ‘grip’ when he did that. If he changed his ‘grip’, ie., if the bottom hand came to the top and the ‘top hand’ became bottom, then and only then is it illegal. Otherwise, it is only sublime improvisation.
And I cant see why a bowler should feel disadvantaged. The reverse sweep is a very difficult shot to play and it requires supreme confidence for the batsman to even go for it There is every chance that you might end up looking like a buffoon if it doesnt come off or even living to rue it for the rest of your life(ask gatting). It can also be an art form when the likes of Andy Flower play it.
To put it simply, Chappel is WRONG. Horribly wrong.
If I were the bowler, I’d have no problem with a batsman going for the shot.
As an off spinner during my cricket days, i really appreciate Chappel’s view point!!! So should the rule of having 4 players within the 30 yards circle for the whole innings.
No reverse sweep is arrogant batsman at their best…..looks great when they get out….keep it up, keeps me smiling!!!!!
the batter does not change his grip or stance before the bowler starts his ball. therefor he is moving in the process of delivering the ball which is completely legal. how ever if the moving or switching happened before the bowlers run up was commenced it would be illegal. as soon as the bowler starts his run up he is commiting to the ball so the batter can do what he likes in the process of the ball.
COMPLETELY LEGAL!!!
saying that changing the batmans grip on his bat should be banned is like saying that changing the bowlers grip on the ball sjould be banned, a shot well loved by many and should be kept in the game