Mankanding in WI v Zim U19 Cricket World Cup match

[Adi_91]

I can't access the video as I am outside of India. 

Is there a youtube link to this?

 

[Laaloo]

 

[Adi_91]

If he hit the stumps while coming on to bowl hoping that the batsman at the other end may be outside, it doesn't speak well about the bowler.

It may be right, but the way it happened, it seems the bowler was only interested in knocking the stumps down rather than bowling. This is unfortunate stuff from the WI bowler.

[BlueBee]

Atleast there is one rule that don't favour the batsman, and you want that to be removed as well?

[Adi_91]

Atleast there is one rule that don't favour the batsman, and you want that to be removed as well?

 

 

Nobody is unhappy with the rule. When clearly there was a defeat waiting for the WI, the bowler had apparently planned this. This is objectionable.

[CoverDrive]

The boy is actually genius getting victory for his team in such a smart manner

[BlueBee]

Nobody is unhappy with the rule. When clearly there was a defeat waiting for the WI, the bowler had apparently planned this. This is objectionable.

How's that objectionable?

The bowler is smart if anything. He probably saw the runner getting out of crease in the previous over as well. I don't see anything wrong with pre-planning that. Actually this kind of dismissals are always pre-planned. If the bowler says that it was not, he's lying.

[express bowling]

Why have a rule in cricket if it is against the spirit of the game ?

If the rule is there...why can't it be used by teams ?

[zen]

Saw the video on youtube. This incidence does not look like the right thing to do 

It appeared as if the bowler slowed down a little on purpose when the batsman was just about to get into his stride. The bat was caught on the line, which belongs to the umpire 

In my book, this particular incidence is up there with batsman given out lbw when the ball is pitched outside the leg, given out of a no ball, etc. even though this one is as per the rules as the method employed does not feel right 

 

 

 

Edited February 3, 2016 by rett

[zen]

This one reminds me of the 1992 WC final when an English batsman thought that he was given out so started to walk and Aamir Sohail, sensing an opportunity, tried to run him out. That run out could have been legitimate but .... 

PS taking about that WC final, it is hard to find such comical celebrations on field 

 

 

Edited February 3, 2016 by rett

[Crookbond]

There is a rule - if the doubt was on the application of the rule; the blame should be on the umpire and NOT on the team that appealed. 

[Adi_91]

Saw the video on youtube. This incidence does not look like the right thing to do 

It appeared as if the bowler slowed down a little on purpose when the batsman was just about to get into his stride. The bat was caught on the line, which belongs to the umpire 

In my book, this particular incidence is up there with batsman given out lbw when the ball is pitched outside the leg, given out of a no ball, etc. even though this one is as per the rules as the method employed does not feel right 

 

 

 

+1,

It seems that the bowler was only interested in doing this nasty stuff than getting a wicket. Horrible sportsmanship.

[zen]

+1,

It seems that the bowler was only interested in doing this nasty stuff than getting a wicket. Horrible sportsmanship.

Too bad that such an incidence came from a player of country that produced sporting bowlers such as these:

 

^ Pak was 9 wkts down 

Walsh's sporting gesture

Edited February 3, 2016 by rett

[fineleg]

Rule is a rule. If rule is wrong - amend the rule. Dont blame the bowler.

[adi B]

Sad end to the game but I personally think it was a smart work by the bowler,he is well within his right to do that.

the problem though is should the bowler have done that instantly(considering the non striker didn't take a massive lead off the crease previously) or should one do this only when the non strikers continuously and mischieviously tries to take a massive lead off the crease and bowler feels 'enough is enough'?

Edited February 3, 2016 by adi B

[zen]

I think there is nothing wrong with the rule. If a batsman is trying to get unfair advantage, he can be Mankaded. However, in this instance the problem is with how the bowler used the rule. The batsman on this occasion was not trying to gain any major advantage 

For e.g. say there is a rule that says that in case of divorce, the husband pays x% of his assets to the wife. There is nothing wrong with the rule. However, the problem is when a girl purposely marries someone to get that x%. She creates a situation where the husband has to divorce and she gets the x%. Legally she is  entitled to that x%. And there is nothing wrong with the rule that offers this entitlement too. But the problem is with how a decent rule is used unfairly. There are usually grey areas .... There are companies too that legally dupe unsuspecting and trusting customers / clients 

 

Edited February 3, 2016 by rett

[zen]

 

Some may claim he wasn't trying to sneak a run in this case, do you feel the same about a batsman, who's foot slips out of the crease and gets stumped?

That is not apples to apples. In that^ case, the credit would go to the bowler for bowling a ball that stretched the batsman out and caused his foot to slip. It would also be similar to when a batman's foot slips (or loses balance) when he is trying to hook but top edges the ball and is caught .... And there could be many such examples

This particular act is questionable because of "how" the rule was used by the bowler. .... For e.g. A batsman gets caught of a no-ball but he does not hear the umpire's call because of the noise in the stadium and starts walking. A fielder runs him out because the batsman is out of his crease despite knowing the batsman did not hear the call and is actually walking back to the dressing room. (IIRC Aamir Sohail tried to do that in the WC final in '92). Per rules, the batsman is out, but sporting cricket lovers will question such a behavior by the fielder  

Edited February 3, 2016 by rett

[sourab10forever]

I honestly don't see any problem with a bowler mankading a batsmen be it him taking an substantial advantage or not. The rule is clear.No backing up untill bowler has bowled the bowl.It is a part of the game just like any other rule. Then how does it become wrong ? Why no chit chat about  "spirit of cricket"  when a bowler had marginally overstepped off the last ball when the last wicket was remaining costing his team the match? Why no fuss when a batsmen knows that he has nicked a ball (maxwell) but stays his ground and goes on to win the match? All this is in the spirit of cricket?

Yes it was sad on the part of the young ZIM players but WI had the Quarters at stack too. I see a lot of tweets against keemo paul, the WI bowler. Don't you think it was actually very cleaver of him , being a fast bowler , to notice that the non-striker was very early into the run and had the presence of mind to clip the bails off just before he started his action? he never ran down his run-up thinking in mind of a possible mankad. He just saw it and did just what his instincts told him to do.

Ur thoughts?

 

 

[zen]

There is already a thread discussing this! 

PS LINK

 

Edited February 4, 2016 by rett

[sourab10forever]

Sorry . please merge.