Mankading - Why is it not within the "Spirit of the Game"?

[viriya]

- It's within the rules of the game
- It's a penalty for batsmen who get an unfair advantage (even slight) by backing up too much
- The game is batsmen-favored already - wouldn't this add an interesting element to the game?

Why is it against the spirit of the game when a batsman standing his ground after edging a ball is considered fair play?
If anything, umpires should stop asking the fielding captain the question once a batsman is mankadded - if it's out, it's out.

 

[Furball]

A batsman standing his ground is fair play because it's down to the umpire to give him out.

 

[viriya]

A batsman standing his ground is fair play because it's down to the umpire to give him out.

A batsman backing up too far and getting mankadded is within the rules and afaik the rules don't state that the umpire should be asking the fielding captain. So why is it not just a run-out?

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I agree, Viriya. Gone are the days of gentlemen playing the game for jolly good larks. Cricket is a professional sport and has rules that should be followed. If the batsman backs up too far, that's his problem IMO. I don't see why they deserve a warning, though I could happily see that continue. But the disgust that some people show towards Mankadding is not reasonable in this day and age.

 

[viriya]

I would like an "I-don't-give-a-****" captain like Nasser Hussain to aggressively follow the rules - would make everyone follow suit and stop batsmen backing up. I would think that adds another dimension to the game.

 

[Burgey]

Don't really have a problem with someone doing it, but the more I look at the incident with Buttler, the less I think he was backing up too far, too early on the ball of te run out (as opposed to the ball he was warned about).

As Neil pointed out, the delivery stride rule doesn't apply in internationals for good reason, but what's to stop a bowler then delaying and delaying the run out until a batsman takes off legitimately as he would were the bowler to let the pill go?

Also, this is the kind of thing one would expect form the Sri Lankans. No doubt Migara or some other apologist will say this is somehow revenge for colonial oppression or Murali being called for chucking, or some other atrocity.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I would like an "I-don't-give-a-****" captain like Nasser Hussain to aggressively follow the rules - would make everyone follow suit and stop batsmen backing up. I would think that adds another dimension to the game.

I wish Nasser had given more of a **** about cricket, then he may not have inserted the Aussies at the Gabba. :shakeshead:

 

[viriya]

Don't really have a problem with someone doing it, but the more I look at the incident with Buttler, the less I think he was backing up too far, too early on the ball of te run out (as opposed to the ball he was warned about).

As Neil pointed out, the delivery stride rule doesn't apply in internationals for good reason, but what's to stop a bowler then delaying and delaying the run out until a batsman takes off legitimately as he would were the bowler to let the pill go?

It doesn't really matter if Buttler was actually going for a run or not. By being outside the crease before the bowler had completed his action, he was technically getting an unfair advantage. That's all that should matter.

All a batsman has to do is to make sure the ball is released before leaving the crease - it's pretty straightforward really.

 

[Burgey]

I don't think it's that simple really. Players time they're backing up (when not trying to take an unfair advantage) to coincide with the release of the ball. The way the playing condition seems to be ATM, the bowler can simply delay the run out by not releasing the ball, and the batsman is left stranded. There needs to be some balance in it.

 

[marc71178]

I note that the previous time such an incident happened in international cricket, the fielding captain withdrew his appeal against the dismissal on advise from his senior batsman.

 

[viriya]

I don't think it's that simple really. Players time they're backing up (when not trying to take an unfair advantage) to coincide with the release of the ball. The way the playing condition seems to be ATM, the bowler can simply delay the run out by not releasing the ball, and the batsman is left stranded. There needs to be some balance in it.

The batsman just needs to look for the bowler to complete his action - the bowler would not be able to mankad by "faking" an action and not releasing the ball.

 

[viriya]

I note that the previous time such an incident happened in international cricket, the fielding captain withdrew his appeal against the dismissal on advise from his senior batsman.

Yes, Sachin told Sehwag to withdraw the appeal because it was "against the spirit of the game". But why is it? I don't see a good reason except that it's been considered so historically.

 

[Burgey]

The batsman just needs to look for the bowler to complete his action - the bowler would not be able to mankad by "faking" an action and not releasing the ball.

That's a fair point.

I actually expect this method of dismissal to be Sti Lanka's leading wicket taker in all their away test series, so more power to them.

 

[Maximas]

Your flattery is most appreciated Burgey

 

[viriya]

That's a fair point.

I actually expect this method of dismissal to be Sti Lanka's leading wicket taker in all their away test series, so more power to them.

That would be quite fun, unfortunately batsmen don't really care for quick singles in Tests.

 

[Burgey]

They have since Simpson and Lawry mate. Except the West Indies who prefer to hit boundaries than, you know, rotate the strike and all.

 

[viriya]

Relevant article by Coverdale:
Rules I'd Change: Brydon Coverdale on not allowing umpires to question a Mankading appeal | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Agree on all points raised.

 

[Red]

I mankadded some prick in indoor cricket once. **** was nearly at the other end before I delivered the ball.

 

[Burgey]

My happiest indoor moment was playing a final against a pack of arseholes and batting out the last over by plonking the ball into the side nets until we were six ahead with one ball left (this was before you had to rotate the strike every three balls or whatever) and letting the last ball go deliberately to bowl me so we won by one run.

They didn't want to shake hands after the game for some reason.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I expected this from Sri Lanka. Matthews has learnt well from Sangakkara.