Women’s cricket has been the cynosure of all eyes in the last couple of days. It was all due to Deepti Sharma deciding to run out England’s Charlie Dean at the non-strikers’ end for backing up too much.
Dean, with her fighting knock of 40, was threatening to take the game away from India despite the visitors having England on the mat in the third ODI at Lord’s. With 17 runs required and five overs to go, Deepti showcased excellent game awareness, running Dean out in her bowling stride.
While rare, running a batter out for backing up is well within the ambit of cricket laws. Dean had allegedly moved early 72 times in the contest before Deepti resorted to the particular mode of dismissal. Yet the whole incident has snowballed into a controversy with England cricketing fraternity accusing India of disregarding the ‘spirit’ of the game.
Deepti’s claim that Dean was warned before her dismissal in the match and England captain heather Knight’s counterclaims accusing the Indian cricketer of ‘lying’ has only added more spice to the whole commotion.
Just for the sake of clarity, let’s have another look at the laws…
‘Mankading’ as it is commonly known comes from India’s Vinoo Mankad who famously ran out Australia’s Bill Brown in the same manner in the 1947 Sydney Test. Sportsmanship and spirit of game aside, it is a legal act and the provision to do so has been laid out in the laws of the game.
Law 41.16.1 says: “If the non-striker is out of his/her ground 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.”
In fact, after the Lord’s incident, the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), the custodian of the Laws, reiterated that Deepti did nothing wrong by running out Dean.
“MCC’s message to non-strikers continues to be to remain in their ground until they have seen the ball leave the bowler’s hand. Then dismissals, such as the one seen yesterday, cannot happen. Whilst yesterday was indeed an unusual end to an exciting match, it was properly officiated and should not be considered as anything more,” MCC’s statement read.
Why the controversy if the mode of dismissal is legal?
The aggrieved party in Deepti’s incident has largely been the English cricketer fraternity who have called the run-out an act against the ‘spirit of cricket’ despite it being legal.
Former England cricketer Lydia Greenway, who was on air during the dismissal, for Sky Sports, had this to say: “It doesn’t feel like the right way to win a game. They [India] are allowed to do it, they’re well within their right to get a wicket that way, but I would disagree with the way that it was managed.”
England cricketers questioned Deept’s sportsmanship before accusing her of deliberately delaying her delivery to run Dean out.
I find the debate of the Mankad really interesting. So many views from either side. I personally wouldn’t like to win a match like that, also, very happy for others to feel differently https://t.co/BItCNJZqYB
— Stuart Broad (@StuartBroad8) September 24, 2022
Well within the laws but not in the spirit.
Just my opinion… the law should be changed back to a warning system or penalty runs for excessive backing up for eg
— Sam Billings (@sambillings) September 24, 2022
Spot on. No intention of bowling the ball 🤬
— James Anderson (@jimmy9) September 24, 2022
This is despite the MCC changing the wording of the rule over the years to destigmatise the mode of dismissal. In 2017, an amendment replaced “Bowler attempting to run out non-striker before delivery” with “Non-striker leaving their ground early”. Also from 2017, a bowler is allowed to effect the run-out before bowling the delivery, earlier he/she was only allowed to do so before entering the bowling stride.
One of the major reasons non-striker run-outs face stigma was because the mode of dismissal found mention in the Unfair play section of the law. The MCC earlier this year decided to remove it from Law 41 (Unfair play) to Law 38 (Run out). The move has since been ratified by ICC.
Also, why drag Mankad into this always?
Mankad was well within his rights to run out Brown at the non-striker’s end as the Aussie was trying to take undue advantage. Yet, Mankad’s name has suffered ill fate over the years whenever a non-striker run-out happens as if what Mankad did was a wrong thing.
Legendary Sunil Gavaskar has been one of the biggest critics of using the term ‘Mankading’. In 2020, during the Indian Premier League (IPL), when Delhi Capitals’ Ravichandran Ashwin let Royal Challengers Bangalore’s Aaron Finch go with a warning, Gavaskar on air had said: “Ashwin tried to Brown Finch”.
Gavaskar’s reason for using Brown’s name instead of Mankad was that it was the Australian who was at fault in Sydney and not the Indian.
“Vinoo Mankad is a legend of Indian cricket, one of the great all-rounders who has won matches for India. And you use his name for, what is looked at by the cricketing world, as unsportsmanlike behaviour that’s not acceptable to me. I don’t want an Indian legend’s name to be disparaged. It baffles me why so many in the Indian media keep using that word as if they don’t have any respect for any Indian legends. As Indians, we should be the last to encourage such usage. That’s why yesterday on television, I said Ashwin tried to Brown him. Because Bill Brown was at fault in 1947 and not Vinoo Mankad,” Sunil Gavaskar had said in an interview to Indian Express.
When the mode of dismissal is legal, every reference to the name Mankad while reflecting on a run-out negatively only results in accusing Mankad of doing wrong which is a gross mistake. It’s high time the cricketing world starts to follow the laws of the game in letter and spirit.
How has Dean reacted to the dismissal?
The English cricketer was heartbroken and in tears after her dismissal. However, she was quick to recover from it as just the next day she was seen faking a run-out at the non-striker’s while bowling in the Rachael Heyhoe Flint Trophy final at Lord’s.
Charlie Dean today. Brought a smile to the face this did. pic.twitter.com/P447ysZfPM
— Charles Dagnall (@CharlesDagnall) September 25, 2022
Also, in an Instagram post, she said: “I’ll just stay in my crease from now on.”
View this post on Instagram
What can cricket learn from other sports?
While cricket tussles with the rules over moving quickly at the non-striker’s end before a ball is delivered, baseball is clear. It is within the rules for a runner to go from one base to another even before the ball is thrown by the pitcher or made contact with the bat.
It is within the rules for runners to be closer to the next base when there is someone at-bat. Runners who are trying to steal base, will thus aim to be as far in advance in order to complete the base shift.
Subsequently, it is legal for the pitcher and fielding team to try to catch the base runner off guard. Called ‘pickoff’, it is a moment when the pitcher throws a ball to the fielder who tries to tag the runner.
Baseball rulebook guides the scorers in such a regard: “The Official Scorer shall charge a runner as “caught stealing” if such runner is put out, or would have been put out by errorless play, when such runner (1) tries to steal; (2) is picked off a base and tries to advance (any move toward the next base shall be considered an attempt to advance); or (3) overslides while stealing.
Read all the Latest News, Trending News, Cricket News, Bollywood News, India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
from Firstpost Sports Latest News https://ift.tt/s8ZQorx
No comments:
Post a Comment