Don't discourage innovation

So what can MCC do to not discourage such wondrous feats as Pietersen's on Sunday, but at the same time maintain the integrity of the game and intrinsic fairness to bowlers? Well, it could consider the following: that a fielding side should not be penalised once the batsman decides to switch-hit. That is to say, once a right-handed batsman has changed both grip and stance to become in effect a left-hander, the bowler ought to be allowed to bowl both sides of the wicket, without incurring a wide, and, taking that one stage further, he ought to be allowed to get leg-befores by pitching both sides of the wicket as well. At a stroke, the kind of genius we saw on Sunday would not be prevented, but would be discouraged by the subsequent advantage accruing to the bowler.

My solution would be to take full advantage of the emergence of Twenty20 cricket, a form of cricket for which Pietersen himself has expressed an almost excessive enthusiasm. For Twenty20 only, improvised switch-hitting would be permitted. A batsman would be given out leg-before if, in the umpire's opinion, the ball would have hit the stumps, no matter where it pitched. A wide would be given for any ball pitching outside lines of longitude drawn six inches from the stumps on both sides of the wicket. And the fielding problem would be solved by making captains set symmetrically proportioned fields, with four men positioned on each side of the wicket and one "floater" to be deployed ad libitum. Oh, go on, try it.