Its disgusting that media, and that too our own media counties to belittle our own great leganday allrounder late Vinoo Mankad, whenever a batsman at the non-striker end is runoutn by the bowler. Atleast show some respect to one who had done yemon service to Indian cricket.
Its disgusting that media, and that too our own media counties to belittle our own great leganday allrounder late Vinoo Mankad, whenever a batsman at the non-striker end is runoutn by the bowler. Atleast show some respect to one who had done yemon service to Indian cricket.
Sorry for posting out of context, but many must have noted that for sometimes now Rediff does not allow comments under ‘News” head. Is that being mandated by Election Commission as “Code of Conduct”?
When bowler runs to the wickets and do not bowl because he lost rythm or batsman is not ready he goes back and umpire signals as not bowled.
In this case too, Ashwin has run up to wicket and did bowling action but ball did not go out of his hands. so will that be called bowled and is he entitled to make the non-stricker run out ...!!!
Re: marked
by vikas korlekar on Mar 30, 2019 05:08 PM
Very valid question but this is not happening for the first time. This was the 10th incident since Bill Brown. In any case You can not justify the non striker leaving crease before the delivery of the ball.When a batsman is declared out if he knowingly or unknowingly comes out of the crease while playing a ball and within that period the wicket keeper dislodges the wicket if the ball in his hands, I feel running out the non striker before the bowling action is complete is also legal. When it is written in the laws of cricket there is no question of spirit of the game and ethics. Another thing is this is the second time Buttler got out in this manner, why he can not follow the rules??? Why we should not call it as miss behaving?? or disobeying the rules?? Why only Asians have a restrictions to follow the rules?? About the ball, whether it is to be counted or not is a technicality which the scorers have to see what is done in previous 9 cases the same will be followed here.
Re: marked
by vikas korlekar on Mar 30, 2019 05:12 PM
Very valid question but this is not happening for the first time. This was the 10th incident since Bill Brown. In any case You can not justify the non striker leaving crease before the delivery of the ball.When a batsman is declared out if he knowingly or unknowingly comes out of the crease while playing a ball and within that period the wicket keeper dislodges the wicket if the ball in his hands, I feel running out the non striker before the bowling action is complete is also legal. When it is written in the laws of cricket there is no question of spirit of the game and ethics. Another thing is this is the second time Buttler got out in this manner, why he can not follow the rules??? Why we should not call it as miss behaving?? or disobeying the rules?? Why only Asians have a restrictions to follow the rules?? About the ball, whether it is to be counted or not is a technicality which the scorers have to see what is done in previous 9 cases the same will be followed here.
R Ashvin had started his bowling action and at that time also J Buttler was inside the line. Suddenly R Ashvin stops for no reason and plucks the bails. If we support this decision all bowlers would try to attempt the same. I feel cricket is an royal game and such actions will spoil the image of the game. He should have warned the player. I remember Kapil Dev had once warned a player for the same reason. Please Ban R Ashvin from IPL 2019.
Re: Worst decision
by M. Iyer on Mar 26, 2019 01:00 PM
I think when the batsman does not risk standing out of the crease for fear of being stumped by wicket keeper, the non-striker too should be wary of the bowler for running him out if he does not keep his crease. When a striker does not require a warning why would a non-striker demand a warning. There is no surprise element or camouflage action in this. It is a well known risk, which every batsman should guard him/herself. Mankading is thus justified.
Re: Worst decision
by M. Iyer on Mar 26, 2019 01:00 PM
I think when the batsman does not risk standing out of the crease for fear of being stumped by wicket keeper, the non-striker too should be wary of the bowler for running him out if he does not keep his crease. When a striker does not require a warning why would a non-striker demand a warning. There is no surprise element or camouflage action in this. It is a well known risk, which every batsman should guard him/herself. Mankading is thus justified.
Re: Worst decision
by M. Iyer on Mar 26, 2019 01:00 PM
I think when the batsman does not risk standing out of the crease for fear of being stumped by wicket keeper, the non-striker too should be wary of the bowler for running him out if he does not keep his crease. When a striker does not require a warning why would a non-striker demand a warning. There is no surprise element or camouflage action in this. It is a well known risk, which every batsman should guard him/herself. Mankading is thus justified.
Re: Worst decision
by M. Iyer on Mar 26, 2019 01:00 PM
I think when the batsman does not risk standing out of the crease for fear of being stumped by wicket keeper, the non-striker too should be wary of the bowler for running him out if he does not keep his crease. When a striker does not require a warning why would a non-striker demand a warning. There is no surprise element or camouflage action in this. It is a well known risk, which every batsman should guard him/herself. Mankading is thus justified.
Re: Worst decision
by M. Iyer on Mar 26, 2019 01:00 PM
I think when the batsman does not risk standing out of the crease for fear of being stumped by wicket keeper, the non-striker too should be wary of the bowler for running him out if he does not keep his crease. When a striker does not require a warning why would a non-striker demand a warning. There is no surprise element or camouflage action in this. It is a well known risk, which every batsman should guard him/herself. Mankading is thus justified.
Re: Worst decision
by ajay bhathire on Mar 26, 2019 01:13 PM
My point is this, 1. Cricket rules say that, bowler is entitled to run batsman out, if he is backing up too far. Provided bowler is doing it as per the rule or guidelines. I believe that this itself serves as a sufficient warning to the batsman. There is no need for bowler for waring him Because, if he believes that he is entitled to a warning, he can keep on doing it till bowler warns him. Which gives an unfair advantage to batsman. Otherwise, in every new batsman who comes in, or every new match the batsman can do it till his warned
2. I didnot watch the match or video. But I can say that, if Ashwin ran him out as per the rules, he was well within his rights. This warning thing should stop
Re: Worst decision
by ajay bhathire on Mar 26, 2019 01:13 PM
My point is this, 1. Cricket rules say that, bowler is entitled to run batsman out, if he is backing up too far. Provided bowler is doing it as per the rule or guidelines. I believe that this itself serves as a sufficient warning to the batsman. There is no need for bowler for waring him Because, if he believes that he is entitled to a warning, he can keep on doing it till bowler warns him. Which gives an unfair advantage to batsman. Otherwise, in every new batsman who comes in, or every new match the batsman can do it till his warned
2. I didnot watch the match or video. But I can say that, if Ashwin ran him out as per the rules, he was well within his rights. This warning thing should stop
Re: Worst decision
by ajay bhathire on Mar 26, 2019 01:13 PM
My point is this, 1. Cricket rules say that, bowler is entitled to run batsman out, if he is backing up too far. Provided bowler is doing it as per the rule or guidelines. I believe that this itself serves as a sufficient warning to the batsman. There is no need for bowler for waring him Because, if he believes that he is entitled to a warning, he can keep on doing it till bowler warns him. Which gives an unfair advantage to batsman. Otherwise, in every new batsman who comes in, or every new match the batsman can do it till his warned
2. I didnot watch the match or video. But I can say that, if Ashwin ran him out as per the rules, he was well within his rights. This warning thing should stop
Re: Worst decision
by ajay bhathire on Mar 26, 2019 01:13 PM
My point is this, 1. Cricket rules say that, bowler is entitled to run batsman out, if he is backing up too far. Provided bowler is doing it as per the rule or guidelines. I believe that this itself serves as a sufficient warning to the batsman. There is no need for bowler for waring him Because, if he believes that he is entitled to a warning, he can keep on doing it till bowler warns him. Which gives an unfair advantage to batsman. Otherwise, in every new batsman who comes in, or every new match the batsman can do it till his warned
2. I didnot watch the match or video. But I can say that, if Ashwin ran him out as per the rules, he was well within his rights. This warning thing should stop
Re: Worst decision
by Mahindra Prasad on Mar 26, 2019 01:15 PM
I second your opinion sir. Being a captain of KXIP, he should have not done that and moreover Buttler was just few inches outside the crease and was not running away for a run
Re: Worst decision
by sunil vaidya on Mar 26, 2019 01:47 PM
how is it ashwins fault...it is umpires fault to give him the batsman out...one should ban the umpire not the one who makes the appeal...
of course the decision might have been given to the third umpire to make
Re: Worst decision
by M. Iyer on Mar 26, 2019 12:57 PM
I think when the batsman does not risk standing out of the crease for fear of being stumped by wicket keeper, the non-striker too should be wary of the bowler for running him out if he does not keep his crease. When a striker does not require a warning why would a non-striker demand a warning. There is no surprise element or camouflage action in this. It is a well known risk, which every batsman should guard him/herself. Mankading is thus justified.
Re: Worst decision
by M. Iyer on Mar 26, 2019 12:58 PM
I think when the batsman does not risk standing out of the crease for fear of being stumped by wicket keeper, the non-striker too should be wary of the bowler for running him out if he does not keep his crease. When a striker does not require a warning why would a non-striker demand a warning. There is no surprise element or camouflage action in this. It is a well known risk, which every batsman should guard him/herself. Mankading is thus justified.
Re: Worst decision
by M. Iyer on Mar 26, 2019 12:58 PM
I think when the batsman does not risk standing out of the crease for fear of being stumped by wicket keeper, the non-striker too should be wary of the bowler for running him out if he does not keep his crease. When a striker does not require a warning why would a non-striker demand a warning. There is no surprise element or camouflage action in this. It is a well known risk, which every batsman should guard him/herself. Mankading is thus justified.
Re: Worst decision
by M. Iyer on Mar 26, 2019 12:58 PM
I think when the batsman does not risk standing out of the crease for fear of being stumped by wicket keeper, the non-striker too should be wary of the bowler for running him out if he does not keep his crease. When a striker does not require a warning why would a non-striker demand a warning. There is no surprise element or camouflage action in this. It is a well known risk, which every batsman should guard him/herself. Mankading is thus justified.
Re: Re: Worst decision
by prasanna kumar raju on Mar 26, 2019 01:19 PM
Mr.Bhupesh, know the Rules of the game then talk. Banning Ashwin this is an extremely outlandish feeling. Get well soon.
Re: Re: Worst decision
by Mahindra Prasad on Mar 26, 2019 01:32 PM
Then, it is better that each and every bowler do "Mankading" and the no strikers will soon realize it and be cautious in future. Isn't it a great idea Mr Iyer Sir?
