Mankads

[RossTaylorsBox]

Lol those rules are there because otherwise cricket would ****ing suck to play and watch.

 

[social]

@social I'm not sure what kind of bender you're on here but you've been so off base it's kinda pointless trying to reason you out of a position you didn't use reason to acquire.

The only law that was added after Bodyline became 46.4.vi, and the contemporary discussions centre largely around the physical danger and difficulty of scoring. It also went practically unenforced at periods, particularly when WI was playing in the mid-sixties and eighties, and SA in late fifties-early sixties.

Might add that in 1947 - well within the memory of Bodyline, the new law 46.4.vii, accompanied by an addition to law 27, was made to quite clearly specify that the batsmen leaving their ground early is unfair and the fielding side can run them out "by any recognised method".

The restriction of fielders on the leg side exists because it was perceived leg theory bowling was making the game uninteresting to watch. The 'spirit of cricket' had nothing to do with it. Worth noting this situation would never have arisen had umpires been enforcing the 1935 LBW rule correctly.

lol

Spirit of cricket laws were enacted after bodyline in the 30s

When they failed, leg side fielding restrictions were put in place in 1957

That’s 65 years ago ?

The Windies never bowled bodyline because it wasn’t legal and you can’t do it today

Do you actually know what bodyline is?

 

[Starfighter]

lol

Spirit of cricket laws were enacted after bodyline in the 30s

When they failed, leg side fielding restrictions were put in place in 1957

That’s 65 years ago ?

The Windies never bowled bodyline because it wasn’t legal and you can’t do it today

Do you actually know what bodyline is?

Sorry there's no point in discussing this with someone so lacking in basic knowledge of how the laws of the game came about (or their historical contexts or vagaries). I explained (amongst others) it to you and you completely ignored me. This is Migara levels of stupidity.

None of the law changes had anything to do with 'spirit of cricket' and were enacted mainly due to practical concerns about the game.

If you're so smart, here's the 1947 laws. Go point out to me the part about the 'spirit'.

 

[social]

Oh, and keep talking about attractive cricket

Finger spinner attempting Mankad v 90 mph bowlers trying to hurt people

 

[Starfighter]

Oh, and keep talking about attractive cricket

Finger spinner attempting Mankad v 90 mph bowlers trying to hurt people

Try actually proving your points rather than deflecting ****head.

 

[social]

Sorry there's no point in discussing this with someone so lacking in basic knowledge of how the laws of the game came about (or their historical contexts or vagaries). I explained (amongst others) it to you and you completely ignored me. This is Migara levels of stupidity.

None of the law changes had anything to do with 'spirit of cricket' and were enacted mainly due to practical concerns about the game.

If you're so smart, here's the 1947 laws. Go point out to me the part about the 'spirit'.

Just lol

Bodyline had EVERYTHING to do with the spirit of cricket as does the Mankad

Have you ever played?

Not trying to be cruel but it would explain a lot if you hadn’t

 

[Starfighter]

Just lol

Bodyline had EVERYTHING to do with the spirit of cricket as does the Mankad

Have you ever played?

Not trying to be cruel but it would explain a lot if you hadn’t

I've played and umpired. But that's a classic deflecting argument, it has has no bearing on the point.

Once again, put up or shut up. The Laws are there, the history is at your fingertips. It's not my job to prove your point for you.

 

[mr_mister]

Just don't be a dog. It's simple

 

[Xix2565]

I would consider being brainless a bigger insult, since dogs aren't all bad unlike what the word brainless is meant to convey. Just some advice.

 

[Xix2565]

http://instagr.am/p/CjHgCX6KCIT/

Should link the full article too: https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/...n-striker-because-its-all-about-power-1337221

 

[social]

I've played and umpired. But that's a classic deflecting argument, it has has no bearing on the point.

Once again, put up or shut up. The Laws are there, the history is at your fingertips. It's not my job to prove your point for you.

History lesson

MCC changed laws of cricket in England after bodyline series to promote spirit of cricket

Basically outlawed bodyline

Jardine never played against Australia again after flouting those laws

Larwood never played for England again



Common knowledge for anyone involved with cricket

 

[mr_mister]

I would consider being brainless a bigger insult, since dogs aren't all bad unlike what the word brainless is meant to convey. Just some advice.

Yeah I'd much rather be known as dumb with a good heart rather than a smart prick nobody likes

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

If laws are put in place to preserve the spirit of cricket, then that means Mankads don't contravene the spirit of cricket since there's no laws preventing them.

 

[mr_mister]

It's more of a gut feel thing

If you're thinking of doing something you know will make your own teammates ashamed to be associated with you, don't do it

 

[trundler]

What I don't get is why batsmen aren't held accountable for running short runs. It's literal cheating. My only problem with Mankading potentially is bowlers faking out the batsmen. But hey, umpires exist for a reason.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

If Mankads aren't cheating then short runs aren't cheating.

 

[honestbharani]

If Mankads aren't cheating then short runs aren't cheating.

But I think @trundler s point is that if Mankad is cheating, so are short runs.

 

[social]

What I don't get is why batsmen aren't held accountable for running short runs. It's literal cheating. My only problem with Mankading potentially is bowlers faking out the batsmen. But hey, umpires exist for a reason.

Faking is the only way a Mankad happens

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

But I think @trundler s point is that if Mankad is cheating, so are short runs.

Mankads should be the method used to stop short runs. They're part of the game and neither thing is cheating.

 

[Victor Ian]

I really dislike all this focus on the bowler and their having to live to a set of standards contrary to the laws.

Faking is the only way a Mankad happens

Not at all. The only way a mankad happens is by the non striker being out of their crease. All the faking in the world wont get a batsman out if they stay in their crease and don't try to gain an unfair advantage.