You’ve no doubt seen the vision by now. Cocksure Indian tweaker Ravi Ashwin bailing out of his delivery stride to dink the bails off, leaving non-striker Jos Butler bewildered, and soon enough, spitting chips.
Cue outrage.
“Disgraceful,” Tweeted Shane Warne.
“Out of order!” insisted Michael Vaughan.
“Gross,” reckoned Dad.
In his post-match press conference, Ashwin stated his defence in the his usual studied and practical manner.
“My actions were within cricket’s rules,” he said. “Can’t be called unsporting.”
And he’s right to a point. You are allowed to run out the non-striker before you deliver a ball.
In baseball, cricket’s mutant step brother, batters attempt to steal bases before a pitch is delivered. The pitcher is allowed to throw to the base rather than the batter.
The Mankad is cricket’s version, and after all, isn’t one base just a quarter of the way down a cricket pitch?
So why the outrage? If it is in the rules then why is Shane Warne on Twitter ripping Ashwin a fourth stump hole?
Shane Warne stuck up for his Rajasthan mate Jos Butler after he was Mankaded by Ravi Ashwin. (Photo by Bryn Lennon/Getty Images for Rajasthan Royals)
Because it is perceived as a dog shot.
Trickery at its most vile.
Cricket doesn’t like the dog shot.
A couple of years ago the ICC brought in the ‘fake fielding law’. A law designed to outlaw the practice of fooling the batsmen in to thinking you were closer to the ball than you actually are.
Now how many times had you seen that before? Not many I’d venture.
On top of that, if you can make a batsmen think you are closer to the ball than you actually are, then that’s probably their fault. But the ICC deemed it unbecoming and now it is gone. A five-run penalty. Thank you very much.
Mitchell Johnson had a more sprawling opinion on Ashwin’s action.
If baseball is the step brother then tennis is cricket’s weird snobbier cousin.
They too detest the dog shot and, as Mitch mentions, the underarm serve is the latest act to come under the public opinion spotlight.
Australia’s favourite self-destructive son, Nick Kyrgios, is the one responsible for the shot’s resurgence. It’s an ingenious way to counter the deep baseline approach employed by those unable to handle Nick’s greatest attribute.
It’s a perfectly legal and appropriate strategy, yet it divides the tennis community.
Somehow even Rafael Nadal’s famously twisted panties became further entangled over this issue.
So what to do about the Mankad? Does the game of cricket put its collective hands over its collective ears and wait for it all to go away again?
Most likely.
Though it is worth noting the match situation at the time of Ashwin’s Mankadding. Jos Butler was 69 not out off 43 balls and the Rajasthan Royals were 1/108 off 12.5 overs in a chase of 185.
With Butler flying, that total is more than within reach. The Royals would go on to lose by 14 runs. The Mankad was without doubt the turning point in the match.
Ashwin is a cagey operator and the captain of Kings XI. He claims his actions were instinctual, but the replay shows something different.
There will be no repercussions for Ashwin or Kings XI other than their stock falling in the eyes of people in the cricketing community.
So if your opposition is 0/150 and the ball is covered in dew and you notice that the batsmen who is tearing you apart is taking liberties with his crease, why the hell not?
It’s a batsmen’s game, right? The pitches are roads and the bats are tree trunks. Not to mention that fake fielding law.
So why can’t you punish a batsmen for leaving their crease prematurely?
From a very young age you know that if you are in your crease you are safe. The crease is your home. Are these batsmen too good for their homes?
If the Mankad were to be brought in and adopted, rather than shamed, it would add to the spectacle. A whole new dismissal.
Just think of the marketing!
There’s no doubt batsmen of today take way more liberties with backing up than they did in the past. The demand for quick runs is the highest it has ever been.
That is what makes the Mankad so appealing. It offers another contest between batsmen and bowler.
There’s the moment just before Ashwin whips the bails off where Jos Butler realises and he attempts to get back into his crease. An instinctual move to save himself because he knows he is danger.
Surely that instinct should be the subject of the law rather than ethics. The Mankad shouldn’t be viewed as a dog shot by the bowler but rather as a response to the batsman’s hubris.
Introducing the Mankad shouldn’t be about getting rid of batsmen backing up as the bowler runs in. It should be about re-framing what backing up should be about.
A calculated risk.
JamesH
Roar Guru
I don't disagree, Chris. The Mankad either needs to be embraced or removed altogether. Keep things black and white so there is no more debate. My question was just in the context of what an alternative approach might look like.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Why would you expect a suspension for a player who acted completely within the rules of the game to get a dismissal. Even those who have an issue with the delay in this particular mankad attempt, I don't see that as an issue for the player. It's actually up to the umpires to determine that he's delayed it too long and it should be dead ball rather than not-out. So if it's considered they made a mistake, or there needs to be further clarification around whether any delay like that is allowed, that's fine, but running a batsman out in that manner is completely legitimate.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
The point is, there's no crime. The batsman is entitled to be out of his crease at any point while the ball is in play, but it's done with the full knowledge that while you are out of your crease you are at risk of being run out. So the batsman is actually allowed to be 2 metres down the pitch when the bowler delivers if he wants, but he's taking the risk of the bowler realising that's what he's doing and running him out. I don't see the need to change the rules, just stop stigmatising the mankad and if batsmen are out of their crease let them get run out.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
It's because it's not cheating. It's completely within the laws of the game to be out of your crease while the ball is in play. It's a calculated risk effectively. You can be out of your crease at any point while the ball is in play, but in doing so you risk getting run out. Just like stealing bases in baseball is a legitimate move, but if you don't get it right and the pitcher catches you, you are out.
Beni Iniesta
Guest
Not sure what your point is but if an Australian did a "Mankad" I would expect Cricket Australia to hand down a 12 month ban to the offender. Although, they are pretty weak on penalties so maybe they wouldn't. It would just be a typical Cricket Australia "whitewash".
Paul
Roar Guru
"I’m just not convinced the Buttler-Ashwin episode was an example of that! On that James, I happy to agree with you.
JamesH
Roar Guru
Why isn't it enough? If the batsman leaves early then the first run he takes doesn't count, a bit like the 'one short' rule when running. Seems like a case of the punishment fitting the crime to me.
JamesH
Roar Guru
On that, I agree with you. If the batsman is leaving the crease early to get a head start then he takes his life (wicket) into his own hands. I'm just not convinced the Buttler-Ashwin episode was an example of that! ;)
JamesH
Roar Guru
I don't mind that (just lose a run like running one short) but it would need someone to police it. Umps have enough trouble picking up no balls without adding this to their plate! The square leg ump might be able to help but he's not really on the best angle.
Ad-O
Guest
The "warning" that a bowler is trying to get you out is when he's standing at his mark with a ball in his hand. LOL
Ad-O
Guest
Right. So when is India banning Ravi Ashwin for 12 months? Didn't think so...
DTM
Guest
I really don't think 1 run is enough of a penalty and the 5 run penalties are insufficient too. For a T20 it needs to be 10 runs, an ODI 20 runs and a test match something else. All deducted from the offending batsman's score. Lets see how much they keep doing it. PS this is not a shot at Butler because this particular case is debateable.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Spot On, there's many options to even the contest between bat and ball. Sadly the default setting seems to be keep making easier on the batsman.
dungerBob
Roar Rookie
Start calling "one short" and batsmen will soon stop I'd say.
Paul
Roar Guru
If the batsman didn't try and steal an advantage in a game where the bat clearly dominates the ball, this would not be an issue.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
It's a no ball if the bowler goes over the line, maybe the powers need to do the same with the batsman and deduct a run. How much does the game have to be in the batsman's favour?
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Can't we just give one big warning now, "don't leave your crease before the bowler delivers the ball or risk getting run out" and be done with it? The idea of this unwritten rule of the bowler having to give the batsman a warning before trying to get him out that way is just weird. No other dismissals require warnings.
dungerBob
Roar Rookie
It beats me why the umpires don't call one short when the batsman has obviously fudged a metre or two. I always thought the idea was to run 20 metres to make a valid run. If you're only running 18 or even less that seems a bit of a cheat to me.
dungerBob
Roar Rookie
Yes, that uniform is a shocker. I call it the pink stink.
josh
Roar Rookie
Ideal cricket score 10/0 (1.4)