Mankads

[Chrish]

It has to - it means having less distance to run once the ball is in play, increang the chance of successfully making a tight run.

Yeah saw the highlight of the incidence in question. If you leave the crease almost one-third of the way, you probably deserve mankad.

Still I would like for opposition to at least warn the player at least once.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

You can assume what you like, mate. Meanwhile, the fact remains only one of these people were involved in the game yesterday and it was not Heather Knight.

Come on now, this is too much. You really think there is even the slightest chance that Knight posted that out of her own pure intuition, and not from speaking to Dean and the other players? Saying she must be wrong because she wasn't the one on the pitch is crazy, she's the England captain and clearly giving the England players' account

That doesn't mean she's right, obvs. Maybe the Indian players warned Dean, maybe not. We've no way of knowing. But saying Knight must wrong because she wasn't on the pitch is ignoring the obvious.

 

[Xix2565]

Come on now, this is too much. You really think there is even the slightest chance that Knight posted that out of her own pure intuition, and not from speaking to Dean and the other players? Saying she must be wrong because she wasn't the one on the pitch is crazy, she's the England captain and clearly giving the England players' account

That doesn't mean she's right, obvs. Maybe the Indian players warned Dean, maybe not. We've no way of knowing. But saying Knight must wrong because she wasn't on the pitch is ignoring the obvious.

If the obvious is a general baseline of Indian players are liars then **** the obvious.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Kaur said she didn't know about any plan so uh, yeah someone is wrong here.

 

[ankitj]

Someone should try it against India’s best bat in a knockout game

Yup they should if given an opportunity. ??

 

[Red]

I’ve never understood the issues around this.

Sport is adjudicated on rules, not “spirit”.

Consider the ball live as soon as the bowler begins his run up. If the non striker leaves his crease, he can be run out. It’s so not complicated. No warnings needed. Everyone knows. Problem solved.

Spirit is how you conduct yourself. You don’t not run out a misjudged single because “spirit”. This is no different in any way.

 

[SteveNZ]

I’ve never understood the issues around this.

Sport is adjudicated on rules, not “spirit”.

Consider the ball live as soon as the bowler begins his run up. If the non striker leaves his crease, he can be run out. It’s so not complicated. No warnings needed. Everyone knows. Problem solved.

Spirit is how you conduct yourself. You don’t not run out a misjudged single because “spirit”. This is no different in any way.

The trouble with this is, a lot of countries govern on this spirit. I know mine does. There needs to be a concerted effort to remove that from the game because as I've said before, this is a thing whether you like it or not. I was taught from age 5 to not run someone out at the bowler's end. It was in the laws as a spirit thing (since changed, or whatever wording it was) and in many people's minds, it still exists that way. So we need that definitively cleared up. And no one tell me it has been, because it hasn't.

Your run out example isn't nuanced enough, no one is suggesting a misjudged runout will ever be looked at on spirit. Look at the run out of Grant Elliott at the Oval in 2004. Ryan Sidebottom knocked him over, NZ expected the bails not to be taken off but they were and it resulted in a significant blowup. I'm sure there are other examples.

 

[SteveNZ]

You can assume what you like, mate. Meanwhile, the fact remains only one of these people were involved in the game yesterday and it was not Heather Knight.

It'd just be better to say you don't know either way. Because you don't. I don't. Heather Knight *may* but also could be lying/guessing, Deepti does, but that's not to say we should 100% take her at her word like no one ever lies in sport. I don't know either person. One was right there so would have a fair idea what was said, but the other one whilst not playing, is the England captain and no doubt has very close access to the immediate thoughts of the team.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Your run out example isn't nuanced enough, no one is suggesting a misjudged runout will ever be looked at on spirit. Look at the run out of Grant Elliott at the Oval in 2004. Ryan Sidebottom knocked him over, NZ expected the bails not to be taken off but they were and it resulted in a significant blowup. I'm sure there are other examples.

BMac running out Murali was probably the worst I've seen

He must have missed the sessions about NZ's governing of spirit of cricket

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

He apologised later and got the gushing praise he was searching for.

 

[Chrish]

Random question: is this within the spirit??

 

[TheJediBrah]

Has anyone pointed out the irony of England complaining about losing a game through something controversial that is within the rules given the manner in which they were awarded the 2019 World Cup

 

[Xix2565]

It was in the laws as a spirit thing

This was never a thing by the way. No need to use "Spirit of Cricket" as some massive shield to hide all sorts of things behind it. The section it was in until the latest changes had the Unfair play be the act of backing up too much to gain a headstart, aka the batter is the one consistently in the wrong by taking a calculated risk to get some runs.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Has anyone pointed out the irony of England complaining about losing a game through something controversial that is within the rules given the manner in which they were awarded the 2019 World Cup

I don't think any of those players were in the World Cup final.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I don't think any of those players were in the World Cup final.

I doubt that the vast majority of people complaining were playing this game either

 

[Red]

The trouble with this is, a lot of countries govern on this spirit. I know mine does. There needs to be a concerted effort to remove that from the game because as I've said before, this is a thing whether you like it or not. I was taught from age 5 to not run someone out at the bowler's end. It was in the laws as a spirit thing (since changed, or whatever wording it was) and in many people's minds, it still exists that way. So we need that definitively cleared up. And no one tell me it has been, because it hasn't.

Your run out example isn't nuanced enough, no one is suggesting a misjudged runout will ever be looked at on spirit. Look at the run out of Grant Elliott at the Oval in 2004. Ryan Sidebottom knocked him over, NZ expected the bails not to be taken off but they were and it resulted in a significant blowup. I'm sure there are other examples.

The example needs no more nuance. If the ball is live and you’re outside your crease you can be run out. A “mankad” is a simple thing to judge.

A batsman being knocked over by a fielder mid run is completely different. There’s external factors at play and it’s a completely different scenario. A mankad is simple. The batsman wants to gain extra feet, he places himself at risk.

 

[Red]

It’s like saying a keeper should give a warning before a stumping. It’s ludicrous.

The responsibility is on a batsman to be in his crease at the right times. So not complicated.

 

[honestbharani]

Come on now, this is too much. You really think there is even the slightest chance that Knight posted that out of her own pure intuition, and not from speaking to Dean and the other players? Saying she must be wrong because she wasn't the one on the pitch is crazy, she's the England captain and clearly giving the England players' account

That doesn't mean she's right, obvs. Maybe the Indian players warned Dean, maybe not. We've no way of knowing. But saying Knight must wrong because she wasn't on the pitch is ignoring the obvious.

It'd just be better to say you don't know either way. Because you don't. I don't. Heather Knight *may* but also could be lying/guessing, Deepti does, but that's not to say we should 100% take her at her word like no one ever lies in sport. I don't know either person. One was right there so would have a fair idea what was said, but the other one whilst not playing, is the England captain and no doubt has very close access to the immediate thoughts of the team.

The problem is she basically unequivocally stated they are "lying". Which i think is a bit rich for a person who was not there to say. And it does grate coz it's obvious there is more likely a chance the person on the field knew what went on better than someone who was not.

 

[Prince EWS]

I think we can learn something about Mankads from when they typically occur. The majority of them seem to happen when a team is 9 down in a high stakes contest - we don't see a bowler casually run out the non-striker at 123/5 in a dead rubber JAMODI.

This shows it's a bit of a desperate final act that a match would struggle to continue normally from, not a totally normal part of the game.

All that said I've always considered backing up to be basically cheating. It'd be great if non-strikers just never left their crease until they saw the ball in front of them.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Probably just a misunderstanding. Maybe the fielders complained about it loudly but the batter didn't hear and they figured that constituted "warning". Maybe they were even saying it in a different language, who knows.

There's a good chance the fielding team thought they'd given sufficient warning and batting team thought they hadn't at all