Jump to content

Jos Buttler claims he would recall a batsman Mankaded even in a World Cup Final


sage

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Lord said:

 

This bowler aborted too. That's how he whipped bails off.

 

The issue is the batsman taking a 'run up' instead of just watching the bowler/ball and staying put till its released. You can get away with it if its a pacer, but spinner can get you out.

 

Sorry buddy, posting to much among Indians may give a false sense of India players being right:

 

11539642-0-image-a-4_1553722703852.jpg

 

 

 

ipl-cover.jpg

Link to comment
Just now, zen said:

 

Sorry buddy, posting to much among Indians may give a false sense of India players being right:

 

11539642-0-image-a-4_1553722703852.jpg

 

 

 

ipl-cover.jpg

 

or is it the 'white is right' syndrome.

 

Ashwin hadn't even completely stopped in above pic. In normal action, Buttler would be way ahead of the crease.

 

I am very open to Indians batsmen being on receiving end of it too, if they bolt ahead.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

He is still doing it. Basically he wants a warning every match lol Amazing.  The warning he got from senanayake is applicable for all the future matches. That is how we should view it.

The bigger problem I have with England is they invoke this spirit of the game nonsense  only when they are at receiving end.

 

Collingwood, Harmison and Broad being the worst. Where did spirit of the game go in these cases. As some rightly pointed out about England WK doing Rashid Latif. How come she did not get banned like latif.

Edited by putrevus
Link to comment
40 minutes ago, zen said:

One thing to follow rules (Mankeding), another to bend rules (Ashwining, a premeditated way to run a batsman out by stopping during the delivery strike when the batsman is in his run up):

 

 

 

 

Most of the innovation in cricket has come from Aus & Eng -> Tests, ODIs, T20s, colored clothing, white ball, pink ball, DRS, D&L, power plays, and so on. I hope that we are able to have laws against "Ashwining" :thumb:

Folks don't seem to read the law, per the law the bowler is allowed to run out at anytime ball is play (when the bowler begins his run up in preparation to bowl at the batsman) until the bowler is normally expected to release the ball". The MCC had clarified that it meant bowler can run one out “at any point before he releases the ball provided he has not completed his delivery swing.”

 

So until the swing is completed the batsman has to be in his ground irrespective of whether he is taking run up or jump up, the bowler of course will stop to effect a run up.

Edited by IndianRenegade
Link to comment
Just now, Lord said:

 

or is it the 'white is right' syndrome.

 

Ashwin hadn't even completely stopped in above pic. In normal action, Buttler would be way ahead of the crease.

 

I am very open to Indians batsmen being on receiving end of it too, if they bolt ahead.

 

Not white, not black, no brown ... but fair syndrome 

 

Watch the video rather than typing random arguments (it won't work in the real world nor it will work online except among "like minded" posters)

Link to comment
1 minute ago, IndianRenegade said:

Folks don't seem to read the law, per the law the bowler is allowed to run out at anytime ball is play (when the bowler begins his run up in preparation to bowl at the batsman) until the bowler is normally expected to release the ball". The MCC had clarified that it meant bowler can run one out “at any point before he releases the ball provided he has not completed his delivery swing.”

 

So until the swing is completed the batsman has to be in his ground irrespective of whether he is taking run up or jump up, the bowler of source will stop to effect a run up.

 

The point is on bending the law ... i.e. in the normal course, Buttler would have been in 

 

If the bowler has premeditated, he will restrict his "swing" 

 

 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Not white, not black, no brown ... but fair syndrome 

 

Watch the video rather than typing random arguments (it won't work in the real world nor it will work online except among "like minded" posters)

 

Maybe you can get off your high horse and use that advice yourself.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, IndianRenegade said:

where in this screenshot has ashwin completed his swing? if you are watching the batter how is this ashwins fault?

 

As mentioned about, the cheat deliberately did not complete his swing (as discussed by commentators too) 

 

100% Ashwin's fault (he cheated) 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, IndianRenegade said:

Folks don't seem to read the law, per the law the bowler is allowed to run out at anytime ball is play (when the bowler begins his run up in preparation to bowl at the batsman) until the bowler is normally expected to release the ball". The MCC had clarified that it meant bowler can run one out “at any point before he releases the ball provided he has not completed his delivery swing.”

 

So until the swing is completed the batsman has to be in his ground irrespective of whether he is taking run up or jump up, the bowler of source will stop to effect a run up.

 

Yup I don't think they have an option to "assume" things. I can "assume" at the start of the run up itself that he is going to deliver. 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, zen said:

 

The point is on bending the law ... i.e. in the normal course, Buttler would have been in 

 

If the bowler has premeditated, he will restrict his "swing" 

 

 

you are the one who is bending the law, the law does't say at any point that the bowler shouldn't premeditate. The existence of such a dismissal allowing a bowler to effect it any time between two actions itself allows the bowler to premeditate. Of course when a mode of dismissal exists on the laws the bowler WILL premeditate to get that mode of dismissal. 

 

 Your reading clearly premeditates that a bowler in his delivery stride would complete his swing. The MCC (in 2017) clearly wanted the batter not to assume this as the previous code allowed the batter to step out during stride. The normal expectation per this law is once the swing is completed, not when the batsman premeditates the swing will be completed.

 

Quote

For instance, in the earlier Code, the wordings went as “Bowler attempting to run out non-striker before delivery”, which was subsequently replaced with “Non-striker leaving their ground early”. The amendment was made in order to put the onus on the non-strikers to remain in the crease.

 

Further, the MCC slightly rephrased the law again, replacing “the bowler is permitted to run the non-striker out” with “the non-striker is liable to be run out.” Previously, the bowler was only permitted to run out a non-striker backing up before entering his delivery stride.The new law permitted the bowler to run the batsman out “at any point before he releases the ball provided he has not completed his delivery swing.”

 

https://www.crictracker.com/what-is-mankading-all-your-questions-answered/

 

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, zen said:

 

As mentioned about, the cheat deliberately did not complete his swing (as discussed by commentators too) 

 

100% Ashwin's fault (he cheated) 

commentators don't write the laws or adjudicate the laws, I don't care what the commentator says. MCC & ICC clearly stated it's the batters fault. The commentators can go jump of a cliff for all I care.

 

And of course he deliberately didn't complete the swing, how else would one hit the stumps behind him? it is the batters responsibility to wait till swing, MCC explicitly stated this, to call someone a cheat because the batter didn't do his job is childish.

Edited by IndianRenegade
Link to comment

Buttler did this a lot in the 2018 ODI series against India, I think in 2nd ODI. I remember making a thread or long post about it back then, Kuldeep was visibly frustrated but didn't have the cojones to mankad him. Buttler is a repeat offender.

 

Also check out Peter Della's twitter timeline, exposes this whole backing thing which is Eng specific, almost like organized cheating and they have been allowed to get away with it for too long. Similar to Aussie sandpaper cheating.....they have been doing this even against Pak this series. OTOH Pak bowlers chucking away merrily, cheaters vs cheaters, match made in heaven. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, IndianRenegade said:

you are the one who is bending the law, the law does't say at any point that the bowler shouldn't premeditate. The existence of such a dismissal allowing a bowler to effect it any time between two actions itself allows the bowler to premeditate. Of course when a mode of dismissal exists on the laws the bowler WILL premeditate to get that mode of dismissal. 

 

 Your reading clearly premeditates that a bowler in his delivery stride would complete his swing. The MCC (in 2017) clearly wanted the batter not to assume this as the previous code allowed the batter to step out during stride. The normal expectation per this law is once the swing is completed, not when the batsman premeditates the swing will be completed.

 

 

 

Just now, IndianRenegade said:

commentators don't write the laws or adjudicate the laws, I don't care what the commentator says. MCC & ICC clearly stated it's the batters fault. The commentators can go jump of a cliff for all I care.

 

That is a bookish take (including being naive enough to suggest that there should be a law on a bowler premediating :lol: )when discussing practical applications including cheating by bending the law (and discussed by commentators)

 

If bowlers stop (premeditating to get a batsman out "in a false manner"), many batsmen would get out in such a fashion. 

 

 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...