Kevin Pietersen Invents the Switch Hit

Kevin Pietersen was the most audacious batsman of his generation — a player who seemed genuinely unconstrained by convention, convention's opinions, or convention's email newsletters. Born in South Africa, he qualified for England and immediately began rewriting how England teams were supposed to bat: with ego, ambition, and a complete absence of the cautious accumulation that English batting had long been associated with.

The 2008 Test series against New Zealand was not especially high-stakes by the standards of the era, but it provided the perfect arena for Pietersen to debut something he had presumably been practising in secret. The switch hit — changing from a right-handed to a left-handed stance mid-delivery — was not a new idea in principle, but nobody had ever attempted it at international level against quality bowling, and certainly not with the casual confidence Pietersen brought to it.

Scott Styris was the bowler who had the misfortune and, in hindsight, the distinction of delivering the ball on which history was made. As a medium-pace all-rounder, he was not accustomed to his bowling decisions becoming permanent footnotes in cricket's legislative history. He was about to become very accustomed to it.

Pietersen had been experimenting with switch-hitting in practice and was confident enough in his ability to attempt it in a Test match at The Oval — one of cricket's most storied venues, in front of a full crowd, against an international bowling attack. The decision to actually execute the shot was characteristic of a player who seemed to operate without the self-doubt that restrained other batsmen.

England were in a strong position in the match, allowing Pietersen the freedom to play expansively. His 90 not out was built on conventional shots as well as the extraordinary, suggesting the switch hit was planned and deliberate rather than improvisational. He chose his moment carefully: a shorter delivery from Styris that he could reach with the switched stance and still hit cleanly.

The confusion among match officials was immediate and genuine. The umpires were not sure how to signal for a wide if the switch hit had resulted in a wide — because the definition of "wide" depended on knowing which stance the batsman had adopted before the delivery. The fielding team had no idea where to stand. New Zealand captain Daniel Vettori admitted after the match that he was completely at a loss for what to do.

During the 2nd Test against New Zealand at Old Trafford in 2008, Kevin Pietersen did something nobody had ever seen before in international cricket. As Scott Styris ran in to bowl, Pietersen — a right-handed batsman — suddenly switched his stance to left-handed and smashed the ball over the cover boundary for six. It was the batting equivalent of a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat, except the rabbit was a cricket ball and the hat was the bewildered confusion of everyone in the stadium.

The reaction was priceless. Styris looked utterly bewildered, his run-up stuttering to a halt as he tried to process what had just happened. The New Zealand fielders exchanged confused glances that said, "Did he just... can he do that?" The umpires seemed uncertain whether it was even legal, reaching for their rulebooks like law students confronted with an unexpected exam question. Commentators went into meltdown trying to process what they'd just seen.

Pietersen did it again later in the innings, this time off Daniel Vettori, depositing the spinner into the stands with a left-handed slog that was so audacious it bordered on disrespectful. He was essentially telling some of the best bowlers in world cricket: "Not only can I hit you right-handed, I can switch to left-handed and hit you just as far." The arrogance was breathtaking. The skill was even more breathtaking.

The "switch hit" sparked an enormous debate about the laws of cricket. Was it legal? Should the bowler be allowed to change his field? Should the umpire switch the wide line? What about the leg-before-wicket law — which stump was "off" stump if the batsman had switched? Cricket's lawmakers eventually ruled it legal, noting that batsmen had always been allowed to change their stance during a delivery. But the initial moment of confusion was comedy gold. New Zealand captain Daniel Vettori admitted he had "no idea what to do" when Pietersen switched, which pretty much summed up everyone's reaction. Rules committee members probably hadn't had this much fun since the aluminium bat debate.

“I'd been working on it in practice. I thought, 'if I can do it in the nets, I can do it in a Test match.' I don't see why not.”

“I had absolutely no idea what to do. The fielders looked at me, I looked at the umpire, the umpire looked at his book. None of us had a clue.”

“He's changed his stance mid-delivery and hit it for six. I've never seen that before. Nobody has.”

“Kevin operates in a different space from other batsmen. He decides what is possible and then does it. The switch hit was entirely consistent with how he plays.”

The MCC moved quickly to clarify the laws following the switch hit debate, ultimately ruling in Pietersen's favor: the shot was legal, batsmen were entitled to switch stance during a delivery, and the wide and LBW laws would apply based on the position adopted when the ball was bowled. The decision effectively codified an entirely new type of batting stroke.

Other players began practicing the switch hit, though few managed it with Pietersen's timing and power. It became a regular if unusual feature of limited-overs cricket, and Pietersen continued using it throughout his career, sometimes to spectacular effect and occasionally with comically disastrous results when his timing was off.