danthemanSAFC
Winger
Adam Zampa mankad’d Renegades’ Rodgers. Given not out as Zampa had bowled a complete action. Another day, another law debate.
You must be logged on to see media items
Last edited:
-
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.
Mankad at the MCG
- Thread starter danthemanSAFC
- Start date
rentaghost
Striker
I hate mankading and I hope zampa felt embarrassed after that. I do accept though that batsmen shouldn’t get away with leaving their crease early. If one short was called every time a batsman left his crease early it would solve the problem in an instance and there would be no point in a batsman leaving his crease.
Hard thing for the umpire to keep an eye on given he should be looking in a different direction at the same time for a no ball. If a player is warned I have no problem with a Mankad.
rentaghost
Striker
It’s just line technology and to be honest once that system is in place it’s utterly pointless for a batsman to leave his crease early. I think mankading is an awful, cheap dismissal and my second issue with it is once it’s accepted as normal you will have bowlers trying it on taking a chance of the batsman overbalancing and having unsuccessful mankad attempts. Be a poor spectacle imo
seaham ftm
Winger
Yep agreed, just make it a rule where a warning must be given to the batsman and the umpire notified and everyone is aware of the crack.
scotch
Striker
If you could draw a line whereby the batsman was deemed to be gaining too much of an advantage and then having the 3rd umpire calling it a dead ball I think that would be fairer.
There's already a line there, no need to add another for "benefit of the doubt" and whatever the rule is needs to be consistent across all forms so can't rely on the 3rd umpire making the decision.
scotch
Striker
The lines there but mankad is not a good look for the sport, they either revert back to batters staying behind the line and dead ball any delivery they dont or allow 'an advantage' to a point
I don’t see why he would? Batsman should stay in his crease until the ball is released.
I think line technology, putting it on the umpire etc takes some of the competitiveness out of the game.
Very simple way to avoid this type of dismissal.
What about the "cheating bastard" bowlers who deliberately stop mid stride to make the batsman leave the crease?
Common sense should prevail, give the batsman a warning if it is blatant then fair game after that.
It is hardly crime of the century so calling the cb's is a bit over the top imho.
rentaghost
Striker
Mankads for millions of us leave a horrible taste but also It will make a mockery of the game once it is more accepted. Bowlers running in taking a chance to see it a batsmen is overbalancing having failed mankads, time wasted. Line technology and one short given and you will never have a mankad and never have a batsman get a run by leaving his crease early. It’s the most blatant and obvious answer imo.
I just don’t see it that way. In the case of Zampa, it’s right to be not out imo as going through your full action and doing it doesn’t sit right, but then the batsman was halfway down the wicket which is a bit ridiculous and more of a mockery imo.
rentaghost
Striker
So one short and line tech solves it all in a heartbeat
Steak Pie
Striker
Like that idea, take away the incentive and immediately stop the problem.
So one short and line tech solves it all in a heartbeat
I just think it takes some of the competitiveness away from the players.
rentaghost
Striker
Fair enough but imo Mankad hasn’t been a significant issue in cricket ever until now and cricket at the top level is such a great competitive sport anyway. It’s just not needed and there is such a simple solution
It is, but an extra type of dismissal improves the game imo. For the same reasons as the modern 360 batting has improved the game.
It’s important that the players are allowed to be innovative to prevent the game from stagnating.
pavarotti1980
Striker
Mankad - the dismissal opportunity for shithouses. It may be in the rules but that doesn't mean the rule isn't shit. For 99.999999% of the time the batsmen leaves the crease just before the delivery, and this doesn't happen
The one in the women's Eng v India was particularly distasteful with the bowler grinning like a Cheshire cat afterwards like she was kind of hero
The one in the women's Eng v India was particularly distasteful with the bowler grinning like a Cheshire cat afterwards like she was kind of hero
rentaghost
Striker
Ah fair enough. I’m not sure mankad makes the game more exciting tho. The supporters of both sides were booing when it happened in the big bash game for example.
