Cricket (None Leicestershire County Cricket Club)

[SouthStandUpperTier]

2 minutes ago, David Hankey said:

Perhaps someone can enlighten me but I thought the ball was "dead" until it left the bowlers arm?

 

Surely, the best way around this is for the umpire to admonish the non striking batsmen for what is, after all, cheating or what we used to call ungentlemanly conduct.

The law states that Mankading is legal as long as the bowler has started his/her bowling action.

[Bert]

Standard India. Imagine their tears if this is done to them. Happy to push the spirit of the game in their favour but absolute outcry if it’s against them. 

[Voll Blau]

Batter should watch what the bowler's doing. 

[Harpenden Fox]

It was such a rubbish end to a wonderful match. I had a great day at Lords, with a wonderful atmosphere. Dean wasn’t trying to pinch a yard. If you watch the slow motion the bowler effectively delays release of the ball, and Dean just continues to advance in tune with the expected release of the ball. India had deservedly won the series. It was such a feeble way to win the game. I just feel it’s a real shame. Full credit to Dean for immediately shaking hands with the opponent when she must have been seething. For me, that was classy.

[Finnegan]

It really is the absolute stupidest "controversy" in cricket and one of the most ridiculous in sport. 

 

Who decided the "spirit of the game" was letting the batsman cheat and crying if a bowler follows the rules? 

 

Fvcking stupid. Nothing wrong with it, stop making such a fuss about it. I swear it's just another excuse to moan about India for the same sorts that have a really weird hate boner for them to begin with. 

 

If you don't want to be run out, stay where you're meant to be stood and stop encroaching. 

[Harpenden Fox]

8 hours ago, Finnegan said:

It really is the absolute stupidest "controversy" in cricket and one of the most ridiculous in sport. 

 

Who decided the "spirit of the game" was letting the batsman cheat and crying if a bowler follows the rules? 

 

Fvcking stupid. Nothing wrong with it, stop making such a fuss about it. I swear it's just another excuse to moan about India for the same sorts that have a really weird hate boner for them to begin with. 

 

If you don't want to be run out, stay where you're meant to be stood and stop encroaching. 

I would agree if the batter was trying to cheat. But look at this incident. The bowler deliberately stops her delivery knowing that the batter’s momentum will take her out of her crease.

 

It’s like the old Vardy slowing his run in the box so that the chasing defender clatters into him thus drawing a penalty. It’s borderline, but you take it if it benefits your team.

 

India deservedly won the series. The atmosphere at Lords was wonderful thanks to their supporters. I have not an inkling of hate for them and rather dislike the implication. It was still a rubbish end to the game.

[Super_horns]

I think the idea is the bowler stops or something .

 

If a run out was done every time the batsmen or women edged up the crease you’d never get any cricket probably as the bowler would just take the bails off each time !

[CrawlingFox]

On 23/09/2022 at 17:46, cambridgefox said:

Brooks is such a good player.Some of those shots were sublime.Duckett is so hard to set a field to.

Two examples of very fine players across all formats which the County system supposedly doesn't produce...

[st albans fox]

The law needs tweaking 

if the bowler has placed their front foot in the delivery stride then the non striker should be able to leave their crease 

[I am Rod Hull]

12 hours ago, Finnegan said:

It really is the absolute stupidest "controversy" in cricket and one of the most ridiculous in sport. 

 

Who decided the "spirit of the game" was letting the batsman cheat and crying if a bowler follows the rules? 

 

Fvcking stupid. Nothing wrong with it, stop making such a fuss about it. I swear it's just another excuse to moan about India for the same sorts that have a really weird hate boner for them to begin with. 

 

If you don't want to be run out, stay where you're meant to be stood and stop encroaching. 

[Raj]

16 hours ago, Bert said:

Standard India. Imagine their tears if this is done to them. Happy to push the spirit of the game in their favour but absolute outcry if it’s against them. 

LOL oh dear @Bert thought you were better than this pal!!!

Didnt india win 3-0 anyway?

Even if they let England win it would have been a 2-1 series defeat?

Maybe England should look at what they should do to win!!

 

Dont see why everyone is crying about it.

It's not breaking any rules?

 

Edited 25 September 2022 by Raj

[AKCJ]

The obvious clear up to the controversy is to have the 3rd umpire watch for batsmen/women leaving their crease when they also check bowlers overstepping their mark. Every time a batsmen overstep, deduct a run.

 

Batsmen will soon stop in their crease.

 

Mankadding isn't sporting IMO. I do think bowlers need to warn the batsmen.

[Raj]

Didnt Josh Butler do this in a game once??

[cambridgefox]

14 hours ago, Finnegan said:

It really is the absolute stupidest "controversy" in cricket and one of the most ridiculous in sport. 

 

Who decided the "spirit of the game" was letting the batsman cheat and crying if a bowler follows the rules? 

 

Fvcking stupid. Nothing wrong with it, stop making such a fuss about it. I swear it's just another excuse to moan about India for the same sorts that have a really weird hate boner for them to begin with. 

 

If you don't want to be run out, stay where you're meant to be stood and stop encroaching. 

It’s in the rules,so it’s the rules.

in the old days before “ going upstairs “ people blatantly didn’t walk after nicking behind,which was far worse.

until they change it.Carry on.Why should the batter get the advantage and I was an opening batter.

[RowlattsFox]

You can't have a situation where it's allowed in the rules but you probably shouldn't do it. That is ridiculous, either you can or you can't. 

 

For me the ball is dead until the ball leaves the hand so therefore it shouldn't be allowed to happen. If batters are taking the piss then they should be warned by umpires and if continues penalty runs should be given. 

 

Everyone should be looking to do it against India at the world cup. See how quickly they change their minds about it then. 

[SouthStandUpperTier]

Maybe I'm too soft but I wouldn't want to lose a game like that and I certainly wouldn't feel any happiness or pride in winning a game like that. India seemed fairly chuffed with themselves though so let them crack on. Each to their own.

[Captain...]

Mankadding is part of the game, but the one yesterday was ridiculous. The bowler had left the crease before turning round. 

 

Look at other examples of mankadding, the bowler takes the bails off almost as part of their delivery stride. Or stop next to the bails and do it, not carry on down the pitch then turn around. Every batter single better would be out the crease in that situation. As she entered her delivery stride Dean was in her crease with the bat grounded. 

 

Mankadding is valid, but there needs to be a tightening of the rules, like the bowler must take the bails off as part of a single action and not stop. There also must be a consequence of a failed mankadding, otherwise it's a just a free attempt at a cheap wicket.

[StanSP]

1 hour ago, Raj said:

LOL oh dear @Bert thought you were better than this pal!!!

Didnt india win 3-0 anyway?

Even if they let England win it would have been a 2-1 series defeat?

Maybe England should look at what they should do to win!!

 

Dont see why everyone is crying about it.

It's not breaking any rules?

 

But it's India. They must be hated for doing  something not illegal

 

53 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

You can't have a situation where it's allowed in the rules but you probably shouldn't do it. That is ridiculous, either you can or you can't. 

 

For me the ball is dead until the ball leaves the hand so therefore it shouldn't be allowed to happen. If batters are taking the piss then they should be warned by umpires and if continues penalty runs should be given. 

 

Everyone should be looking to do it against India at the world cup. See how quickly they change their minds about it then. 

Change minds about what? It's a cricket law, not an India law

 

Any cricketer has always been able to do it. Its not and never has been exclusive to India? 

[StanSP]

3 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Mankadding is part of the game, but the one yesterday was ridiculous. The bowler had left the crease before turning round. 

 

Look at other examples of mankadding, the bowler takes the bails off almost as part of their delivery stride. Or stop next to the bails and do it, not carry on down the pitch then turn around. Every batter single better would be out the crease in that situation. As she entered her delivery stride Dean was in her crease with the bat grounded. 

 

Mankadding is valid, but there needs to be a tightening of the rules, like the bowler must take the bails off as part of a single action and not stop. There also must be a consequence of a failed mankadding, otherwise it's a just a free attempt at a cheap wicket.

The law was recently changed so that it can only be done in or after the final delivery stride wasn't it? 

 

 

[StanSP]

Also, I find it disappointing that it was so predictable I'd come into this thread and there'd be a barrage of anti-India rhetoric for no reason just because they decided to employ something in the game that is perfectly legal to do. The anger should be about the rules, if anything. Shouldn't just be against India even though any team or any country can do the same thing.

 

 

[Corky]

Not a chance that happens in the fifth over or similar. She was about to release the ball then turned back. Poor way to finish it for me.

 

 

[Raj]

20 minutes ago, StanSP said:

But it's India. They must be hated for doing  something not illegal

 

Change minds about what? It's a cricket law, not an India law

 

Any cricketer has always been able to do it. Its not and never has been exclusive to India? 

Always the indians innit...🙄🙄🙄😃

[purpleronnie]

Same old veiled racism.  No surprises there.

[Captain...]

41 minutes ago, StanSP said:

The law was recently changed so that it can only be done in or after the final delivery stride wasn't it? 

 

 

I'm not sure, but when you watch the video of this one compared to others the bowler is well beyond where you would expect her to release the ball when she turns around and walks back to the stumps. Every single batter would be out in the scenario because every batter in limited overs cricket backs up ready to run a quick single.

[RowlattsFox]

22 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

Same old veiled racism.  No surprises there.

What has it got to do with racism? India are being criticised, rightly or wrongly, because they were the ones that did it.