Picture the scene. After four days of cut and thrust in the Quaid-e-Azam Trophy, the outcome of the keenly-fought contest between WAPDA and Peshawar boils down to one beautifully delicate equation: four runs to win, one wicket remaining.
A knife-edge finish if ever there was one, made all the tastier by the batsman on strike, WAPDA’s Mohammad Saad, being unbeaten on 111 and there being one delivery left in the over.
To take the plunge and go for the ropes, ending the match in one fell swoop? Or attempt to pinch a single, defying the close-in fielders and give yourself potentially six deliveries to decide which way to place your stake?
And as for the bowler, Peshawar’s Taj Wali; do you try the time-honoured tactic of the bouncer to keep the specialist batsman on strike?
Or back your ability to take the final wicket by aiming for the stumps and putting the onus on the opponent to force the play. Decisions, decisions.
Well, none of the above actually came to pass.
This scenario didn’t get as far as the centurion rolling the dice and possibly crowning an outstanding performance with the added kudos of becoming the matchwinner. There was no bouncer or attempted yorker as the bowler in question sought to settle the matter in decisive fashion.
There was, however, the number 11 Mohammad Irfan, wandering out of his crease and the bowler, in a decisive manner of sorts if that is the best way to describe it, running him out backing up, or ‘Mankading’ him if you prefer,
High drama ended by the lowest of blows or a lapse in concentration effectively and ruthlessly punished?
According to the captain of the defeated side, it was the former: “We had a great game, fully competitive throughout four days, which saw both teams’ fortunes fluctuate. And suddenly this mankading spoiled it. Sportsman spirit should have been the top priority but the game didn’t end in a proper way. What’s the point of this law when the opponent team despite winning apologises to us?”
Now, I would expect the side on the receiving end to express feelings of anger or disappointment as to come so close and have it snatched away so brazenly is hardly going to encourage a shrug of the shoulders.
And, even if you subscribe to the view that the fielding side did nothing wrong, and according to the laws of the game they didn’t, it would take a cold heart not to have a trace of sympathy for the vanquished.
But those with a sense of humour may well have found comedy gold in the identity of the captain extolling the virtues of sportsmanship.
Salman Butt is renowned for a few things, actually just the one come to think of it, but the understanding of irony is definitely not on the list.
(Photo by Stu Forster/Getty Images)
The man who, in 2010 and as captain of his country, decided that corruption was the road down which to travel by engaging in spot-fixing and took money in exchange for information on when no-balls would be bowled, having the gall to condemn the sportsmanship of an opponent?
Laugh I most certainly did and apologies for those on the bus who were shocked out of their morning slumber by my unintentionally loud guffawing.
Here is a man who shouldn’t have been allowed to play cricket again let alone asked for his opinions on it but I doubt whether his brass neck would allow him to understand the ludicrousness of his statement.
I thought David Warner’s ‘Ashes is war’ (it’s not but I can see what he was trying to get at) comments were going to triumph in the ‘who can say the daftest thing this week’ competition, but Butt’s efforts put them well and truly in their place. Leave this to the professionals.
Sportsmanship does indeed have its place, and even in the most pressurised situations, but it really doesn’t need a convicted fraudster in its corner.
If Butt can achieve anything, maybe educating those a bit younger on the perils of illicit activity would be a more suitable pastime than unashamedly preaching about the very thing he was happy to trample all over.
Either that or stand-up comedy.
Brainstrust
Guest
if there is nothing wrong with it then why not do it more often then, Its not fair if everyone is getting away with it that its used in one particular instance. Its a matter of convention and the convention is that you shouldn't do it.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I get the idea of something being "disappointing for the viewers", but why does that have anything to do with the mankad. You've got the possibility of an exciting last over presented, a wicket falls, the game is over. That's the same regardless of the type of dismissal. Why is it any different from, say, a batsman defending the ball which goes to a close-in fielder who notices the batsman is slightly out of his crease so he throws down the stumps and runs the batsman out? And the bowler is running in thinking about all sorts of options for taking a wicket, based on what the batsmen have been doing. I was playing football (soccer) a few years back, and was up front, and I had noticed the keeper was regularly well off his line and kept that in mind. When I got the ball and new the defenders were a lot quicker than me, I looked up, saw that he was again and took the shot from about 10m inside the half, managed to lob the keeper and get the goal. Should I have spoken to the keeper prior to that and just said that I noticed him getting well off his line, if he keeps doing that and I get the chance I will try and lob him. And if I just do it without giving him a warning, then that's unsportsmanlike? It seems a ridiculous analogy, because nobody would ever consider that something you should do, rather the fact you've spotted the keeper regularly off his line gives you something you can exploit to potentially get a goal. But for some reason, something that's just as totally legitimate in cricket gets so looked down on and people expect you to give a warning and all those sorts of things.
Custard Cream
Roar Rookie
The only one I feel sorry for here is Mankad. Traduced for ever.
Rats
Guest
Here is the link to that match https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/feb/02/west-indies-zimbabwe-mankad-u19-world-cup Viewers were robbed off from an exciting finish.. If the bowler had warned the non striker instead of planning getting him out that way, he and West indies team would have won a thousand fans... Nothing unsportsmanlike.. But was very disappointing to watch
Rats
Guest
Absolutely nothing wrong in mankading.. We all seem to agree on that. But as a viewer, I feel uncomfortable when bowler looks for this opportunity.. Especially during crunch situations.. It's almost like bowler while running in thinking about doing this as an option.. Similar thing happened during U19 World Cup when WI beat Zim in the last over.. It would have been an amazing last over if not for mankading.. I would still never call it unsportsmanlike.. Because the non striker deserves it.. I would rather call it disappointment for viewers..
Don Freo
Guest
It's not even close to saying that.
Pom in Oz
Roar Guru
No mate. The law states before the ball is released. Your assertion that it is only controversial because people decide it is and if we all agreed it was ok it wouldn't be, is laughable. That's like saying if we all agreed that Trump was a great president he wouldn't be controversial. Duh!
James
Guest
If a bowler has to warn a batsman about what he is going to do does a batsman have to warn a bowler he is premeditating hitting a 6? Or less smart assery, does he have to warn a bowler he is going to switch hit the next ball?
James
Guest
Yeah its one of those 'rules' that doesnt make sense. The batsman is the only one doing something wrong as far as i can see by leaving his crease and trying to get a head start.
Don Freo
Guest
The only thing, Alec, is that no batsman cribs that ground accidentally. Every batsman does that intentionally. The "courtesy" would be to leave the crease when the ball is delivered. That would be "courteously" playing according to the rules.
slurpy
Roar Rookie
Good read Alec. Personally I've never had an issue with the mankad (as an offie who bowls straight breaks it was my best chance of taking a wicket) but I think there's a courtesy in warning the batsmen once. Usually this is enough to keep them honest in my experience.
matth
Guest
Hmmm underhanded. Just like those nasty leg spinners looking like it's spinning from leg to off and then it goes the other way! Ban the lot of the sly criminals I say.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Pretty sure the bowler has to do the mankad before they enter their delivery stride too. They can't bring their arm over to bowl the ball but hold onto it and run the non-striker out, they have to do it before they bring their arm over to start bowling. So it's probably more similar than you suggest. There's no run up in baseball to compare to. I just think it's only controversial because people decide it is. If everyone just said, "stay if your crease until the ball is released or you risk getting run out, deal with it" and then got on with the game, it would be fine.
spruce moose
Guest
If a warning is needed - it should only be the moment a new batsman arrives to the crease. First and last warning right there. There were batsman who cynically exploited the 'spirit of the game' and were essentially cheating. The person that I will gladly call out was Michael Hussey. He knew no bowler + captain would be bold enough to risk the 'spirit of the game' by mankading him and so he back up 3-4 metres ALL the time in ODI cricket. He was basically keeping stride with the bowler. I'd wager that if bowlers were brave enough to mankad him, Australia would have lost at least a 10 matches as a result. Hussey was an expert in sneaking a single here or there in the death overs, and then get himself on strike and club a few boundaries.
spruce moose
Guest
Or his OLED TV...which has given him a more colourful and vibrant perspective on things.
Pom in Oz
Roar Guru
Interesting observation regarding baseball, Chris. I did some fact checking on your point and found that the pitcher cannot pull out of a pitch once he's started (Rule 8). So, I'm afraid you're wrong there. Also, base stealing is very much part of their game and they even have stats on bases stolen (BS) and caught stealing (CS). Apparently, Ty Cobb stole base 892 times! So, very different here. I don't believe the two are comparable. I think mankading will always be a controversial rarity in the game, with both supporters (e.g. Don Bradman) and detractors like Darren Lehmann...
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I think no ball reviews would be fine if they reviewed every ball. But when umpires just keep failing to call no-balls and just let the bowler keep bowling them only to review the one where the wicket falls, I don't think that's right. Have the video ref just wanting the side-on shot as the ball is bowled every ball and if there's an infringement that's clear enough at full speed then he calls it to the on-field umpire straight away. Sure, if a wicket falls you can take a closer look on the close ones, but don't just review when the wicket falls.
Neil Back
Roar Rookie
Won't enter the debate on type or length of penalty but I absolutely take the authors point that Butt has no place commenting on others sportsmanship. Particularly so when he's defending someone both breaking the rules and seeking an unfair advantage of their own.
Matt P
Roar Rookie
Finally, someone mentioning the no-ball reviews. I've always had an issue with that - if the umpire didn't pick up that one, how many others have they missed? Especially since you can get a dismissal that wasn't one overturned, but the opposite doesn't apply.
Matt P
Roar Rookie
Nah, not life ban, 10 years with 5 suspended for good behaviour or whatever the equivalent is.