Is Mankading Okay?

SriLanka

Active Member
Hi guys the new controversial topic they are talking atm in the cricket world is about mankading give me your opinion I think it is absolutely fine as long as the batsmen gets 1 or 2 warnings from the umpire.
 
Yep, totally agree.

If you are silly enough to keep doing it after not 1 but 2 warnings you deserve to get run out.
 
Zero warnings, there's a game on so why are you falling asleep at the wheel?

The attitude that the batsman deserves a warning is utter BS, since when did cheating or laziness become excusable?
 
Zero warnings, there's a game on so why are you falling asleep at the wheel?

The attitude that the batsman deserves a warning is utter BS, since when did cheating or laziness become excusable?
I agree, in baseball do runners on base need to be warned before the pitcher attempts to pick them off?
What's wrong with running 22 yards?
Does a batsman who throws the ball back carelessly need to be warned before an appeal is made for "handled ball"?
 
While I can see leftie and boogie's opinion on the matter. I wouldn't like to see this as a frequent occurrence in the game.

I still think there's nothing wrong with it...there should just be at least one warning.
 
There is absolutely nothing wrong with it because the batsmen was warned 2 times without this rule batsmen can run halfway down the pitch before the bowler delivers the ball is that fair?
 
I don't have a problem with it if it's indoor cricket as it is generally accepted there. But outdoor cricket is a different story, I don't like it and never have. Personally it's a pretty weak way to get a wicket, that said Buttler was silly enough to keep doing it but I can't say I'll ever agree with it happening.
 
Some of these responses confuse me, no bowler that I've ever met plans ahead of time to get a Mankad in outdoor cricket (or run out as one poster somewhere else rightly called it). Mankads are a response to the batsman cheating, if you believe in warnings or even not having Mankads at all then you are endorsing cheating.

Even if a batsman "didn't mean to do it" doesn't make it right, batsman also don't mean to get out hit wicket but it happens.
 
Hang on, it's not cheating for a batsman to gain an advantage by walking up. I didn't mean to suggest it was. But neither do I think it's cheating for the bowler to effect the runout.
 
Its fine. The tradition is a warning or two, and even that was followed in the latest example.
I wouldn't mind seeing the playing condition used at internataional level revised so that a batman has a little more leeway when the ball is not released. But the rules are the rules, and in this case even the spirit of the game was complied with in terms of warnings, etc.
 
Zero warnings, there's a game on so why are you falling asleep at the wheel?

The attitude that the batsman deserves a warning is utter BS, since when did cheating or laziness become excusable?
Absolutely right. Lets get over it or should we introduce a warning for the batsman over being stumped?
 
There should be no warnings. The rules are the rules. BUT the umpires should absolutely insist that the bowler doesn't contravene the laws by trying to mankad the nonstriker after landing in his delivery stride. Personally I think if the bowler has passed the stumps, he's missed his chance for the mankad.

Murali Karthik's run out of Alex Barrow should have been disallowed for example. That was pitifully poor umpiring to not spot that.

The other day a bowler stopped half way through his action and tried to "warn" me. I turned round and said "knock em off mate, you've entered your delivery stride so it can't be out anyway".
 
There should be no warnings. The rules are the rules. BUT the umpires should absolutely insist that the bowler doesn't contravene the laws by trying to mankad the nonstriker after landing in his delivery stride. Personally I think if the bowler has passed the stumps, he's missed his chance for the mankad.

Murali Karthik's run out of Alex Barrow should have been disallowed for example. That was pitifully poor umpiring to not spot that.

The other day a bowler stopped half way through his action and tried to "warn" me. I turned round and said "knock em off mate, you've entered your delivery stride so it can't be out anyway".
Today i was halfway through my action but the batsman had left his crease way before so i warned him some people like to do it but i agree that it is fair even if there is nous warning
 
You'd have to be a pretty rubbish bowler to go for a mankad anyway.

Well possibly, although if you were still halfway through your run up and the non-striker was already half way down the pitch I think you might do something about it.

Being picky about it and trying to catch someone out is a bit dickish. If the bloke is 6 inches out of his crease its really not going to make that big a difference.
 
Mankadong is okay and i will do it everytime i can until the batsman understands !! If bowlers go over the line its a no ball and a free hit why???
 
Well possibly, although if you were still halfway through your run up and the non-striker was already half way down the pitch I think you might do something about it.

Being picky about it and trying to catch someone out is a bit dickish. If the bloke is 6 inches out of his crease its really not going to make that big a difference.

I just don't think it's a good look for the game. I can understand the bowler not going through with the delivery if the batsman's miles down the track but personally I wouldn't be taking the bails off if it were outdoor cricket. I'd have to say if something like that were occurring the umpire/opposition captain would have to step in.

If this situation was in indoor cricket though and it was an important final then I'd consider it as it is much more accepted.
 
Back
Top