Mankading - Why is it not within the "Spirit of the Game"?

[CaptNimmo]

I hate the term "spirit of cricket"..........it is a blight on our game and I'd love to never hear it used again. Pompous old crap that may have been relevant in the early 20th century but sure to **** isn't now..

The fact is there is such a thing as "spirit of cricket". For example, why else would Michael Clarke and others frequently applaud an opposition batsman when he scores a hundred? I don't see an opponent in football being applauded by the opposition for a hat trick. It is an unique sport in that regard and others. In our amateur game we clap on an opponent batsman when he enters the field and applaud 50s/100s and long may that continue. The fact that the professional era has demeaned the spirit of the game, does not mean it doesn't exist.

Oh, and yes Sri Lanka were right to run out Buttler after the warning which was given in the spirit of the game. Crass stupidity by the English batsman.

 

[nexxus]

I don't see an opponent in football being applauded by the opposition for a hat trick.

Wha? It happens all the time, handshakes after the game, shirt swopping, consoling, etc.

 

[nexxus]

Fair enough. Bizarre that there is a difference. Mankading has always been cheap and I thought the MCC law was a great addition.

... Mankading was a curse on the game and the MCC rule is far superior.

Think over and above the rule, I'm really keen on hearing why you think it's cheap. For me, the game is, like or not, professional, and in a professional sport, inches matter a great deal. We heavily penalise a bowler for daring to stray even a cm over the line, when the benefit derived is near negligible. They're penalised whether or not they intended to overstep, whether or not they tried to gain some advantage. A fielder is denied a fair catch if his foot even slightly brushes the boundary line. Why are those inches more important than the 1 or 2 stolen by a batsman who follows up to far? In the modern game, where many run-outs are decided by a matter or inches, a player is almost negligent in their duty if they wantonly allow an opponent a head start without punishing them.

That they never had to watch the bowler up to the point of release before is irrelevant, cricketers have had to do lots of things they've never done before. The MCC law is wrong for me because it allows for a batsman to steal ground with impunity and leaves very little recourse for a bowler other than to tut-tut, which actually wastes the fielding teams' time.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

It is hardly unique though. There is far more good sportsmanship in rugby and golf than there is in cricket (although I agree with you about football/soccer)

 

[hendrix]

It's the playing condition I have a problem with tbh, for reasons outlined earlier in the thread. I think the MCC law covers it well enough.

a playing condition that goes "don't leave your ****ing crease before the ball is delivered" should cover it pretty ****ing well.

As far as I'm concerned, the ICC laws, let alone the MCC laws cover it well enough.

 

[honestbharani]

Sehwag said afterwards that he didn't go through with it cos he wasn't prepared to handle the criticism. So basically he pussied out.

Well, he did but how awesome is it that he is the kind of guy who would come out and basically say something like that. Any other cricketer there would have mumbled some niceties about the spirit of the game and respect for the opposition and try and gain some holier-than-thou points.. SehWAG...

 

[OverratedSanity]

Sehwag said something like "It's soft, but that's how we are"

 

[Daemon]

a playing condition that goes "don't leave your ****ing crease before the ball is delivered" should cover it pretty ****ing well.

As far as I'm concerned, the ICC laws, let alone the MCC laws cover it well enough.

What Dan argued against the ICC laws makes a lot of sense to me tbh. MCC law is fine.

 

[viriya]

Well, he did but how awesome is it that he is the kind of guy who would come out and basically say something like that. Any other cricketer there would have mumbled some niceties about the spirit of the game and respect for the opposition and try and gain some holier-than-thou points.. SehWAG...

Yes, Sehwag is not someone who would make up some bull**** which is admirable.

 

[GIMH]

Anyone remember in the 3rd Test of the 05 Ashes Test where McGrath was out of his crease and Hoggard didn't run him out? Pretty sure I'm not making this up

 

[sledger]

Anyone remember in the 3rd Test of the 05 Ashes Test where McGrath was out of his crease and Hoggard didn't run him out? Pretty sure I'm not making this up

Was probably feeling sorry for him.

 

[Shri]

No one accused Hoggard of being intelligent.

 

[GIMH]

You must know how he feels

 

[fredfertang]

No one accused Hoggard of being intelligent.

You shouldn't generalise about Yorkshire folk like that

 

[Smudge]

For those of you questioning the existence of the Spirit of Cricket award, get ****ed. New Zealand has to win SOMETHING at the ICC awards occasionally.

 

[SteveNZ]

Without Spirit of Cricket, it becomes football. Do we want that?

The Spirit of Cricket absolutely has a place, just as etiquette does in golf.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

If we don't allow mankadding then we should let bowlers overstep just a little bit, and let fielders discuss the news as the ball is delivered while fielding under the helmet. Hey, they're not trying to gain an unfair advantage!

 

[the big bambino]

I just wonder which team is going to win "Spirit of cricket" award. It is usually one of NZ or SL, but we are a pack of match fixers and they do this


Also, I don't know if this has been posted - but the great (greatest) man of the game summed it up brilliantly:

For the life of me, I can't understand why [the press] questioned his sportsmanship. The laws of cricket make it quite clear that the nonstriker must keep within his ground until the ball has been delivered. If not, why is the provision there which enables the bowler to run him out? By backing up too far or too early, the nonstriker is very obviously gaining an unfair advantage.

Sir Donald John Bradman

Too bloody right. Mankad was sweet then as SL are now.

Donald George Bradman btw

 

[viriya]

Even the MCC came out and said the "Spirit of Cricket" doesn't apply here since the rules were followed.

 

[viriya]

ICC cricket committee comments - step in the right direction imo:

"The cricket committee believes that a non-striker should be deterred from leaving his or her crease before the time the bowler normally delivers the ball," the committee's statement said. "It did not support a formal warning being introduced prior to a bowler being eligible to run out a non-striker, but it did support the view expressed by some captains that the umpires shouldn't ask the captain whether he wanted the appeal to stand before making a final decision. The Law strikes a sensible balance between preventing a batsman from gaining an advantage whilst at the same time preventing the bowler from unfairly seducing the batsman into leaving his crease by faking to deliver and then holding on to the ball."

ICC news : Deter batsmen from backing up - ICC cricket committee | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo