Mankad.

[The Charlatan]

Link to story

With a Mankad taking place at the U19 World Cup the furore has been raised again on the law and whether it is in the spirit of the game.

Personally, while it's not a tasteful mode of dismissal, I think that the non-striker leaving his crease early is no less cheating than "Mankadding." If you want to steal a head start, you run the risk of being dismissed.

What do you think?

 

[Walt Flanigan]

I'm not a fan of it but TBH, if everyone is so up in arms about this every time it happens then why not just ban it?

 

[ek999]

I have no problem with mankadding. Like you said, non-strikers being out of their crease when the bowler is delivering the ball is cheating and is against the spirit of the game.

Everything is weighted against bowlers these days and when one tries to get back at a batter he is called a cheat or bad sport :crazy:

 

[grouch]

May as well bowl underarm too.

Do a phantom mankad as a warning first ffs. Even fat blokes playing indoor cricket on a tuesday night do that.

 

[Pete Cash]

Why should the batsman be warned.

People arent going to like it because the bowler was never planning on bowling the ball but come on young Zimbabwean the bowler wasnt even at the bowling crease and youn were technically out of your ground ?

Dont leave your crease until you are supposed to

 

[juro]

It's perfectly within the rules of the game. Well done to WI. If they don't want people doing this, they need to change the rules.

 

[The Charlatan]

I think keeping the rule keeps the batsmen honest, I must admit I'm a bowler so I hate watching the batsmen take a head start. As ek999 said, the game is engineered for the batsmen now so I don't see why they can take yet another advantage without consequence.

 

[redvscotty]

Everyone apparently loves T20 because of the baseball style big hitting and all that rubbish but when they take a classic baseball style dismissal everyone is up in arms.

Keep it out of tests but the other 2 formats are pretty boring these days so anything to brighten them up a bit IMO.

 

[juro]

The only downside I can see with mankad is if the bowler tried to do it unsuccessfully, repeatedly. It would slow down the over rate even more than it is now.

 

[Danish]

Its a distasteful way to lose a match, for sure, but as others have said batsmen taking a lead is cheating too.

Since everyone blows up about it so much though, why not change the rule banning the practice, but in order to balance it out also implement a rule that if the non-striker leaves his crease before the ball leaves the bowlers hand all runs scored from that delivery are nullified - including boundaries and extras.

There has to be a severe alternative punishment for the batsman if you are going to remove the threat of losing their wicket.

 

[tomdl]

The only downside I can see with mankad is if the bowler tried to do it unsuccessfully, repeatedly. It would slow down the over rate even more than it is now.

I can't imagine the batsmen will keep walking out of the ground after the first unsuccessful attempt though and if they do they deserve to get out.

I am all for it. If batmen can change from right handed to left or vice versa, can have bats the size of trees, boundaries the size of a $2 coin then the bowlers and everything else that is going in their favour now than the bowlers are more than welcome to mankad someone who is roaming down the crease before he has even begun his bowling action.

 

[juro]

Its a distasteful way to lose a match, for sure, but as others have said batsmen taking a lead is cheating too.

Since everyone blows up about it so much though, why not change the rule banning the practice, but in order to balance it out also implement a rule that if the non-striker leaves his crease before the ball leaves the bowlers hand all runs scored from that delivery are nullified - including boundaries and extras.

There has to be a severe alternative punishment for the batsman if you are going to remove the threat of losing their wicket.

That sounds far worse to me! Imagine how many times that would happen in a game? How is the umpire going to rule on both the front-foot no-ball and the non-striker leaving the crease???

 

[ek999]

If a Mankad is not in the spirit of the game, neither is not walking when you know you have nicked it or claiming a catch that you know you didn't catch. Yet there is never anywhere near this much controversy when one of those happens (not walking especially)

 

[Danish]

That sounds far worse to me! Imagine how many times that would happen in a game? How is the umpire going to rule on both the front-foot no-ball and the non-striker leaving the crease???

In practice I would imagine it would not get called to often, with the bowler likely still needing to draw the umpire's attention to it. They could also check it on certain deliveries (like when a cheeky bye is stolen at the death etc).

I can't really think of another way to enforce batsmen stay in the crease besides either risking their wicket or costing their team runs.

 

[jargan83]

I've got no real problem with it, if it had happened earlier in the game I doubt there would be as much controversy about it.

I can't stand the batsman getting a head start, especially, as others have said, in an age where the game is weighted so much in their favour.

Tee ICC won't get rid of it until it happens to Virat Kholi or MS Dhoni.

 

[papabear]

I think it was fine.

Clever.

coaches don't like it as they like to be in control of everything and sometimes when the 1 percenters happen they have a cry.

 

[no name]

The real tragedy is that Fox had an image covering the crease during the story!

 

[Twizzle]

Geez some of the T20 batsmen are about a metre out of their crease, imagine if we did that to Kholi

meltdown

 

[nöyd]

I only just saw it on Fox without really taking notice.

Did the bowler roll his arm over or just whip the bails off as he ran through the crease?

 

[bazza]

Ban it and deduct a run if the non-striker leaves the crease before the ball is bowled