Switch-hitting and the LBW laws

I was watching the highlights of GCS's century in the CLT20, they said he scored over 20 runs batting right-handed, switch-hitting.

It made me wonder if there was ever a definitive ruling handed down about LBW decisions when a batsman does that.

My logic suggests there should be no change to the rulings about leg stump and off stump, etc, because it's the batsman's choice to switch around how he's standing, but the lawmakers in the game have shown they're not exactly the kind of people who always let logic be the base for their decisions.

So was there a ruling, or has the issue been left unruled upon with some sort of controversy to erupt down the track?

I know one thing. Harsha is a whinging twat. He griped about Warner's switch hitting for several overs as he smoked 4 and 6s right-handed. Moody summed it up by replying deadpan "if he's good enough to hit 6s righthanded, good luck to him".

Bhogle becomes more of a garquestick by the day.

There has been a ruling


your 'handedness' when you take strike is the consideration for lbw and fielding restrictions ...and I think the wide ruling becomes ....garq you ...to the batsman (which is the same for any major shift in position by the batsman)

The controversy will erupt when KP takes strike left handed and switches to right handed ...or vice versa for GCS

embee wrote:The controversy will erupt when KP takes strike left handed and switches to right handed ...or vice versa for GCS

Jeez, they'd be taking the piss to do that.

It'd be an easy law to 'fix' - if the ball is prevented from hitting the stumps by the batsman's body during a switch-hit play, it's out lbw ... no leg-side immunity at all. Increase the risk in the shot a little to compensate for the batsman's decision to switch-hit. Batsmen who want to turn deep third man into deep backward square leg will still do it if they're good enough, but they will run the risk of lbw if they reverse sweep a ball turning into the stumps, and miss.

Bhogle whinging and moaning? He was breathing ... what did you expect?

Just declare yourself an ambidextrous bat LBW is decided on the handedness you take when you hit the ball.

no, if they're going to bat like bisexuals, make them vulnerable to bowlers coming at them from either side ...

Being come at from all angles and dealing with it made them bi, didn't it?

bisexual, ambidextrous, same thing

Woody told me so

Woody needs a hug.

he'll be on your doorstep if you carry on like that

Knock, knock, who's there
Could this be Wood that's calling...

You'd better Knock Knock, Knock on Wood

He'd probably like that.

Now, back to the topic...

embee wrote:There has been a ruling


your 'handedness' when you take strike is the consideration for lbw and fielding restrictions ...and I think the wide ruling becomes ....garq you ...to the batsman (which is the same for any major shift in position by the batsman)

The controversy will erupt when KP takes strike left handed and switches to right handed ...or vice versa for GCS

Thanks embee. Your last point was what my follow-up question was to be about. Can't wait for that to happen.