*Official* Women's Cricket discussion thread

[RossTaylorsBox]

Yeah that's why I'm saying to change the rules to what I said because it's way better.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's not a legal delivery, therefore should be a no-ball. Practically though, it's to stop bowlers trying to do it every ball and ruining the game.

No-ball isn't enough of a punishment, the reward is too high. If they do it and the batsman is in the crease they should be banned from bowling for the rest of the innings

 

[Burgey]

That's given though? This isn't nuclear science.


21.2 Fair delivery – the arm

For a delivery to be fair in respect of the arm the ball must not be thrown.

A ball is fairly delivered in respect of the arm if, once the bowler’s arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened partially or completely from that instant until the ball has left the hand. This definition shall not debar a bowler from flexing or rotating the wrist in the delivery swing.

Although it is the primary responsibility of the striker’s end umpire to assess the fairness of a delivery in this respect, there is nothing in this Law to debar the bowler’s end umpire from calling and signalling No ball if he/she considers that the ball has been thrown.

I'm not going to get into a throwing discussion lest I be dragged to the Hague for alleged crimes against humanity again.

 

[Xix2565]

Yeah that's why I'm saying to change the rules to what I said because it's way better.

Now that is something I can reasonably disagree with unlike most opinions.

 

[Xix2565]

I'm not going to get into a throwing discussion lest I be dragged to the Hague for alleged crimes against humanity again.

Don't worry, I'll throw it just for you.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

I'm right though

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Some team should just say before a series "yeah we're gonna Mankad whenever we can deal with it binch". Pretty soon everyone else will follow then maybe they'll actually draw up some proper rules about it.

 

[Xix2565]

Some team should just say before a series "yeah we're gonna Mankad whenever we can deal with it binch". Pretty soon everyone else will follow then maybe they'll actually draw up some proper rules about it.

People have questions to answer for not doing this.

 

[Burgey]

Gonna be awkward for those who both support the Mankad and hate slow over rates. They're be a ****ing brain implosion trying to reconcile those two things.

 

[Shady Slim]

If a bowler tries a Mankad but the batter is actually in, I reckon there should be a penalty for the bowler. You've got to bowl the next ball from a standing start, say.

i mean you could just call a failed mankad a noey i think would be the easiest

 

[Shady Slim]

The rule should be this:

Ball is live once the bowler begins their run up. At that point anything goes, batsman can start their run and the bowler can run them out. If the bowler does try to run them out then it's a no-ball because the delivery is illegal.

"Mankads" should be accepted as a normal way to dismiss the batsman, the only reason it's not at the moment is because of aesthetics.

oop rtb again beat me to the punch

 

[TheJediBrah]

I'm not going to get into a throwing discussion lest I be dragged to the Hague for alleged crimes against humanity again.

I'm surprised any criticism of Mankad-ing isn't already being labelled racist tbh

 

[mr_mister]

Just get to the crease, bowl the ball and stop trying to play 200 IQ cricket

We're gonna have bowlers balking and foxing to get batters out of their crease like a game of cat and mouse

Benny Hill type stuff

 

[Xix2565]

You guys act like these people on the ground are robots who can only carry out a certain action. Shameful posting, mods have questions to answer for letting you fester.

 

[mr_mister]

You guys act like these people on the ground are robots who can only carry out a certain action. Shameful posting, mods have questions to answer for letting you fester.

Please you're the one who headbutted the line with some of your name calling yesterday. If you can't have civil discourse you're the one staring down the barrell of a 7 day vacation

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

robots who can only carry out a certain action.

People have questions to answer for not doing this.

mods have questions to answer

 

[TheJediBrah]

Please you're the one who headbutted the line with some of your name calling yesterday. If you can't have civil discourse you're the one staring down the barrell of a 7 day vacation

You never seen Xix2565 post before

bloke can barely respond to someone without spending more time insulting them than actually commenting

Reminds me of a young TJB

 

[mr_mister]

You never seen Xix2565 post before

bloke can barely respond to someone without spending more time insulting them than actually commenting

Reminds me of a young TJB

I actually hadn't, I guess he's kinda new here

 

[TheJediBrah]

This place needs more personalities. Davado was a huge loss

 

[ashley bach]

I thought the rule was that a bowler could run the non striker out BEFORE their delivery stride (part of law 42 on unfair play). Dean had her bat grounded in her crease at the point Sharma hit her delivery stride. Smacks of sharp practice to then stop, mid delivery stride, and run someone out. Dean was not backing up as the bowler was hitting her delivery stride - she had her bat grounded behind the crease, so at that point the bowler could not see that she was backing up. Either way I think this incident could see the rule changed back to giving a warning. Leaves a sour taste, and not in the spirit of the game. India had already won the series and only needed one wicket with 20 runs to spare. If they believed that was the only way to win the game it reflects poorly on them.

This is actually a really good first ever post, welcome to CW Brompton!
Certainly didn't deserve to receive the abuse it did, jesus talk about trying to ruin a new member.