Back

Ambidextrous batsman
"In a friendly match last season, the other team brought on a left arm bowler whilst I was batting. I had been batting right handed to the previous right arm bowlers and also when the lefty bowled round the wicket. He then changed to over the wicket and I changed to left handed batting stance (I am uncomfortable with the ball coming down my leg side and prefer to keep it on the off). Next over against him he asked which way I was batting to which I replied with the question which way are you bowling? He said round so I said right handed to which he said in that case I'm bowling over so to avoid any unpleasantness I remained in the right handed position which was not my preference. Who has right of way as it were in this position?"

A similar question was raised some time ago.  In that case it was that, at the start of a match, the wicket-keeper stood at one end of the pitch and a bowler marked out his run-up at the other end.  The batsmen came out and one went to the wicket-keeper's end and the other to the bowler's end, whereupon the wicket-keeper changed ends.  The batsmen joined in the spirit of this and they also changed ends.  Who had to yield?  In line with normal convention, the fielding side should make their decision first and then stick with it regardless of which batsman faces.  
It would be easy to draw an analogy and say the bowler must be the first to decide, but that is not the normal practice; the batsman is identified as left- or right-handed and the bowler makes his decision accordingly.  Our view is that the umpire at bowler's end should step in immediately and rule that, as the norm is for the bowler to decide which side of the wicket to bowl from according to whether the batsman is left- or right-handed, the batsman must make his decision first and then put up with whatever the bowler does.