[VIDEO/PICTURE] Mankad wins a game of cricket - But is that really cricket?

[MenInG]

43.4
Deepti Sharma to Davies, out Charlotte Dean Run Out!! Extraordinary scenes at Lord's. Pretty surreal to be honest. Controversial ending (depending on which way you want to look at it) to the game as Deepti Sharma sees Charlotte Dean out of her crease and wandering forward before she completes her delivery stride, Deepti watches all this and calmly knocks the bails off. It's in the Laws of the Game and is a perfectly allowed mode of dismissal. Deepti walks away towards her team-mates who are all giggling around even as the umpires refer to the third umpire. The decision is relayed on the big screen to loud boos from the Home of Cricket crowd. Dean is in tears, Ecclestone and the others on the balcony can't quite believe what they are seeing. But that's the end of the game. Charlotte Dean run out (Deepti Sharma) 47(80) [4s-5]

 

[kukkad kamaal]

Yes, it is cricket. It is within the laws of cricket.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

It was pre-planned and quite disgusting to watch live.

India were likely to win the game anyway and there was no need for a classless display like that.

It was a poor end to a cracking game and not the send off that Goswami deserved.

 

[gazza619]

Disgusting.

Dont know why Indians do this.

 

[MenInG]

Video added to post#1 - note the reactions from England side.

 

[YousafTheBeast]

What makes me angry is when the bowler decides to mankad a batsman whose bat would’ve left the crease at the point of delivery which should NOT be given out.

However, on this instance you can see the batter had already left the crease before the bowlers arm had even gone over her shoulder.

 

[Major]

Indians and their stupid habit of mankading. It was started by an Indian and they will keep doing these dumb stuff

 

[Major]

She didnt even get a headstart, if deepti or whatever her name is delivered the ball, the non striker would had left her crease at the same time.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Yeah it seemed quite borderline tbh.

I'm not anti-mankad in general, I can see the need for a warning if the batters are taking the mick.

This one just didn't feel right especially when England had put on a last wicket partnership.

I must say though, i was very impressed by the way that the Indian captain spoke and defended her team in the post match interview. Puts some of our players to shame.

 

[Birdman]

Why is it hard for coaches to teach the runners not to back up till the ball is released at a young age? I don't believe in the spirit of the game.

 

[MenInG]

MCC Law wording for final wicket

Here's the wording of MCC Law 41.16.1: "If the non-striker is out of his/her ground at any time from the moment the ball comes into play until the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the non-striker is liable to be Run out. In these circumstances, the non-striker will be out Run out if he/she is out of his/her ground when his/her wicket is put down by the bowler throwing the ball at the stumps or by the bowler's hand holding the ball, whether or not the ball is subsequently delivered."

 

[MenInG]

 

[docteurmanish]

You may have heard the term, ‘Spirit of Cricket’ during discussions about a bowler running out the batter if he/she saw them leave the crease before the delivery being bowled. That’s because it is mentioned in MCC’s Law 41. That the instance above would now be dealt with under the ‘Run Out’ category means the custodians of the game’s law have called it for what it is. A de-stigmatisation much called for.


Batsman try to cheat , get run out . mankad was right . Kudos .
Just like him , ashwin bowled with sleeves on and all throwing ended in cricket . No more javelin throws .



https://www.google.com/amp/s/indian...w-playing-conditions-mankad-law-8161530/lite/

 

[CricketAnalyst]

Nothing wrong with this at all.

Batters keep cheating all the time in white-ball cricket with no consequence. India needs to keep doing this regularly so people stop making a huge deal about it. In full support of our girls in this case and the captain spoke very well about it.

 

[MenInG]

 

[docteurmanish]

The commentator is stupid . Why warn a cheater ? The batter knows u have to stay within crease until ball is bowled.

If the bowler oversteps , unintentionally , still called a no ball. No warning .

The back up batter is not innocent . I have played cricket and used to ground bat and watch bowler till ball comes out of hand . As a bowler , I never believed in such warnings . U are out of crease , I will get u out

 

[Birdman]

These are not some street cricketers playing bush league. These are professional cricketers representing their country. If the player doesn't have game awareness they will pay the price. It is not the opposition's duty to warn of their incompetence.

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Not even looking at the other end in delivery stride… &#55358;&#56611; <a href="https://t.co/n0ZZjnpyuV">pic.twitter.com/n0ZZjnpyuV</a></p>— Sam Billings (@sambillings) <a href="https://twitter.com/sambillings/status/1573726749241872386?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Not even looking at the other end in delivery stride… �� <a href="https://t.co/n0ZZjnpyuV">pic.twitter.com/n0ZZjnpyuV</a></p>— Sam Billings (@sambillings) <a href="https://twitter.com/sambillings/status/1573726749241872386?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

So, a premeditated strategy.

 

[Snowflake]

I don't think the batsman was taking an unfair advantage there. This felt more like tricking the batsman to walk out and then mankad her. Not a good look.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

There are no laws that say a player from the opposing team should be given a guard of honour, time should be taken out of the game to celebrate their final ball etc etc - but it happened because the spirit of the game was important.

The game was fiercely competitive and played in good spirit until the end. India were all over them from the start and had a great crowd backing them.

Sure, "rules are rules" but with 1 wicket to get and 18 runs on the board India could still have won this cleanly. Instead they seemed to concoct this plot because they deduced that they couldn't get the english batter out.

Honestly, when watching it live it seemed like they cheated themselves, the fans and the opposition from a tantalising spectacle. Winning in such a phattu way from such a dominant position ( both in terms of the game and the series) is just not cricket.

 

[MenInG]

 

[Birdman]

Giving a guard of honor to a player from the opposing team is not within the parameters of the game. Same with congratulating an opponent for playing well. Going against the spirit of the game would be something like claiming a grassed catch or staying on after nicking to the keeper as Broad did or unfairly backing up to cheat a run.

 

[Birdman]

This shows the bowler had the game awareness and the runner did not.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Imagine if an Indian player gets out like this in the final of a World Cup. You can imagine the outburst and number of people who would start boycotting ICC.

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I find the debate of the Mankad really interesting. So many views from either side. I personally wouldn’t like to win a match like that, also, very happy for others to feel differently <a href="https://t.co/BItCNJZqYB">https://t.co/BItCNJZqYB</a></p>— Stuart Broad (@StuartBroad8) <a href="https://twitter.com/StuartBroad8/status/1573730170137100289?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Why the hell are you trending Ashwin? Tonight is about another bowling hero <a href="https://twitter.com/Deepti_Sharma06?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Deepti_Sharma06</a> &#55358;&#56617;&#55357;&#56399;</p>— Ashwin &#55356;&#56814;&#55356;&#56819; (@ashwinravi99) <a href="https://twitter.com/ashwinravi99/status/1573734957578874880?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Not even looking at the other end in delivery stride… &#55358;&#56611; <a href="https://t.co/n0ZZjnpyuV">pic.twitter.com/n0ZZjnpyuV</a></p>— Sam Billings (@sambillings) <a href="https://twitter.com/sambillings/status/1573726749241872386?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Her bat was in the crease but the bowler was looking at her. Looks premeditated here. Which bowler looks at the non striker like this lol.

 

[Mp812]

Within the law. If spirit of game is such big thing.... then non striker should not leave crease till ball is delivered.

 

[cricketjoshila]

It is legal and absolutely correct.

 

[GenericBrand]

Extremely harsh, the batswoman's bat would have clearly left the crease at the point of delivery.

 

[Major]

To be fair, england men did win a world cup due to the dumb laws.... Soo yeh... While what this indian team did was just dumb but, some silver lining?

 

[James]

I am not going to lose sleep over this one. Personally I would feel a bit uncomfortable if England won a close game doing this. But it is a legitimate and legal way to win.

 

[TeymurBlake]

It is legal and I personally don't have any problems with it. But looking at the pics above, looking at it being premeditated, I don't like it.

 

[Technics 1210]

England needed 17 runs from 39 balls.

Dean was on scoring fine, England were well on target to win.

MCC either change the laws, or batters need to be careful.

 

[Front Foot Pull]

india already won the series 2-0 before this match, but not a hot topic. last match harman scored a 140 with s/r of 130 or so yet not a hot topic. but now every one wants to weigh in and brush aside india's 3-0 win.

 

[Front Foot Pull]

"to be honest, i thought you will ask me first about the other 9 wickets we have taken, those were not easy too. deepti did nothing which wasn't in the laws and i back my player"
- captain kaur savage reply to the host in the post match presentation who repeatedly questioned her on this. got a loud cheer from the crowd as well.

 

[jnaveen1980]

I don't care which guy mankades. Power to them. Indian or Australian. Don't care. Even at school level we would not lift the bat until the bowler releases the ball. It was considered a cardinal sin and it is unfair play. Suck it up. Or change the rules. How about batsman going and staying at the other end instead

 

[Mp812]

It is legal and I personally don't have any problems with it. But looking at the pics above, looking at it being premeditated, I don't like it.

Premeditated. Because the non striker kept on doing it again and again thinking spirit of game will save them

 

[HitWicket]

Legal, but potentially outside the spirit of the game if Dean was likely to be in her crease when the ball was released if Deepti hadn't paused. Can't say I'm a fan.

 

[Saj]

Had she warned the batter before?

 

[YousafTheBeast]

I don't care which guy mankades. Power to them. Indian or Australian. Don't care. Even at school level we would not lift the bat until the bowler releases the ball. It was considered a cardinal sin and it is unfair play. Suck it up. Or change the rules. How about batsman going and staying at the other end instead

“Until the bowler releases the ball” - the only problem with that is some batsmen would be in the crease at the point of release, but the bowler will back out of the release and wait for the batsman to leave the crease.

Do you think it’s ok for a wicket-keeper to wait for the batsman to lift his feet before stumping him, even if he’s kept the ball around 5 seconds after the ball had been bowled?

 

[Shaka81]

If this is a legit strategy now, then might as well stop bowling and just try mankading on ever bowl. Completely risk free, a batter can never score a run if you never actually bowl a single delivery....

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I am honestly tired of this 'spirit of the game' nonsense at this point. Mankading is a completely legal thing and if a player gets mankaded, they should question their stupidity and lack of game-awareness, rather than making the bowler out to be some kind of villain.

Credit to Deepti Sharma and credit to her game awareness. Her game awareness ended up being the deciding factor for India winning the series. And rather than crying Charlie Dean should question why she was stupid enough to leave her crease before the ball had even when delivered. Especially when her side needed 16 runs from 28 balls and all but one of India's frontline bowlers had bowled out.

 

[jnaveen1980]

“Until the bowler releases the ball” - the only problem with that is some batsmen would be in the crease at the point of release, but the bowler will back out of the release and wait for the batsman to leave the crease.

Do you think it’s ok for a wicket-keeper to wait for the batsman to lift his feet before stumping him, even if he’s kept the ball around 5 seconds after the ball had been bowled?

Release means ball releasing from hand. You can't run out players after that. Batsman should not have head start. Period. Even an inch. This is exploited by batsmen when they bat with a tailender a lot.

 

[jnaveen1980]

If this is a legit strategy now, then might as well stop bowling and just try mankading on ever bowl. Completely risk free, a batter can never score a run if you never actually bowl a single delivery....

It is not mankading. It is running the batsman out. In the scorecard that is what it will say.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Whenever batsman play with tailender they exploit this "spirit of the game" to hilt. They are desperate to have a head start.

 

[dildilpak]

Didnt ICC recently codify Mankad into a regulation? Thought that would have settled the debate for once & all.

 

[KingOfPakBreakfast]

It’s absolutely within the rules of the game, and Deepti Sharma has no case to answer as such, rules wise.

However, there’s a thing called sportsmanship. It’s not required, it’s what elevates a competitive activity to a ‘sport’, I.e. something more.

It’s true that Deepti got her team the win with this. However, legacies are made up of not just winning all the time, but rather ‘how’ you win.

It’s also incredibly opportunistic action, rather than an advantage gained via skill, in game strategy or forcing your opponent in making an in game mistake.

A similar example would be the following scenario. Verstappen was leading Hamilton in the drivers championship last year, by a very slim margin at the time of the final F1 race, During this race, he could have crashed into Hamilton (inadvertently of course, very difficult to subjectively demonstrate intentional crashing at the beginning of a race), both would have not finished (and not gained any points) and Verstappen would hence win the championship.
This would all be within the rules, but it would leave a bad taste on the mouth. Thankfully this didn’t happen (other stuff did, but this isn’t an F1 forum)


Thusif you value winning just for the sake of it above the example you set, than that’s you. But the ends justifying the means is usually a dubious argument.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Those of you who think it was premeditated need to watch the actual footage rather than looking at a screenshot. Deepti Sharma was well into her stride and hadn't even delivered the ball before Charlie Dean left her crease and started walking.

It was amateur hour lack of game awareness and Dean learned a valuable lesson because it was her incompetence that cost her side the match and the series.

The umpire took one look at the replay and made his decision. It was THAT obvious.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Whenever batsman play with tailender they exploit this "spirit of the game" to hilt. They are desperate to have a head start.

Absolutely. And its completely unfair to the bowler who has to fear being made out as some kind of a villain just because they decided put their foot down on a batter getting an unfair advantage by following the freaking rules.

This is why I have a special respect for bowlers who do this and captains who stand by their bowler's decision to do so.

 

[Mp812]

Release means ball releasing from hand. You can't run out players after that. Batsman should not have head start. Period. Even an inch. This is exploited by batsmen when they bat with a tailender a lot.

If the non striker leaves the crease before ball is bowled he or she is the one cheating. The few steps taken before a delivery is released can be difference between a run out ,if a quick single was taken, as sometimes run outs are as close a difference of few inches.

Till the ball is out of the hand a d on it way to the batter,the non striker stays in crease . Its as simple as that else its within law to be runout.

Spirit of game is applicable to the the non striker as well and if they take a headstart (illelgal advantage) well they are NOT playing it in the right spirit are they?

 

[KingOfPakBreakfast]

The MCC can easily end the handwringing around this occurrence by formalising the rules.

Any time you’re in a position to Mankad, you give the non-striker one singular verbal warning, as evidenced by the umpire. Following that, it’s fair game to be mankaded.

Thus it’s one verbal warning per player. You enforce that rule long enough and non-strikers will get trained to be more disciplined over time.

 

[YousafTheBeast]

Release means ball releasing from hand. You can't run out players after that. Batsman should not have head start. Period. Even an inch. This is exploited by batsmen when they bat with a tailender a lot.

I don’t know if I can explain it any more clearer than I already have but I’ll try again…

If the batsman was in the crease and only left when the ball was expected to leave the bowlers hand, that imo is cheating.

However, on this dismissal you can pause at 0.58 and see that the batsman would have left the crease before the ball would have been release, therefore I’d say the non-striker was at fault.

On most occasions though, what we see is the bowler running in to bowl, and STOPPING even when the bat is still IN the crease, that is wrong.

 

[hitthestump]

Mankading is too exploitable. A single warning should be a pre-requisite before teams can do it.

In terms of the spirit of the game - shame on India. Again. You'd think that such a rich and powerful nation wouldn't need to resort to such low levels to win but it seems they do.

 

[volcyz]

Embarassing to watch

 

[James]

Didnt ICC recently codify Mankad into a regulation? Thought that would have settled the debate for once & all.

Indeed. Formally comes into effect on October 1st. This match outcome was an event waiting to happen — the evolving views around Mankad are there to see.

 

[Gilly]

The MCC can easily end the handwringing around this occurrence by formalising the rules.

Any time you’re in a position to Mankad, you give the non-striker one singular verbal warning, as evidenced by the umpire. Following that, it’s fair game to be mankaded.

Thus it’s one verbal warning per player. You enforce that rule long enough and non-strikers will get trained to be more disciplined over time.

No need for a warning, watch the bowler and leave the crease when the ball leaves the bowlers hand. Its your wicket to protect and if anyone can be mankadded then its entirely their own fault.

 

[shariqnoor]

When a bowler crosses the line, even if its by a mere 1 cm, it's called a no-ball. Why? Because that's what the rule book states. Nobody invokes the spirit of cricket then by allowing the bowler to get away with it because obviously his intention wasn't to bowl a no-ball.

Spirit of Cricket similarly should not be invoked when it comes to Mankad-ing. It is a clear breach of rules of the batter if he/she strides forward out of the crease while the bowler is still within his/her delivery stride. Dean clearly would've gained 2-3 yards advantage in getting a run had the bowler actually bowled the ball. Why should that be allowed?

Spirit of Cricket is when Imran Khan recalled Srikkanth even after he was given out LBW which everybody knew was the wrong decision. Spirit of Cricket is when Dhoni allowed Ian Bell to resume his innings after getting run out when he ventured out of his crease thinking it was the end of the session. Spirit of Cricket would've been England asking the umpires to revoke the 4 runs gained accidentally by the bat of Ben Stokes in the final.

This, whichever way you want to look at, DOES NOT invoke the Spirit of Cricket unwritten law.

 

[Shaka81]

It is not mankading. It is running the batsman out. In the scorecard that is what it will say.

But the point is why even risk taking the option of bowling when you can just keep trying this non-stop until you get someone out. You will never concede a run and eventually if you time it right you will catch them out.

 

[jnaveen1980]

I don’t know if I can explain it any more clearer than I already have but I’ll try again…

If the batsman was in the crease and only left when the ball was expected to leave the bowlers hand, that imo is cheating.

However, on this dismissal you can pause at 0.58 and see that the batsman would have left the crease before the ball would have been release, therefore I’d say the non-striker was at fault.

On most occasions though, what we see is the bowler running in to bowl, and STOPPING even when the bat is still IN the crease, that is wrong.

You shouldn't "expect" . See the ball releasing from the hand and go. Don't assume things. That is why law not once favors the batsman that gets run out. As a batsman you should be aware this is something that can be legally done. So don't leave the crease until you see is out of the hand from the bowler.

 

[jnaveen1980]

If the non striker leaves the crease before ball is bowled he or she is the one cheating. The few steps taken before a delivery is released can be difference between a run out ,if a quick single was taken, as sometimes run outs are as close a difference of few inches.

Till the ball is out of the hand a d on it way to the batter,the non striker stays in crease . Its as simple as that else its within law to be runout.

Spirit of game is applicable to the the non striker as well and if they take a headstart (illelgal advantage) well they are NOT playing it in the right spirit are they?

This is the point many miss. We see batsman getting run out by an inch even milli meter even on the crease is out. That one inch can easily be gained by leaving the crease early. Cricket laws clearly understand that. That is why amidst all the noise about spirit umpire gives out. Never once umpire says "you are against the spirit".

 

[Robert]

To me that is sharp practice. It’s not as though Davies was backing up by a yard or more. Deepti did not intend to deliver the ball.

Well, you live by the sword, you die by the sword. India can expect the same to happen to them in future.

 

[introvert]

It was Intentional not spontaneous decision and that's the sad part about it.

Fear of failure made her do that. Instead of trusting her own bowling she chose this cunning move to pick last wicket and close the match.

How shameless it is that a wicket is falling without ball being pitched and some people Justifying and Celebrating the mode of dismissal. I guess people will only understand it when it happens to their own team at some important moment in the match in icc tournament.

If non striker getting head start in sync with bowler is wrong then even strikers should be punished for batting out of crease because technically a striker is also stealing few inches by batting out of the crease.

 

[Gilly]

To me that is sharp practice. It’s not as though Davies was backing up by a yard or more. Deepti did not intend to deliver the ball.

Well, you live by the sword, you die by the sword. India can expect the same to happen to them in future.

Leaving your crease at the bowlers end before the ball is delivered is also a sharp practice.

 

[jnaveen1980]

It was Intentional not spontaneous decision and that's the sad part about it.

Fear of failure made her do that. Instead of trusting her own bowling she chose this cunning move to pick last wicket and close the match.

How shameless it is that a wicket is falling without ball being pitched and some people Justifying and Celebrating the mode of dismissal. I guess people will only understand it when it happens to their own team at some important moment in the match in icc tournament.

If non striker getting head start in sync with bowler is wrong then even strikers should be punished for batting out of crease because technically a striker is also stealing few inches by batting out of the crease.

I will 100% support the team that runs any Indian batsman out for leaving the crease. It is a law. The batsman standing outside the crease is not the same. Because he is actually facing a ball. A bowler can adjust the length accordingly. What can a bowler do about the non-striker who is leaving the crease other than running him out? That is why I backed Ashwin too for running Butler out. Sadly Virat Kohli himself acted petty by mocking Ashwin in a head to head IPL game. I am pretty sure they targeted Ashwin many times to run him out similarly. But he always had his bat in the crease only his body was outside. How hard it is to keep the bat inside the crease until the ball is delivered.

 

[Robert]

Leaving your crease at the bowlers end before the ball is delivered is also a sharp practice.

Though tolerated by most players. It’s a culture that grew up outside the Laws. I remember watching non-strikers backing up by two yards at the end of OD matches and nobody Mankaded them. It would have been considered ungentlemanly.

Walsh stopped in his delivery stride and warned Qadir for backing up in a WC match, and everyone praised Walsh’s gentlemanly conduct.

The solution for other teams is to start Mankading India, rather than let them get away with backing up too.

 

[introvert]

I will 100% support the team that runs any Indian batsman out for leaving the crease. It is a law. The batsman standing outside the crease is not the same. Because he is actually facing a ball. A bowler can adjust the length accordingly. What can a bowler do about the non-striker who is leaving the crease other than running him out? That is why I backed Ashwin too for running Butler out. Sadly Virat Kohli himself acted petty by mocking Ashwin in a head to head IPL game. I am pretty sure they targeted Ashwin many times to run him out similarly. But he always had his bat in the crease only his body was outside. How hard it is to keep the bat inside the crease until the ball is delivered.

You may support it but I bet that most Indian fans will cry foul if it happens with India.

For me Both are same thing imo because striker is clearly stealing few inches by batting out of the crease as non striker is accused of same thing in defense of mankad.

In this match she kept her bat inside the crease but the bowler delayed her action to create mankad opportunity.

Mankad is probably worst advert of cricket and icc/mcc not doing anything about it is ridiculous.

As a cricket fan I just can't digest that a wicket is falling without ball being pitched.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Totally fair, shouldn't even be up for debate.

 

[jnaveen1980]

You may support it but I bet that most Indian fans will cry foul if it happens with India.

For me Both are same thing imo because striker is clearly stealing few inches by batting out of the crease as non striker is accused of same thing in defense of mankad.

In this match she kept her bat inside the crease but the bowler delayed her action to create mankad opportunity.

Mankad is probably worst advert of cricket and icc/mcc not doing anything about it is ridiculous.

As a cricket fan I just can't digest that a wicket is falling without ball being pitched.

So someone getting bowled off a full toss is a problem? Let us say for argument sake the non striker stands at the middle of the pitch lol what will you do? Tell me.

 

[JaDed]

Though tolerated by most players. It’s a culture that grew up outside the Laws. I remember watching non-strikers backing up by two yards at the end of OD matches and nobody Mankaded them. It would have been considered ungentlemanly.

Walsh stopped in his delivery stride and warned Qadir for backing up in a WC match, and everyone praised Walsh’s gentlemanly conduct.

The solution for other teams is to start Mankading India, rather than let them get away with backing up too.

It happens in IPL itself..

 

[Mp812]

Stealing a few yards before the ball is bowled should be the point of discussion in spirit of game context. What if it was last ball and 1 run required to win and batter just taps the ball and runs. The non striker will have gained an unfair advantage if it results in a run out scenario. Does the spirit of game not count then?
Also what happens to the spirit of game if bowler overs oversteps by an inch and is no balled and gets a wicket. By overstepping an inch he has not gained an extra 10kph pace is it? Then by spirit of game thing the batter should walk,instead they get a free hit.

 

[MenInG]

 

[introvert]

So someone getting bowled off a full toss is a problem? Let us say for argument sake the non striker stands at the middle of the pitch lol what will you do? Tell me.

You clearly know what I meant by "pitching" .

I would stop If I see non striker middle of the pitch before ball being released but wouldn't mind if non striker is in sync with me during my ball release like the situation in current thread.

I understand why this rule exists but let's be real we are debating about intentional mankads where bowler is cunningly misusing the power they have by delaying their ball release to create opportunity.

 

[sweep_shot]

It is not classy but perfectly legal.

I think a warning to the batter would've been nicer.

 

[jnaveen1980]

You clearly know what I meant by "pitching" &#55357;&#56836;.

I would stop If I see non striker middle of the pitch before ball being released but wouldn't mind if non striker is in sync with me during my ball release like the situation in current thread.

I understand why this rule exists but let's be real we are debating about intentional mankads where bowler is cunningly misusing the power they have by delaying their ball release to create opportunity.

Rules have to be strictly enforced. There is no half crime. Crime is a crime. This rule should be strictly followed at all levels. Surprisingly this is enforced better in gully cricket than in international cricket. Never seen any batsman in gully cricket getting a head start. at least where Iplayed. Batsman can get clever head starts very easily. In tight games where non striker is a better batsman will try everything to get a head start. That puts the opposition at a disadvantageous position. If you don't like it change the role into giving a warning before running someone out. But problem is when it comes to dismissals warning looks silly. So many unfortunate ways you can get out. Batsman hits straight at the bowler and bowler accidentally deflecting on to stumps, batsman hitting the ball on to someone's boot and ball popping up to someone else, batsman inadvertently slips and fell on the stumps getting hit out. That is the beauty of cricket with all its idiosynracies. We have to accept it as part of the sports instead of bringing in "spirit of the game' argument. It dilutes the greatness of the game. This is not gentlemanly game anymore. It is a highly professional sports now. So everyone has to behave professionally meaning follow the rules.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Lol, why not dismiss Indian batsmen too if they try to cheat like that English lady was doing yesterday? But one thing is for sure, Indians won't cry like sore losers.

I seriously want one of our batsmen standing well outside the crease when an English bowler bowls forcing him to run him out. Then we can shut all the Twitter noise from England permanently.

 

[Mamoon]

I generally support Mankading. Run outs are a game of inches and there is no reason why the non-striker should be allowed to leave the crease before the delivery is bowled. It means that the batter has less distance to cover.

In fact, the non-striker leaving the crease before the delivery is bowled should be frowned upon and reminded and highlighted as a violation of spirit of cricket.

However, in this particular situation, the Mankading was in poor taste. The non-striker’s bat was behind the line when the ball entered the delivery stride. It looked preplanned by the bowler, perhaps because the batsmen had backed out too much previously.

 

[jnaveen1980]

I generally support Mankading. Run outs are a game of inches and there is no reason why the non-striker should be allowed to leave the crease before the delivery is bowled. It means that the batter has less distance to cover.

In fact, the non-striker leaving the crease before the delivery is bowled should be frowned upon and reminded and highlighted as a violation of spirit of cricket.

However, in this particular situation, the Mankading was in poor taste. The non-striker’s bat was behind the line when the ball entered the delivery stride. It looked preplanned by the bowler, perhaps because the batsmen had backed out too much previously.

She was repeatedly gaining head start. In this case even with pause you can't have lie 3 or 4 feet head start. That is how far she was before even Deepti took off the bails. How hard it is to keep your bat inside the crease until the ball is release. It is a valid question.

 

[Kohli The King of Chase]

Ashamed to be an Indian. Idk why our Indian folks love using cheap tactics to be successful