The Mankad

[honestbharani]

Yeah but trying to ensure you get the minimum required amount of your feet inside the line is something batsmen do too. Its not like they ground the bat well inside the crease during every run. That is not the same thing as deliberately leaving the crease and then crying to the opposition captain and umpires about "spirit of the game" after you have been run out as you deserve to be.

 

[ankitj]

Javagal Srinath: If the non-striker's taking undue advantage, I'm fine if he's run out

Former pacer and current match referee tells Ashwin on show 'DRS with Ash' says rules have been set and reiterated many times

www.espncricinfo.com

'"The bowler is focusing on the batsman [as he bowls]. For the batsman [at the non-striker's end] to stick to his crease till the ball is released is no big deal, because he's not batting, nor is he thinking of anything else." Srinath told Ashwin on his Youtube show 'DRS With Ash'. "So the batsman shouldn't leave the crease and the bowler should focus on just bowling and the batsman he's going to bowl to.

"If the batsman is taking undue advantage, and if he's involved in a run out, I am fine. I am perfectly okay with that. The rules have been set and reiterated many times. It is not about T20, but every format of the game. The onus is on the batsman to stick to the crease until the ball has been delivered. That's the best way to look into it.

"Don't look for any empathy. Don't invoke the spirit of the game. The spirit of the game is with the runner. He cannot move out of the crease. If he is doing it, he's not invoking the spirit of the game itself. I would believe that the batsman should stick to the crease."

 

[GIMH]

Its pretty much always accidental

 

[honestbharani]

Going by Ashwin's suggestion, in a LO game, that would be both a free hit and a free ball.

 

[Migara]

West Indies bowlers used to overstep big and bounce people just to intimidate them.

 

[mr_mister]

Don't mankad. It might be 'within the laws' but it's just not cricket.

see also: bodyline, underarm ball

 

[JOJOXI]

My two cents having played some cricket - when bowling I've never looked at the batsman with the thought of mankadding and unless it was several yards being stolen wouldn't do it myself. However, when I was at the non strikers end batting I always had the bat grounded behind the line until the bowler released the ball. However, whilst mankadding is something I wouldn't really think of doing unless in an extreme scenario I have no problem with the practice tbh. I'd prefer a warning if it was a team I liked/was playing for as it would reduce the controversy but it is within the rules. Is what Ashwin done in the IPL right probably not due to delayed nature but think it's wrong that batsman can take an unfair advantage (you wouldn't wonder out of your crease and risk a mankad if the perceived reward didnt outweigh the risk.


As an aside what will Ashwin's legacy be if there are rule changes do we think? Whilst his actions were unpopular amongst the majority would we be having these discussions of how to curb batsman taking an advantage without Ashwin? Will it even be a major talking point when he has retired or a mere footnote?

 

[honestbharani]

Don't mankad. It might be 'within the laws' but it's just not cricket.

see also: bodyline, underarm ball

There is a reason why the other two were outlawed and this was not.

 

[srbhkshk]

I'd prefer a warning if it was a team I liked/was playing for as it would reduce the controversy but it is within the rules.

Nope, "warning" is the actual problem and gives people the sense that there is something wrong with the Mankad, you don't warn a batsman before taking his catch, if you think it's fair, do it without any warning, else just don't do it, middle of the line stances are what lead to the whole mess.

 

[JOJOXI]

Nope, "warning" is the actual problem and gives people the sense that there is something wrong with the Mankad, you don't warn a batsman before taking his catch, if you think it's fair, do it without any warning, else just don't do it, middle of the line stances are what lead to the whole mess.

I agree and disagree - get that the idea of a warning making it seem like it is almost something wrong but I do not think the middle of the line stances are ultimately what is leading to this mess - the rules are clear on allowing mankading but if someone was to do it without warning in the T20I match going on in England right now it would cause controversy - more so then if you gave a warning before mankadding. Whilst I have no issue with no warning being given and was just saying a personal preference the (wrongful imo) accusations of being underhand and near enough a cheat is rightly or wrongly what would make me prefer if a side I followed/played with issued a warning for that reason but point taken no other legitimate dismissal would you give a second chance.

 

[the big bambino]

If you've left you're ground and got run out then blame yourself.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

I'm for mankad but if a fielding side appeals for mankading but it is not out then it's a no ball.

 

[honestbharani]

Mel is right on the money here.

 

[ankitj]

I'm for mankad but if a fielding side appeals for mankading but it is not out then it's a no ball.

Mankad attempts are always dead balls though

 

[Coronis]

They should let the non striker smash the ball if he’s not out imo.

 

[honestbharani]

They should let the non striker smash the ball if he’s not out imo.

Sure, will still call dead ball after though.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Mankad attempts are always dead balls though

That's what he's saying lol

He thinks they shouldn't be

It has to be made something to discourage the fielding side from doing it all the time with no repercussions. Either a no-ball or a free hit the next ball, or you have to bring fielders inside the circle or something, or a warning system? I don't know but it has to be something. Can't just be allowed to keep attempting a mankad when the non-striker is in their crease over and over wasting everyone's time.

 

[ankitj]

That's what he's saying lol

He thinks they shouldn't be

It has to be made something to discourage the fielding side from doing it all the time with no repercussions. Either a no-ball or a free hit the next ball, or you have to bring fielders inside the circle or something, or a warning system? I don't know but it has to be something. Can't just be allowed to keep attempting a mankad when the non-striker is in their crease over and over wasting everyone's time.

Sure. Has it happened ever though?

 

[cnerd123]

It has to be made something to discourage the fielding side from doing it all the time with no repercussions.

Bloody hell you're an absolute moron aren't you?

A) this is a situation that has literally never happened
B) cricket already has laws about time wasting and playing conditions with penalties for slow overrates. There is plenty of deterrents for not getting on with the game (hence A)

You post an awful lot for someone who has no ****ing clue on how cricket works.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Bloody hell you're an absolute moron aren't you?

A) this is a situation that has literally never happened
B) cricket already has laws about time wasting and playing conditions with penalties for slow overrates. There is plenty of deterrents for not getting on with the game (hence A)

You post an awful lot for someone who has no ****ing clue on how cricket works.

You clearly have serious personal issues so I've been ignoring your consistent over the top personal attacks for a while because I'm nice like that. But you need to get yourself right because it can't be healthy.

Oh and you are completely wrong about this, as you generally tend to be whenever you have a disagreement with someone, and if someone wants to engage like an adult I'll gladly explain it to them