*Official* IPL 2019

[Jarquis]

I don't think there are any other analogies that really work for this IMO. It's a really weird instance.

It’s most similar to fake fielding imo.

 

[mr_mister]

It makes bodyline looks like the switch hit on a controversary scale

 

[Spark]

It’s most similar to fake fielding imo.

Yeah, or those (very rare) instances where the keeper basically holds the ball until the batsman basically assumes the ball is dead and lifts his foot from the crease, and then claims a stumping.

 

[Dan]

To the surprise of literally nobody, I'm with Spark on this.

 

[trundler]

Dick move.

/Endthread

 

[Burner]

This is a good development imo. Will stop batsmen taking a single off a good ball by already having a moving start. Wait until the ball is bowled and then run.

 

[stephen]

I think the fake fielding rules are **** too. It's a mental game, why is only the batsman and bowler allowed to play the mental games?

 

[Spark]

I think the fake fielding rules are **** too. It's a mental game, why is only the batsman and bowler allowed to play the mental games?

Since when was deceit a "mental game"?

 

[mr_mister]

Since when was deceit a "mental game"?

The wrongun is deceit lol. But no I agree this is different

 

[harsh.ag]

Since when was deceit a "mental game"?

When was it not?

 

[Borges]

Just play by the rules, as they exist at the point of time; instead of pontificating: ah! don't adhere to this particular rule; it is not in the spirit of the game etc.
Let the umpires adjudicate on contentious issues, as Bruce Oxenford did, correctly it would appear, on this occasion.

 

[mr_mister]

Just play by the rules, as they exist at the point of time; instead of pontificating: ah! don't adhere to this particular rule; it is not in the spirit of the game etc.
Let the umpires adjudicate on contentious issues, as Bruce Oxenford did, correctly it would appear, on this occasion.

Nah way too much of a slippery slope. There should exist a degree of spirit/gamesmanship that goes beyond rules. We've seen what happened in the past when that goes out the window while still 'obeying the rules.'

 

[Arachnodouche]

Why is Warne having a meltdown on Twitter? I thought he already had his cup of coffee in the bigtime.

 

[Spark]

Just play by the rules, as they exist at the point of time; instead of pontificating: ah! don't adhere to this particular rule; it is not in the spirit of the game etc.
Let the umpires adjudicate on contentious issues, as Bruce Oxenford did, correctly it would appear, on this occasion.

Stunningly, rules can be changed, and sometimes rules are wrong.

 

[Daemon]

The MCC stance on this seems to be clear:

In accordance with MCC Law 41.16 — which governs the non-striker leaving his or her ground early — Buttler should never have been given out as he is allowed to leave his crease “when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball”.

“If the non-striker is out of his/her ground from the moment the ball comes into play to the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the bowler is permitted to attempt to run him/her out,” the law states.

“Whether the attempt is successful or not, the ball shall not count as one in the over.

“If the bowler fails in an attempt to run out the non-striker, the umpire shall call and signal dead ball as soon as possible.”

superimposed image of Ashwin in his normal action which shows buttler was behind the crease when Ashwin would have been expected to release the ball.

 

[stephen]

Look at Buttler's lack of awareness in that photo. He's not even paying attention to the one thing he should be - the bowler. If anything he's looking away from the bowler.

The game is a professional one and the laws of the game and umpires exist for a reason.

Personally I don't think enough mankading is done. It's the simplest dismissal to avoid but so many batsmen don't care because they think tradition will keep them safe.

 

[weldone]

Look I just don't want bowlers trying what Ashwin did every third ball.

I don't want non-strikers trying what Buttler did every third ball.

 

[Borges]

I don't want non-strikers trying what Buttler did every third ball.

If Mankading was done as often as it should have been done, by now this problem of batsmen trying to cheat this way, trying to gain an unfair advantage, would have been eradicated. The solution to making Mankading disappear, become unnecessary, is to consistently Mankad at every available opportunity

 

[TheJediBrah]

Just play by the rules, as they exist at the point of time; instead of pontificating: ah! don't adhere to this particular rule; it is not in the spirit of the game etc.
Let the umpires adjudicate on contentious issues, as Bruce Oxenford did, correctly it would appear, on this occasion.

bodyline, underarm blah blah

"just follow the rules", old and pointless argument.

Would not surprise me if the rules did change because of this, and change to outlaw what Ashwin did rather than to (stupidly) force batsmen to watch a bowlers hand the whole time until they let go of the ball.

This is all assuming that you are correct in saying that the correct decision within the rules was made, which if the ICC rule wording daemon quoted is accurate, you are probably not

Look at Buttler's lack of awareness in that photo. He's not even paying attention to the one thing he should be - the bowler. If anything he's looking away from the bowler.

lol why don't you watch replays of games and see how often the non-striker watches the bowler's hand until the ball is released. You seem to be having a real disconnect with reality.

 

[weldone]

If Mankading was done as often as it should have been done, by now this problem of batsmen trying to cheat this way, trying to gain an unfair advantage, would have been eradicated. The solution to making Mankading disappear, become unnecessary, is to consistently Mankad at every available opportunity

Yes. I hope Ashwin takes down a few batsmen every game in this way. The other teams can go and make a pickle out of the fair play award.