[VIDEOS] ICC World Cup 2023: Angelo Mathews Timed Out - Worse than Mankad?

[SpiritOf1903]

Matthews appeared to have a helmet issue and Shakib appealed, given Timed Out

The rarest of dismissal

Angelo Mathews, right handed bat, comes to the crease.Mathews seems to have brought a wrong helmet. That is school boyish from the experienced campaigner. The substitute runs out with the correct helmet. The umpires are not happy and are having a word with Mathews. Did Bangladesh appeal for time-out? Looks like they have. Bangladesh gather around as if celebrating a wicket. Mathews is explaining to Shakib what happened. Unless Bangladesh withdraw their appeal, Mathews is a goner. Erasmus and Illingworth still having a word with the batter. Silverwood is standing in the dugout and looking at what is happening. Mathews again tries to explain but Shakib and Bangladesh don't withdraw their appeal.

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[160KPH]

First time ever in international cricket. I cannot believe they appealed for that.

 

[Swashbuckler]

Rules are rules, well done to Bangladeshis.

 

[Extra_Cover]

This is really low. I can say a lot but its stupid timing a batsman out in such fashion. Mankad is bad but this is worse.

If you think about it in normal matches we have something called strategic timeout that goes on for 3 minutes or more. We are happy to stop the game for advertisers / sponsors / etc but when a batsman have a legit issue with his gear the game cannot be somehow stopped. How stupid is that.

 

[sweep_shot]

Shocking that Shakib appealed for it. Loser approach.

Angelo had a legitimate reason for the delay. That shouldn't have been timed out.

 

[160KPH]

What’s shocking is if the purpose of the law is to keep the game moving, without a doubt the whole process of giving the timeout out took much much longer than it would have for another helmet to be ran out to Matthews. Hope Matthews gets a 5fer and runs through them.

 

[Asif321]

Atleast Srilanka made some record here

 

[Cover Drive Six]

Bangladeshi players often behave like nuts. Shakib would have allowed Angelo.

 

[The_KING]

Shakib becomes even more unlikeable

 

[GLORY OF '92]

Sickening especially since it's a dead rubber apart from CT qualification.

 

[GLORY OF '92]

Shakib becomes even more unlikeable

Makes the impossible possible

 

[160KPH]

Also, I understand the rule. We want to keep the game moving. But the umpire should be allowed by the law of the game to exercise discretion.

Matthews could’ve taken strike without the helmet and then gotten hurt but that would’ve been perfectly legal. But, we can’t wait 30 seconds for another helmet to be ran out to the middle? Insanity.

 

[160KPH]

Makes the impossible possible

His demeanor was very annoying too when Matthews was trying to explain the situation to both the umpire and to Shakib. At that point, Shakib could have probably withdrawn the appeal but Shakib just kept on waving Matthews away.

 

[Swashbuckler]

Basketball uses a shot clock, tennis has a shot clock. In the French Open semifinal Alcaraz lost a gane without a point being played because of a medical timeout, Djokovic won that set. Rules are rules no matter how harsh.

About time cricket becomes a rules based professional sport instead of the usual village circus. Main reason Europeans and Americans don't take cricket seriously is that rules aren't watertight in our sport and open to interpretation.

 

[Rajdeep]

Excellent and expected stuff from Bangladesh.

Joy Bangla

 

[sweep_shot]

It is better to lose a game cleanly than to win like this.

It was a legitimate dismissal but considering the context, that appeal shouldn't have happened (let alone being given out).

 

[IAJ]

It is better to lose a game cleanly than to win like this.

It was a legitimate dismissal but considering the context, that appeal shouldn't have happened (let alone being given out).

Poor stuff from BD then.

 

[160KPH]

Basketball uses a shot clock, tennis has a shot clock. In the French Open semifinal Alcaraz lost a gane without a point being played because of a medical timeout, Djokovic won that set. Rules are rules no matter how harsh.

About time cricket becomes a rules based professional sport instead of the usual village circus. Main reason Europeans and Americans don't take cricket seriously is that rules aren't watertight in our sport and open to interpretation.

In baseball, a player would almost certainly be allowed extra time to get a new helmet if something happened to their helmet before they got a pitch.

 

[sweep_shot]

Poor stuff from BD then.

They are probably desperate to win after a bad losing streak. But, is better to lose a game cleanly than to win like this.

It was a legitimate dismissal but considering the context, that appeal shouldn't have happened let alone being given out.

Poor from Shakib (for appealing). Poor from the umpires (for giving it out).

 

[saqib.rai]

I understand the logic behind the law but Matthew's wasn't doing it on purpose

He wasn't trying to save a test match or wait for the rain/bad light to stop play

Umpires need to be more flexible and base their decisions on the context

 

[topspin]

This is the kind of behaviour you would expect from Bangladesh. They have always been the most undignified out of all the national sides I've seen play over the last 20 years or so.

 

[chinaman00]

This is really low. I can say a lot but its stupid timing a batsman out in such fashion. Mankad is bad but this is worse.

If you think about it in normal matches we have something called strategic timeout that goes on for 3 minutes or more. We are happy to stop the game for advertisers / sponsors / etc but when a batsman have a legit issue with his gear the game cannot be somehow stopped. How stupid is that.

How is Mankad bad? The modern game is already heavily tilted in favor of the batsmen and allowing a batsman to get unfair advantage by running earlier than allowed is both unfair to the bowler & illegal under the rules. I have no sympathy for any batsman that faces consequences for cheating a run.

 

[IndoorCricket]

Bangladesh deserves all the humiliation coming to them.

 

[saqib.rai]

I understand the logic behind the law but Matthew's wasn't doing it on purpose

He wasn't trying to save a test match or wait for the rain/bad light to stop play

Umpires need to be more flexible and base their decisions on the context

Ramiz Raja is calling it "smart" decision by Bangladesh to appeal
Shameful

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Basketball uses a shot clock, tennis has a shot clock. In the French Open semifinal Alcaraz lost a gane without a point being played because of a medical timeout, Djokovic won that set. Rules are rules no matter how harsh.

About time cricket becomes a rules based professional sport instead of the usual village circus. Main reason Europeans and Americans don't take cricket seriously is that rules aren't watertight in our sport and open to interpretation.

Ridiculous comparison.

In tennis, Alcaraz kept playing.

An equivalent would have been Mathews being docked 10 runs and starting on -10 but still being allowed to bat.

Alcaraz didnt have to forfeit the match for being timed out.

 

[oatmeal]

Bangla bros are within their rights to appeal but since it was due to an equipment issue, they should have withdrawn the appeal

 

[Swashbuckler]

Ridiculous comparison.

In tennis, Alcaraz kept playing.

An equivalent would have been Mathews being docked 10 runs and starting on -10 but still being allowed to bat.

Alcaraz didnt have to forfeit the match for being timed out.

Buddy I am talking about enforcement of rules.

In tennis, penalty is one game awarded to opponent without playing a point. In cricket, penalty is timed out, a legit form of dismissal in the rule book which all umpires and players must be familiar with.

Rule may appear harsh but it is up to ICC/MCC to change it. Blaming it on the appealing team or umpire is futile. I am so done with the spirit of cricket talk.

 

[160KPH]

Ridiculous comparison.

In tennis, Alcaraz kept playing.

An equivalent would have been Mathews being docked 10 runs and starting on -10 but still being allowed to bat.

Alcaraz didnt have to forfeit the match for being timed out.

Also basketball has a shot clock for a completely different reason. Let’s say someone’s shoe ripped the same way something happened to Matthew’s helmet - either one of the many timeouts both teams are given would be used or if out of timeouts, a player would run over to the sideline and toss on another shoe. The point of the shot clock was to stop purposeful stalling. This appeal did nothing and took longer than it would have for Matthews to get another helmet ran over to him.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Shakib thinks he is bigger than the game.

I used to like this guy because he was a good all rounder.

But over the last 3 years he has become arrogant, conceited and thinks he is better than he actually is.

I wonder if he had his pscyh eval yet.

Could be showing early signs of narcissistic personaliy disorder.

 

[topspin]

Bangladesh deserves all the humiliation coming to them.

Sri Lanka winning and doing the nagin dance would be the perfect send off.

 

[saqib.rai]

Basketball uses a shot clock, tennis has a shot clock. In the French Open semifinal Alcaraz lost a gane without a point being played because of a medical timeout, Djokovic won that set. Rules are rules no matter how harsh.

About time cricket becomes a rules based professional sport instead of the usual village circus. Main reason Europeans and Americans don't take cricket seriously is that rules aren't watertight in our sport and open to interpretation.

They don't take cricket seriously because its played over 5 days
And ODIs over 8.5 hours

Cricket laws have nothing to do with this

In this case, the umpires should have looked at the context. Was Mathews doing it intentionally to save a test match? Or wasting time for rain/bad light to stop play?

He wasn't

 

[FearlessRoar]

The 'Timed out' dismissal, given out by the umpire on Shakib's appeal, is certainly against the spirit of the game. It could potentially fuel rivalry between the two nations.

 

[160KPH]

Buddy I am talking about enforcement of rules.

In tennis, penalty is one game penalty. In cricket, penalty is timed out, a legit form of dismissal in the rule book which all umpires and players must be familiar with.

Rule may appear harsh but it is up to ICC/MCC to change it. Blaming it on the appealing team or umpire is futile. I am so done with the spirit of cricket talk.

No, discretion is purposefully built into the rules of cricket. That’s why you have to appeal for every wicket. The rules were purposefully designed in such a way that allowed for discretion from the umpire and appealing party to keep with the spirit of the game. This timeout rule only becomes relevant if a player shamefully appeals for it.

 

[Energy]

These petty things are expected from Bangladesh unfortunately. They are a minnow who have nothing tangible to show for their on field performances

 

[sweep_shot]

Shakib thinks he is bigger than the game.

I used to like this guy because he was a good all rounder.

But over the last 3 years he has become arrogant, conceited and thinks he is better than he actually is.

I wonder if he had his pscyh eval yet.

Could be showing early signs of narcissistic personaliy disorder.

Can't wait for Shakib to retire. He treats Bangladesh team like his father's property (kicking stumps in domestic game, arguing with umpires, beating up fan, conflict with Tamim, timed-out drama etc.).

All the toxic seniors should be kicked out after the World Cup.

 

[Swashbuckler]

They are probably desperate to win after a bad losing streak. But, is better to lose a game cleanly than to win like this.

It was a legitimate dismissal but considering the context, that appeal shouldn't have happened let alone being given out.

Poor from Shakib (for appealing). Poor from the umpires (for giving it out).

Shakib was well within his right to appeal. Umpire did the correct thing, followed the rule book which he had to learn by heart before getting the job in the first place. Had he overruled the appeal, that would have been a violation of codified laws and a disservice to the sport because these things shouldn't be dependent on whims and fancies of certain individuals. If people have grievances, players or officials aren't targets, take it up with authorities who write these rules in the first place.

 

[nish_mate]

Best of luck to any Bangladeshi player taking a mid match unscheduled break now....

 

[Cover Drive Six]

Already, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh players have been mocking each other after the famous Nagini Dance episode.
Now, this case is going to take their rivalry to the next level, making it perhaps the most unique rivalry currently in international cricket.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Shakib was well within his right to appeal. Umpire did the correct thing, followed the rule book which he had to learn by heart before getting the job in the first place. Had he overruled the appeal, that would have been a violation of codified laws and a disservice to the sport because these things shouldn't be dependent on whims and fancies of certain individuals. If people have grievances, players or officials aren't targets, take it up with authorities who write these rules in the first place.

Seems like Indian and Bangladesh values align with regards gamesmanship

 

[Swashbuckler]

Seems like Indian and Bangladesh values align with regards gamesmanship

Don't know about other Indians but I certainly want rules to be followed strictly in any professional endeavour.

But maybe our values align since we aren't too big on ball tampering or chucking.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Don't know about other Indians but I certainly want rules to be followed strictly in any professional endeavour.

But maybe our values align since we aren't too big on ball tampering or chucking.

Indian talking about chucking... rich

 

[saqib.rai]

Shakib was well within his right to appeal. Umpire did the correct thing, followed the rule book which he had to learn by heart before getting the job in the first place. Had he overruled the appeal, that would have been a violation of codified laws and a disservice to the sport because these things shouldn't be dependent on whims and fancies of certain individuals. If people have grievances, players or officials aren't targets, take it up with authorities who write these rules in the first place.

That's the thing with cricket. And why spirit of the game is emphasized so much.

I understand the logic behind the timed-out law. And it should be there.
But appealing when you know the batsman had a genuine reason to stop play for a bit is pathetic.
If Sri Lanka were trying to save a test match or wanting bad light/rain to stop play, MAJORITY would have favored Shakib appealing. But here it was uncalled for.

You would have noticed many batsman after blocking and playing a dot, give the ball back to the wicket-keeper/fielder by picking it up. Opposition can APPEAL on that as well and it would be given OUT OBSTRUCTING THE FIELD.

But have you seen any one appeal?

 

[karthikc]

Seems like Indian and Bangladesh values align with regards gamesmanship

Then why have that timed out rule in first place. Why not add a condition that it is upto discretion of umpire. Till then there is nothing illegal in using it

 

[YousafTheBeast]

Expect a couple of Mankads coming Bangladesh’s way…

 

[karthikc]

That's the thing with cricket. And why spirit of the game is emphasized so much.

I understand the logic behind the timed-out law. And it should be there.
But appealing when you know the batsman had a genuine reason to stop play for a bit is pathetic.
If Sri Lanka were trying to save a test match or wanting bad light/rain to stop play, MAJORITY would have favored Shakib appealing. But here it was uncalled for.

You would have noticed many batsman after blocking and playing a dot, give the ball back to the wicket-keeper/fielder by picking it up. Opposition can APPEAL on that as well and it would be given OUT OBSTRUCTING THE FIELD.

But have you seen any one appeal?

I am against the batsman doing that also. Why do they need to pick it up?? If no one has appeal for it then it is that teams mistake

 

[gazza619]

I did not see this live.

Embarrassing for both teams, to say the least.

Whilst I hated what Shakib did, this Angelo Mathews just looks like a lazy fella who lacks urgency in whatever he does on field.

 

[Swashbuckler]

Good to have more discussions on these contentious rules anyway. MCC can provide clarity. If people feel some rules can lead to controversy, there is always the option of tweaking then or maybe even removing them altogether. Eliminate all doubt.

Another glorious chapter in the nagin rivalry, will spice up future contests.

 

[Babeikh]

I would be embarrassed if we did this to someone

 

[rhony]

BD is probably the most unsportive team out there

 

[Swashbuckler]

That's the thing with cricket. And why spirit of the game is emphasized so much.

I understand the logic behind the timed-out law. And it should be there.
But appealing when you know the batsman had a genuine reason to stop play for a bit is pathetic.
If Sri Lanka were trying to save a test match or wanting bad light/rain to stop play, MAJORITY would have favored Shakib appealing. But here it was uncalled for.

You would have noticed many batsman after blocking and playing a dot, give the ball back to the wicket-keeper/fielder by picking it up. Opposition can APPEAL on that as well and it would be given OUT OBSTRUCTING THE FIELD.

But have you seen any one appeal?

Obstructing the field when ball heads towards stumps or some fielder goes to field or catch the ball.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Naagin Dance is loading.....

 

[Iamcoolwhiz]

Rules are rules, well done to Bangladeshis.

No, law is law. Rules are guidelines for Umpires to ensure fairplay, and this is by no means fair.

 

[saqib.rai]

I am against the batsman doing that also. Why do they need to pick it up?? If no one has appeal for it then it is that teams mistake

Because its different for wicket-keepers to pick the ball up due to the gloves they wear

That is why they take the gloves off when picking up a ball and throwing when the batsmen are running

Anyways, win by skill not by chichore-pana and that is why I was really happy when ICC introduced the penalty on fake fielding

 

[Swing]

Pathetic. Nothing that can be done about it now. Sri Lanka need to smash Bangladesh and give us another Naagin Dance.

Also I need them to win here so they feel better when facing NZ for our sakes.

 

[Swashbuckler]

Most teams wouldn't dare to do this in a bilateral, let alone a World Cup. Ashwin limited mankad to an IPL group game, in internationals India always takes back the appeal. The cowards have to maintain an image.

Brave of Shakib.

 

[saqib.rai]

Obstructing the field when ball heads towards stumps or some fielder goes to field or catch the ball.

no no. Its obstruction even if a batsman picks up a stopped ball.

Go to YouTube. Search Under 19 world cup obstructing the field.

A South Africa batsman was given out as the West Indies appealed.

 

[IndoorCricket]

Most teams wouldn't dare to do this in a bilateral, let alone a World Cup. Ashwin limited mankad to an IPL group game, in internationals India always takes back the appeal. The cowards have to maintain an image.

Brave of Shakib.

Dhoni recalled Ian Bell Runout too if I remember correctly and that too we were getting trashed left and right!!

 

[Swashbuckler]

Dhoni recalled Ian Bell Runout too if I remember correctly and that too we were getting trashed left and right!!

Yes and Dhoni was wrong. He wanted to protect his image and divert attention from poor cricket being played by India. Got his sportsmanship plaudits and spirit of cricket award.

We surrendered a psychological edge to England that day, which would haunt us for many years.

 

[nish_mate]

Yes and Dhoni was wrong. He wanted to protect his image and divert attention from poor cricket being played by India. Got his sportsmanship plaudits and spirit of cricket award.

We surrendered a psychological edge to England that day, which would haunt us for many years.

Might hve haunted you mate, not rest of us. 2011-2012 was a peak England team and 2011-2015 was a weak Indian test team especially abroad.....

 

[Blackbradman]

Now Srilanka should Mankad atleast 2-3 batsmen..

 

[Blackbradman]

Athar Ali Khan: Take a look at that, that is brilliant captaincy from Shakib-Al-Hasan.

 

[Extra_Cover]

How is Mankad bad? The modern game is already heavily tilted in favor of the batsmen and allowing a batsman to get unfair advantage by running earlier than allowed is both unfair to the bowler & illegal under the rules. I have no sympathy for any batsman that faces consequences for cheating a run.

I don't have anything against a "genuine" mankad. When I say genuine I mean the non-striker setting off before the delivery stride to steal a quick run.

However recently we have seen where the bowler intentionally completes a mock action and the batsman post the delivery stride barely leaves the crease in anticipation of the shot. The bowler takes the bail off and simply like that its Mankad.

When a law is intentionally being used for manipulation then the law needs revision.

In my opinion if a batsman is out of the crease before the bowler's action then it can be out as batsman is genuinely trying to steal a run there. However if the bowler gets the batsman out when the non-striker is simply taking a minute step in anticipation of shot from batsman then it should be 5 penalty runs to batting team. Most posters would think that is exactly how it is but its not case in point being Shadab dismissal against Afghanistan or Ashwin against Butler. In such cases given the rigid nature of the law the bowlers have "intentionally" decided to Mankad rather than bowl a ball and play cricket. We need to change that mindset.

 

[Thanos]

Angelo's dismissal today and running out non striker for leaving early are NOT same for me. In later batters try to gain unfair advantage by covering the distance between wickets. So full support to bowlers like Ashwin.

Appealing for time out too can be justified in some cases like when batsmen playing for draw etc. But it seems legit case today when Matthews could've been hurt on first ball.
Agree that he should've been more careful before walking in but Shakib's appeal was totally uncalled for.

And then Matthews tried to convince him but Shakib's response too was very poor. Shakib had the opportunity to make things right.

Anyway rules are rules.
It should be a good wake up call for all professionals out there.

 

[gazza619]

I hope this dismissal recharges Angelo Mathews against NZ into playing a match winning knock

 

[Advaith]

This is really low. I can say a lot but its stupid timing a batsman out in such fashion. Mankad is bad but this is worse.

If you think about it in normal matches we have something called strategic timeout that goes on for 3 minutes or more. We are happy to stop the game for advertisers / sponsors / etc but when a batsman have a legit issue with his gear the game cannot be somehow stopped. How stupid is that.

 

[thelandofthebravepeople]

Bangladesh is desperate to finish in top 8 to make champions trophy.

I still think they will lose today. Even if they win finishing in top 8 is not guaranteed.

 

[shortbread]

Tomorrow's bangla media will be all praise for Shakib's intelligence and achieving a world first.

 

[Mas-LFC]

I think this deserves a thread of its own.

For the first time everyone seen such thing and Mr Angelo Mathews becomes the first batsman ever to be timed out in international cricket history.


NO bias. By the letter of the law. It’s fine to me. Shakib did nothing illegal or wrong. Put it this way, when a bowling team has poor over rate even by a 1min behind, do the batting team show big heart and wave off the penalty, do they? No. So why should a bowling already on slow over rate allow a new batsman take an age going beyond the by-cricket-law time, to take the strike.


Your thoughts..?

 

[DeadlyVenom]

This was a scandalous way to get someone out.

Bangladesh should be deeply ashamed of themselves here.

I wonder if the umpires said anything to Matthews? Technically he could have faced one ball and then stood around forever waiting for a helmet without being timed out.

We are living in an age where safety is everything and concussion protocols rightly are a big part of the game yet a batsman was giving out because he felt his helmet wasn't up to scratch.

 

[IMMY69]

This is absolutely appalling.
Truly disgusting

 

[HateKiller]

Rule is rule. You need to be aware of yourself. Applies to all walks of life and this was a lesson for that.
Mankad is good and this is alright as well.

 

[RehanG]

The reason why Bangla will never grow as cricket nation. Minnow and small mentality, once it was communicated to Matthews he should've withdrawn the appeal. As clearly the strap was broken on the field.

Or umpires should’ve communicated the consequences and told Matthew’s to play without helmet for now it was Shakib bowling anyways.

 

[W63L35]

I will blame ICC for making such rule where questions of "spirit of the game" are raised...or the fans/cricketers/experts not raising a stink at the time this rule of "timed out" was put in place.

 

[Saurav]

Bangladesh had right to appeal but umpire should be smart enough.

 

[W63L35]

Bangladesh had right to appeal but umpire should be smart enough.

What should have umpire done?

 

[IMMY69]

The reason why Bangla will never grow as cricket nation. Minnow and small mentality, once it was communicated to Matthews he should've withdrawn the appeal. As clearly the strap was broken on the field.

Or umpires should’ve communicated the consequences and told Matthew’s to play without helmet for now it was Shakib bowling anyways.

Some of the worst injuries I have seen at club level cricket, in a time when very few wore helmets, were batsmen getting a top edge in to the chin from trying to sweep a spinner.

One kids literally lost his teeth and the doctors actually said he was lucky.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Mathews walked in to bat at No.6 at the fall of Sadeera Samarawickrama's wicket, but had to walk back before facing a single ball after he was timed out – a first in international cricket across all formats.

The veteran Sri Lanka all-rounder, who made a late entry to the World Cup as a replacement player, was left befuddled as Bangladesh appealed when he took time to sort an issue with his helmet.

The incident happened in the 25th over of the Sri Lanka innings when Shakib Al Hasan had just dismissed Samarawickrama, caught by Mahmudullah near the rope.

Mathews took his time walking in, and then struggled with his helmet as the strap broke just as he was taking guard.

As he signalled to the dressing room for a new helmet, Shakib and the Bangladesh team appealed for a "timed out" dismissal and the umpires upheld the appeal much to Mathews' dismay.

Mathews was seen deep in discussion with Bangladesh and the umpires, but the appeal was not withdrawn and Mathews had to walk back dismayed.

The ICC Men's Cricket World Cup 2023 playing conditions pertaining to "timed out" dismissals reads thus:

40.1.1 After the fall of a wicket or the retirement of a batter, the incoming batter must, unless Time has been called, be ready to receive the ball, or for the other batter to be ready to receive the next ball within 2 minutes of the dismissal or retirement. If this requirement is not met, the incoming batter will be out, Timed out.

With Mathews taking more than two minutes to face his first ball even before the strap came off, he had to be sent back to the pavilion following the appeal.

It was the first time in international cricket, men's or women's, that a batter was dismissed according to the "timed out" law.

In 2007, Sourav Ganguly was nearly timed out in a Test match against South Africa after he took more than six minutes to step out following a bizarre sequence of events. Then South Africa skipper Graeme Smith decided not to appeal and Ganguly went on to bat.

Sachin Tendulkar, who was slotted to come in at No.4, couldn’t bat yet, because he had been off the field during South Africa’s innings. VVS Laxman, meanwhile, was believed to be in the shower which meant Ganguly, who was unprepared for the event, had to rush out at No.4.

While the Mathews incident is a first in international cricket, there have been six instances of batters being timed out in first-class cricket.

Source: ICC

 

[IMMY69]

I will blame ICC for making such rule where questions of "spirit of the game" are raised...or the fans/cricketers/experts not raising a stink at the time this rule of "timed out" was put in place.

I actually like the rule.
It shows you what sort of character the opposing captain/team have.
Exposes them for what they are.

Tendulkar could have been times out in a game in South Africa, but the South African captain (Graham Smith) allowed him to continue.

 

[AAli98]

Matthew’s comes across as a lazy individual serves him right won’t be doing it again anytime soon

 

[Major]

I get the criticism Bangladesh is getting, but I want someone to clear up something here first.

If lets say 5 mins were taken by the Mathews, would that extra 3 mins fall on Bangladesh's time? Because Bangladesh is trying to bowl within the over rates, and if they are ahead by 1 or 2 mins that gives them an advantage further. So if a batter is late, thus the time get subtracted from Bangladesh's qouta?

Because remember, if you go above over rate, than Bangladesh is forced to reduce fielders on the boundary.

So if this was gonna come from Bangladesh's qouta of time, than the Bangladeshis were spot on, as they would have to worry one less batter in the final overs, because they would be at risk with a lesser fielder