Why is Mankading 'against the spirit' of the game?

Cricinfo has a piece on actions that made the lawmakers think about changes and one of them is a bowler running a batsman out in his delivery stride. They judge it to be against the spirit of the game, and I know the laws have been changed to make this virtually impossible these days.

Why is this against the spirit, if anything, it's an appropriate punishment for a batsman who's trying to cheat?

In more & more tight situations when the batsmen are trying to pinch a run or a bye the non-striker's almost a couple metres outside his crease when the bowler lets go of the ball, making the bye infinitely easier than it used to be. Run the buggers out.

It only used to be against the spirit of the game if a bowler didn't give a warning prior to running the batsman out.

Pretty odd, I mean should they rule out run outs if the person falls over because its against the spirit of the game?

Its not, and I do it many times (particularly in crunch situations where the game is on the line) when I play Indoor Cricket.

If you give a warning, I don't see why it is.

Lillian Thomson said:

It only used to be against the spirit of the game if a bowler didn't give a warning prior to running the batsman out.

Click to expand...

Why is the bowler expected to warn the batsman, especially if it is obvious that he is doing it to get unfair advantage ?

The law is perfectly fine as it is.

The batsman can be runout at anytime before the delivery stride.

The law is to stop the bowler faking to bowl and then running a batsman out as they are moving anticipating the delivery. Franky that is fine as its preventing clown like behaviour.

Once the act of delivery has started then lets focus on delivering the ball rather than playing silly beggars.

Lillian Thomson said:

It only used to be against the spirit of the game if a bowler didn't give a warning prior to running the batsman out.

Click to expand...

Ya fielders should also give a warning to the batsman before taking a catch otherwise it's against the spirit of the game...

Lillian Thomson said:

It only used to be against the spirit of the game if a bowler didn't give a warning prior to running the batsman out.

Click to expand...

Does the bowler have to stop in his run up to give this warning or can it be given after a delivery?

Goughy said:

The law is perfectly fine as it is.

The batsman can be runout at anytime before the delivery stride.

The law is to stop the bowler faking to bowl and then running a batsman out as they are moving anticipating the delivery. Franky that is fine as its preventing clown like behaviour.

Once the act of delivery has started then lets focus on delivering the ball rather than playing silly beggars.

Click to expand...

Would like to hear your view on this(3:22 Kapil-Peter Kirsten incident in SA) :-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZrmD8bVza0

Never seen Kapil Dev so angry, its just pure gold watching his emotions here.

Had a Mankading in a school U11 game the other week.

Batsman was about six yards down the wicket before our spinner was anywhere near his delivery stride... it has been suggested I should not have allowed it!

Neil Pickup said:

Had a Mankading in a school U11 game the other week.

Batsman was about six yards down the wicket before our spinner was anywhere near his delivery stride... it has been suggested I should not have allowed it!

Click to expand...

I am assuming that you were the Umpire, which is very hard as usual in pretty much every tough situation in the middle.

I am just curious about the Umpire's role here - Can the Umpire do anything in case someone has been mankaded ? If the fielding side appeals for an out, what choice does an umpire have apart from giving the batsman out ?

And if the umpire says 'Not Out', wouldn't that be a wrong decision ?

Captain of a side I was playing in Mankaded a bloke on 99 once.

Umpire said "You're ****ing kidding aren't you?"

"No".

"Well then, it's out".

Haha, almost Tufnell-Gooch-McConnell-esque that.

Jono said:

Its not, and I do it many times (particularly in crunch situations where the game is on the line) when I play Indoor Cricket.

Click to expand...

I can't stand it in indoor. I know it's perfectly acceptable and part of the rules but I don't like it and it usually leads to a pretty poor relationship between the two sides from that point on.

Because the batsman is entitled to anticipate that the ball is going to be bowled- as long as the batsman is not half way down the pitch, gaining a massive advantage.

Feigning to bowl constantly throughout the day just reduces the game to a farce.

I think there's also the element of the batsman's back being turned which helps the perception it's contrary to the spirit of the game.

Mind you, taking off to run ridiculously early is also contrary to the spirit of the game.

Sanz said:

Would like to hear your view on this(3:22 Kapil-Peter Kirsten incident in SA) :-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZrmD8bVza0

Never seen Kapil Dev so angry, its just pure gold watching his emotions here.

Click to expand...

Dont like it at all. Its cheap and classless.

However, that was before the rule change so it was allowable.

Now the rule is far better where it cant be done in the delivery stride. This type of fakeout isnt allowed anymore and that is a good thing. Players can get on with the job of batting and bowling, yet the law still provided the chance to run out if the batsman is taking the piss by advancing during the bowlers runup.

Burgey said:

Captain of a side I was playing in Mankaded a bloke on 99 once.

Umpire said "You're ****ing kidding aren't you?"

"No".

"Well then, it's out".

Click to expand...

Goughy said:

Dont like it at all. Its cheap and classless.

Click to expand...

To be fair to Dev he had warned Kirsten three times.