• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Bowler run out

Khukuri said:
I like how everyone glosses over the fact that if someone was mankaded it was definitely at least the second time they tried to cheat in that game. Once when the bowler noticed it was happening, and once when they were ran out. The rule book is warning enough. If you play the game, you should know not to cheat. And if you still cheat, then no additional warning is needed before you get punched in the mouth

All this negativity around the bowler does is give the cheating shitcunts the confidence that they can flout the rules, secure in the knowledge that most bowlers will refrain from giving them what’s rightfully coming their way because of some bullshit one-sided morality code.
Or maybe we are all looking at it wrong.

Maybe we should have the attitude that baseball does, where stealing a base is just part and parcel of what you do. You try to gain an additional base, and you suffer the consequences if you are not successful. No stigma attached to either action. the point of the game is to score runs so do it by whatever means necessary, just understand the risks
Click to expand...
Do you play the game? It doesn't sound like it to me.

A lot of what you are saying is correct according to the strict rules, but the game of cricket is more than just about the rules. There's an etiquette to it that is, or should, be understood by everyone who plays.

From almost the first time they pick up a bat, kids are taught to 'back-up' when they are at the non-strikers end. They are told that they have to make sure they are still in 'their ground' (behind the bowling crease) when the ball is released, but be in motion, ready to run, if necessary. Sometimes their timing is a little bit out and they get ahead of the bowler. Or they get distracted, or caught up in the moment, or their forward momentum carries them out of their ground even though they would have still been safe if the bowler had released the ball as normal. That is when it becomes one of the 'unwritten rules' that, once it is spotted, the bowler says to them that the next time they do it they will be run out. I personally think that this 'unwritten' rule should become 'written' - this will take away the controversy around this type of dismissal

To call some one doing this a 'cheating shitc@nt' for doing this is just pathetic and demonstrates a lack of practical knowledge about the game. There are far worse 'crimes' in the game than this.

I've played in a game where the wicket-keeper has crept up from his original starting position to stand up directly behind the stumps during the bowlers run-up. I don't know whether this is against the rules or not (the umpires did not say anything to him about it at the time) but it is not normal for a 'keeper to do this. It's a 'c@nt's trick' and he was not so politely informed of this by the batsman. Normally they will remain in the same position until the delivery is completed. If they then choose to stand up they will often advise the batsman they are doing so or do it early enough that he can see their new position. they don't have to inform the batsman, but it is part of the etiquette of the game that they do.

Over rates at professional level are already crap - how long before it gets substantially worse because bowlers are stopping in their delivery stride every other ball to try and catch out the batsman, even if there is no evidence that they are stealing a few inches.

The powers-that-be can nip this in the bud by making the giving of a formal warning, either by the fielding captain, or the umpires, part of the rules. If the batsman then chooses not to take steps to mitigate the problem then that is up to them and they run the risk of losing their wicket due to their own choices.
 

Khukuri said:
I like how everyone glosses over the fact that if someone was mankaded it was definitely at least the second time they tried to cheat in that game. Once when the bowler noticed it was happening, and once when they were ran out. The rule book is warning enough. If you play the game, you should know not to cheat. And if you still cheat, then no additional warning is needed before you get punched in the mouth

All this negativity around the bowler does is give the cheating shitcunts the confidence that they can flout the rules, secure in the knowledge that most bowlers will refrain from giving them what’s rightfully coming their way because of some bullshit one-sided morality code.
Or maybe we are all looking at it wrong.

Maybe we should have the attitude that baseball does, where stealing a base is just part and parcel of what you do. You try to gain an additional base, and you suffer the consequences if you are not successful. No stigma attached to either action. the point of the game is to score runs so do it by whatever means necessary, just understand the risks
Click to expand...
Describing it as cheating is ridiculous. This entire post is absolute drivel in all honesty.
 
Jap Stammer said:
Do you play the game? It doesn't sound like it to me.

A lot of what you are saying is correct according to the strict rules, but the game of cricket is more than just about the rules. There's an etiquette to it that is, or should, be understood by everyone who plays.

From almost the first time they pick up a bat, kids are taught to 'back-up' when they are at the non-strikers end. They are told that they have to make sure they are still in 'their ground' (behind the bowling crease) when the ball is released, but be in motion, ready to run, if necessary. Sometimes their timing is a little bit out and they get ahead of the bowler. Or they get distracted, or caught up in the moment, or their forward momentum carries them out of their ground even though they would have still been safe if the bowler had released the ball as normal. That is when it becomes one of the 'unwritten rules' that, once it is spotted, the bowler says to them that the next time they do it they will be run out. I personally think that this 'unwritten' rule should become 'written' - this will take away the controversy around this type of dismissal

To call some one doing this a 'cheating shitc@nt' for doing this is just pathetic and demonstrates a lack of practical knowledge about the game. There are far worse 'crimes' in the game than this.

I've played in a game where the wicket-keeper has crept up from his original starting position to stand up directly behind the stumps during the bowlers run-up. I don't know whether this is against the rules or not (the umpires did not say anything to him about it at the time) but it is not normal for a 'keeper to do this. It's a 'c@nt's trick' and he was not so politely informed of this by the batsman. Normally they will remain in the same position until the delivery is completed. If they then choose to stand up they will often advise the batsman they are doing so or do it early enough that he can see their new position. they don't have to inform the batsman, but it is part of the etiquette of the game that they do.

Over rates at professional level are already crap - how long before it gets substantially worse because bowlers are stopping in their delivery stride every other ball to try and catch out the batsman, even if there is no evidence that they are stealing a few inches.

The powers-that-be can nip this in the bud by making the giving of a formal warning, either by the fielding captain, or the umpires, part of the rules. If the batsman then chooses not to take steps to mitigate the problem then that is up to them and they run the risk of losing their wicket due to their own choices.
Click to expand...
As has been said a few times on these threads recently, the short run rule being enforced on a non-striking batsman being out of the crease before the ball is delivered would solve this overnight, especially if the run out rule was updated to say a batsman cannot be run out before the ball has been delivered.

Have the 3rd umpire checking it in professional cricket, at lower levels have the standing umpire doing it as best they can. It'll be obvious is a batsman is taking the piss, which at club level is the only time they'll gain a real advantage given how difficult it is to judge those final few millimetres on a run out when you don't have technology.
 
chelt_mackem said:
As has been said a few times on these threads recently, the short run rule being enforced on a non-striking batsman being out of the crease before the ball is delivered would solve this overnight, especially if the run out rule was updated to say a batsman cannot be run out before the ball has been delivered.
Click to expand...
It's a decent idea, but one that in real terms is only practical at elite level, where 3rd-umpire technology is in use.

At all other levels it will cause more issues than enough, and with the sport itself already struggling to attract new amateur players in certain countries - the UK included - the last thing needed is another way to p!ss off players.

I'm honestly of the opinion that the majority of players, when backing up, do not take the piss and that if every ball was analysed it would be the case that most are still in their ground at the normal point of release by the bowler. It's their forward momentum that then carries them out of their ground when the bowlers stops their natural action.

The only other solution is to do away with the notion of the non-striking batsman 'backing-up'.

Yahrba said:
You must be logged on to see external links

Hes right like , there will be blows struck on the square and in the bar .
Click to expand...

^Absolutely this.
 
I am Boss said:
It’s going to creep in to the local leagues it’s becoming so frequent and I’m going to get a ban for wrapping my bat round a shithouse bowlers heed
Click to expand...
Bomarsund were using it in the 70s
SuperSub said:
Not a fan of the Mankad especially if the non-striker hasn't been given a warning beforehand. All of this can be solved if they stop it being a form of dismissal, but have the tv umpire monitor the line and penalise the batting side by using the short run rule if the non-striker has left the crease before the ball is bowled
Click to expand...
How will this be policed in club cricket ?

How can an umpire watch for an overstepping no ball and a batsman leaving his crease at the same time ? Only Marty Feldman could manage that
 
Last edited:
Eggman said:
Bomarsund were using it in the 70s

How will this be policed in club cricket ?

How can an umpire watch for an overstepping no ball and a batsman leaving his crease at the same time ? Only Marty Feldman could manage that
Click to expand...

You could say the current ruling is far too difficult to police in club cricket. The MCC rules say the non-striker can be run out if they are out of their ground up until the moment the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball. That means when the arm gets to its highest point.

Not many club cricket umpires can watch the front foot, non-striking batsman leaving the crease and the bowlers arm at the same time
 
SuperSub said:
You could say the current ruling is far too difficult to police in club cricket. The MCC rules say the non-striker can be run out if they are out of their ground up until the moment the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball. That means when the arm gets to its highest point.

Not many club cricket umpires can watch the front foot, non-striking batsman leaving the crease and the bowlers arm at the same time
Click to expand...
Most club cricket umpires struggle just watching for no balls to be honest.
 
Surprised we haven't had issues already in club cricket based on some of the consensus on here
Also love butchers analogy on it ha
 
redandwhiterob said:
Anyway local leagues could issue a directive of sorts and nip it in the bud?
Click to expand...
They could - but it would only be advisory as it's currently not against any of the rules to 'mankad' someone.

The umpire would still have to give the batsman out regardless of whether or not a warning was given, or if it was a breach of a 'local' agreement/guideline. The only other way would be for the fielding captain to withdraw the appeal.

There are a lot of teams out there who simply wouldn't do it/let it happen but there will always be one who will, especially if the team is under the pump at the time.
Jap Stammer said:
They could - but it would only be advisory as it's currently not against any of the rules to 'mankad' someone.

The umpire would still have to give the batsman out regardless of whether or not a warning was given, or if it was a breach of a 'local' agreement/guideline. The only other way would be for the fielding captain to withdraw the appeal.

There are a lot of teams out there who simply wouldn't do it/let it happen but there will always be one who will, especially if the team is under the pump at the time.
Click to expand...
They could bring in a rule similar to that for underam bowling whereby it is not allowed unless agreed beforehand by both teams. That might put a stop to it as no-one would like to be the c@nt who wanted it allowed - word would soon get round the local leagues about who it was.
Yahrba said:
Umpires call the skippers in " just so you know , im giving mankads if you appeal them. I wouldnt appeal them if i were you "
Click to expand...

They could bring in a rule similar to that for underam bowling whereby it is not allowed unless agreed beforehand by both teams. That might put a stop to it as no-one would like to be the c@nt who wanted it allowed - word would soon get round the local leagues about who it was.
 
Last edited:
Jap Stammer said:
It's a decent idea, but one that in real terms is only practical at elite level, where 3rd-umpire technology is in use.

At all other levels it will cause more issues than enough, and with the sport itself already struggling to attract new amateur players in certain countries - the UK included - the last thing needed is another way to p!ss off players.

I'm honestly of the opinion that the majority of players, when backing up, do not take the piss and that if every ball was analysed it would be the case that most are still in their ground at the normal point of release by the bowler. It's their forward momentum that then carries them out of their ground when the bowlers stops their natural action.

The only other solution is to do away with the notion of the non-striking batsman 'backing-up'.



^Absolutely this.
Click to expand...
It would be harder to police at club level, but at that level a non-striker is only likely to be mankadded if they're taking the piss already, so in theory the umpire should be well aware of the situation and calling the short runs.

Currently it's only at elite level where a mankad would work if he's millimetres outside the crease, and no one would say that was taking the piss at club level.

Removing the mankad but having a proper penalty in place for the batting team for being out of the crease solves both problems without pissing off large numbers of cricket fans in the process.
 
Jap Stammer said:
Do you play the game? It doesn't sound like it to me.

A lot of what you are saying is correct according to the strict rules, but the game of cricket is more than just about the rules. There's an etiquette to it that is, or should, be understood by everyone who plays.

From almost the first time they pick up a bat, kids are taught to 'back-up' when they are at the non-strikers end. They are told that they have to make sure they are still in 'their ground' (behind the bowling crease) when the ball is released, but be in motion, ready to run, if necessary. Sometimes their timing is a little bit out and they get ahead of the bowler. Or they get distracted, or caught up in the moment, or their forward momentum carries them out of their ground even though they would have still been safe if the bowler had released the ball as normal. That is when it becomes one of the 'unwritten rules' that, once it is spotted, the bowler says to them that the next time they do it they will be run out. I personally think that this 'unwritten' rule should become 'written' - this will take away the controversy around this type of dismissal

To call some one doing this a 'cheating shitc@nt' for doing this is just pathetic and demonstrates a lack of practical knowledge about the game. There are far worse 'crimes' in the game than this.

I've played in a game where the wicket-keeper has crept up from his original starting position to stand up directly behind the stumps during the bowlers run-up. I don't know whether this is against the rules or not (the umpires did not say anything to him about it at the time) but it is not normal for a 'keeper to do this. It's a 'c@nt's trick' and he was not so politely informed of this by the batsman. Normally they will remain in the same position until the delivery is completed. If they then choose to stand up they will often advise the batsman they are doing so or do it early enough that he can see their new position. they don't have to inform the batsman, but it is part of the etiquette of the game that they do.

Over rates at professional level are already crap - how long before it gets substantially worse because bowlers are stopping in their delivery stride every other ball to try and catch out the batsman, even if there is no evidence that they are stealing a few inches.

The powers-that-be can nip this in the bud by making the giving of a formal warning, either by the fielding captain, or the umpires, part of the rules. If the batsman then chooses not to take steps to mitigate the problem then that is up to them and they run the risk of losing their wicket due to their own choices.
Click to expand...

Excellent post that mate imo, the etiquette in cricket is what sets it apart from a sport like football.

The culture of football nowadays is to cheat as much as possible and deceive to achieve an outcome.

Cricket has a different culture and would hate for it to go down the route of football.

And accepting this would be a road in that direction
 
Unless the law has changed, the ball becomes ‘live’ once the bowler begins his run up.

If that were changed to be ‘released in the act of bowling’, that would remove the option of a Mankad.

Create a law amendment based on the previously discussed ‘short run’, then both issues would be solved.

Too simplistic, I know
 
My son always did when he bowled. He would stop in his delivery stride and hold the ball over the bails. He always gave the warning to the batsman. That to me is sportsmanlike behaviour. Just taking the bails is wrong and against the spirt of the game.
 
A non-striking batsman stealing yards is a liberty. A bowler is within the word of the law to run them out.

However, it is a method of dismissing a batsman which leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth, creating bad feeling between teams and players.

The issue is cultural. If the batsman doesn't try to take an unfair advantage, they don't get penalised. Instead of the cultural norm of treating a Mankad as a dishonourable, almost cheating dismissal, instead treat is as a bloody stupid way for a batsman to throw their wicket away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top