Cricket Thread

[denislawsbackheel]

It’s like if someone is persistently backing up at the non strikers end . You should warn them and you are quite within your rights to run them out . From what I’ve seen Bairstow persistently does it although not seeking to gain an advantage, it seems a bit of a habitual thing and done without thinking

This is no longer the case.
Earlier this year the rules were clarified to make the mankat a perfectly acceptable dismissal with no warning needed.


Rule 38.3.1
At any time from the moment the ball comes into play until the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the non-striker is liable to be run out if he/she is out of his/her ground. In these circumstances the non-striker will be out run out if he/she is out of his/her ground when his/her wicket is put down by the bowler throwing the ball at the stumps or by the bowler’s hand holding the ball, whether or not the ball is subsequently delivered.

 

[Nellies left peg]

This is no longer the case.
Earlier this year the rules were clarified to make the mankat a perfectly acceptable dismissal with no warning needed.


Rule 38.3.1
At any time from the moment the ball comes into play until the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the non-striker is liable to be run out if he/she is out of his/her ground. In these circumstances the non-striker will be out run out if he/she is out of his/her ground when his/her wicket is put down by the bowler throwing the ball at the stumps or by the bowler’s hand holding the ball, whether or not the ball is subsequently delivered.

I thought it was always allowed but very ungentlemanly as someone tried it in a school match when I was a kid and it caused a mass scrap

 

[eastmanc]

I've met a few just like him!

Played against a few in club cricket.

 

[eastmanc]

This is no longer the case.
Earlier this year the rules were clarified to make the mankat a perfectly acceptable dismissal with no warning needed.


Rule 38.3.1
At any time from the moment the ball comes into play until the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the non-striker is liable to be run out if he/she is out of his/her ground. In these circumstances the non-striker will be out run out if he/she is out of his/her ground when his/her wicket is put down by the bowler throwing the ball at the stumps or by the bowler’s hand holding the ball, whether or not the ball is subsequently delivered.

All of your post is true but what about the spirit of the game.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

I thought it was always allowed but very ungentlemanly as someone tried it in a school match when I was a kid and it caused a mass scrap

It was always “allowed” but considered “ungentlemanly”. Because of it happening more often, especially in one day cricket, they decided to include it in the rules in 2019 and clarified it this year.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

All of your post is true but what about the spirit of the game.

Like Broad not walking when caught…?

 

[eastmanc]

Like Broad not walkiing when caught…?

Good point but a mancat isn't a great look, much worse than none walkers. Years ago lots of players walked if they nicked one. Now it seems nobody does.

 

[Gabriel]

Remember Collingwood being done in very similar circumstances during a ODI against New Zealand. The Umpire took Vettori aside, spoke to him, and he withdrew the appeal; some guy called McCullum was the wicketkeeper doing the ‘stumping’. Vettori is in the Australian dressing room, I think, but I guess he’s not advising on sporting etiquette.

 

[Nellies left peg]

Good point but a mancat isn't a great look, much worse than none walkers. Years ago lots of players walked if they nicked one. Now it seems nobody does.

It was started by the Aussies, they wouldn’t walk if they middled it. But to be fair that’s what the umpires and the snickometer are for.

 

[M18CTID]

I dont get all this moaning about the Aussies.
I watch football and see footballers faking injuries, diving, time wasting, trying to get opponents sent off etc. No big fuss from the press/media about that.

From what I saw the batsman was a knobhead for just walking out of his cross.

I think the issue here is that cricket still has a level of sportsmanship that football lacks, hence the furore.

For me, while it was a bit lazy from Bairstow what they haven’t factored in is the umpire seemed to be in the process of handing the bowler his cap back when that incident happened so IMO that was enough to signal the end of the over.

IIRC there was a similar incident at an England v India test match back around 2010 or 2011. On that occasion, I think Ian Bell was either stumped or run out (when backing up) on the stroke of lunch. During the lunch break, there was a discussion between the two teams and the appeal was withdrawn.