The International Cricket Council has very pragmatically raised a debate over the change of batting stance that Kevin Pietersen has been employing recently. He takes stance as a right-handed batsman, but with the ball about to be released, he switches his grip and his stance to become a left-hander. It looks attractive to the onlookers, but it is not in accordance with the spirit and traditions of the game. Just as a bowler needs to inform the umpire whether he is bowling with his right hand or left, similarly the batsman is expected to remain with his original grip and stance. Or how would the umpire decide about field restrictions and lbw decisions?

However, if the batsman wants to change his stance before a particular delivery, he has the full liberty to do so after informing the umpire. But in Pietersen’s case the alterations were made without informing the umpire in advance. The ICC needs to find a rational solution to the controversy.

As far as unorthodoxy is concerned, the bowling world has got a new specimen in the form of Ajantha Mendis. He seems to be the right man to carry forward the legacy of Jack Iverson. Iverson, the Australian spinner of the 1940s, had a grip similar to Mendis’s. Iverson had very long fingers and would hold the ball in his palm and flick it with his index or middle finger. This helped him bamboozle batsmen with leg spin and off spin with no apparent change in the style of delivery. But Mendis seems to be more competent than Iverson because of his impeccable length and line.

Cricket is full of very complicated laws and regulations. Some of these need to be urgently erased or modified. Some of these practices are downright ridiculous.

If a batsman misses a ball, and the ball goes off his pads, whatever runs he acquires are added to his team’s score as leg-byes. Can you imagine the absurdity of the situation? Here is a batsman who is not good enough to play the ball with his bat, but still gets runs off that ball. The bowling side is penalized for the batsman’s failure!

The weight of the bat is another problem area. In cricket, the ball has a definite weight but not the bat. Why such discrimination? Heavy bats are becoming popular these days, because in the shortened version of the game, they give the batsmen more power and thus, an advantage.

Wicket-keepers should also not be allowed to wear pads. They should be good enough to hold the ball with their hands and not need to use pads. Even shin-guards and pads for fieldsmen should be discouraged. The restriction on bumpers needs to go too. If batsmen can use all their weapons, why deprive the bowlers of theirs?

Another concern is the covering of pitches overnight. Till the late 1970s, the pitches would be kept uncovered after the day’s game was over. The overnight dew would make the pitch lively once again. A batsman needed to have technique and application to overcome the odds. Covered pitches are docile in comparison. The spectators are thus being deprived of the joy of watching a top-class batsman struggling on a wet pitch.