Maxwell's shot was an amazing example of skill and superb hand-eye coordination but was it fair? The answer is a resounding "no" as far as I'm concerned.

One of the main tasks of a cricket administrator is to frame laws that maintain a reasonable balance between bat and ball. If the laws or playing conditions favour one or the other unfairly then the game becomes a diminished contest.

Poll

Who will win the Punjab Elections?

BJP 32.86%

AAP 41.43%

INC 25.71%

Submit

View All In Poll

In the case of the switch-hit the batsman has one prime objective in mind, to make the bowler's field placings redundant. Considering the bowler—in consultation with his captain—places his field taking into account the batsman's style, how can it then be fair that the willow wielder becomes the opposite type of player with the leather flinger having no recourse to a change of field? This obviously hands a huge advantage to a highly skilled switch-hitter.

Disagree with Simon Taufel

Former respected international umpire Simon Taufel suggested the already heavily burdened on-field officials would find it difficult to adjudicate on any switch of the hands or feet. With all due respect to a man who has done the job very effectively—I disagree.

The square-leg umpire is already paying close attention to the batsman's feet in case there is a stumping and he'll notice any change of order. If a batsman changes the order of his feet, then the square-leg umpire simply declares the ball dead and no runs result.

If this became the law then batsmen would have no incentive to switch-hit and balance would be restored in that individual contest.

Referring to the switch-hit after the game Maxwell said, "It's within the Laws, batting has evolved in such a way that it's just got better and better over the years. [I] suppose it's up to the bowlers to try and combat that."

There's one sure way for bowlers to combat the switch-hit. They can simply refuse to deliver the ball every time a batsman starts to make a move to change his feet. This would further slow over-rates that are already approaching glacial pace but it would also send a strong message to any reluctant administrators.

If the administrators prime concern is to favour hysterical commentary and please fans who only want to see a bowler's head on a spike then they won't budge. However, they should do so in the knowledge that bowlers will eventually say "enough is enough" and take the law into their own hands.

The history of the game provides administrators with multiple examples of what happens when the balance between bat and ball gets seriously out of whack.

Go back to the gradual evolution from under-arm to side-arm to today's over-arm bowling. These changes were forced on the game by bowlers determined to be involved in a fair contest.

Fed up bowlers declare war

There are plenty more examples where bowlers have become fed up and declared war. These include the bodyline series, chucking and ball tampering, all of which were strong protests against a game that had become lop-sided in favour of batsmen. Don't worry Glenn, history shows bowlers will move to combat the switch-hit but will it be in a manner that benefits the game? If batsmen want to reverse sweep or play a ramp shot without changing the order of their feet that's fine. By playing in that manner the contest remains roughly a 50-50 proposition.

However switch-hitting greatly favours batsmen and therefore alters the balance of the contest. It's very skilful but it's not fair.

Keep scrolling to read more news

Catch up on all the latest sports news and updates here. Also download the new mid-day Android and iOS apps to get latest updates.

Mid-Day is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@middayinfomedialtd) and stay updated with the latest news