Print

[smokem]

Just read there was a "Mankading" in the game between Somerset and Surrey yesterday. It seems to have caused a bit of a furore. Apparently Murali Kartik had already warned the offending non-striker earlier in the over.

The article notes that "'Mankading' is regarded within the English game as being a breach of etiquette". Personally I don't see a problem with it as long as there's a warning prior to it happening (which there was). So I'm interested to hear what everyone here think.

Full story:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2012/content/current/story/580122.html

[Byo]

Quite simply its a disgrace - if Adams has to apologise for being in breach of what is perceived as sportsmanship then they are clearly in the wrong.

[charlie15]

Absolute nonsense, if Kartik warned the batsmen then it's the batsmen's responsibility to make sure he isn't backing up/leaving the crease to soon.  He's playing first class cricket so what does he expect!

[gdb19]

Absolute nonsense, if Kartik warned the batsmen then it's the batsmen's responsibility to make sure he isn't backing up/leaving the crease to soon.  He's playing first class cricket so what does he expect!

I agree, if a warning has been given then it's fair game - why should the batsman be allowed to get an extra advantage. The warning is key though, running out without the warning would be unacceptable.

[Byo]

That is if he was warned - comments from a former professional cricketer on the incident state that its something you think about but never do!! 

[Whispering Death]

if it had been any other player apart from karthik (Possibly de bruyn) there wouldn't be any fuss whatsoever!

its purely the fact it was a former player and at taunton!

[Red Ink Cricket]

I think it's the fact that it happened rather than who did it. By the reports even the umpires thought it was unacceptable but had to raise the finger after batty refused to withdraw the appeal. It's unsporting to run someone out like that and just shows what some teams will do for a point!

If it was acceptable then why doesn't it happen more often and why do Surrey feel thy made a mistake by doing it? Even the Surrey fans felt it was wrong! And for them to go against the team must say something!

[ppccopener]

similar thing with Collingwood when he ran out the NZ player after a collision with Widebottom a few years back. got asked 3 times to withdraw the appeal and did'nt then said he regretted it and would make a different decision if it happened again.
Batty was asked 3 times to withdraw.
the rules have changed it's true and this actually happened in a league match last week against our 1st team(upheld decision)

[Buzz]

I don't get the issue - it is within the laws, the guy was warned, what is the point of having laws if you don't follow them, otherwise you are just cheating.

I think the issue was that it was Kartik rather than the dismissal.

This is different to the Collingwood issue - in that case it was not the batsman's fault, in this case the batsman is tying to steal a run.

[ajmw89]

As a surrey fan, I don't feel it is wrong.  If Kartik had done it without warning, then yes, it would be wrong and against the spirit of the game, but Barrow had been warned.  Trying to gain an extra advantage is against the spirit of the game, so I think Kartik is within his rights to run the batsman out.

Batsmen can use modern technology for bigger, yet lighter bats to hit the ball further and gain an unfair advantage over a bowler and no one moans, yet whenever a bowler does something within the laws of the game that may be perceied as unfair, he gets crucified.

[ajmw89]

I also don't see how the bell issue last year can be compared.  The batsman thought it was tea, so were walking off and not trying to steal a run

[Byo]

I think it's the fact that it happened rather than who did it. By the reports even the umpires thought it was unacceptable but had to raise the finger after batty refused to withdraw the appeal. It's unsporting to run someone out like that and just shows what some teams will do for a point!

If it was acceptable then why doesn't it happen more often and why do Surrey feel thy made a mistake by doing it? Even the Surrey fans felt it was wrong! And for them to go against the team must say something!

Quite agree - as Steve Snell stated its something you think about doing but never do!!

[Red Ink Cricket]

All this mention of stealing a run- its not baseball, he's not stealing Second base! . Anyone know how far he was out? Can't imagine in a 4 day game he would have been charging down the pitch. Yes it is within the laws of the game but unless someone's actually taking the mick by charging down the Wicket then I don't think you should go through with the appeal. Warn them and that's it.

People also forget that by coming down the wicket more you open yourself up to bein run out when the balls hit back. Not much of an advantage really! By the sounds of it kartik was bein an (No Swearing Please) anyway and surrey were warned for chatting when he bowler was running in so that probably didn't help. Tres walked away twice on day one because the slips were talking! It's not club cricket

[FvanN]

If he was warned and then run out happy days he is out .. I hope to give it a go next season just for the fun of it... 

No warning should not be given out but if you have warned the chap then fair play to the bolwer... All is fair in love and war... 

[alexrickyponting]

I don't get the issue - it is within the laws, the guy was warned, what is the point of having laws if you don't follow them, otherwise you are just cheating.

I think the issue was that it was Kartik rather than the dismissal.

This is different to the Collingwood issue - in that case it was not the batsman's fault, in this case the batsman is tying to steal a run.

Agreed. It's the batsman's responsibility to make sure he isn't run out, and it isn't particularly hard to keep your bat in the crease until the ball is being bowled/bowler in delivery stride - can't remember the specifics of the law.

Considering the fact that the umpires told surrey off a couple of times after this dismissal I think that Batty's apology may well have been a case of someone saying "go out there and read this to the press, it'll calm things down" rather than a genuine apology but that's just how I've interpreted things.

Also, in regards to the warning by Khartik - It was earlier in that very over. Surely the batsman is going to be thinking about where he is in his crease for at least the next few overs! Being warned and doing it again a couple of balls later when the bowler is obviously still going to be alert is plain stupidity.