Why That Particular Mankad Was Cheating 53


mankad

Even this picture does not give the idea of how close it was. The bat is moving forward (left to right), and you can see the stump has already moved forward a fair way. At the instant the stumps were broken, the bat was further back towards the crease. If it was out, it was by well less than a millimetre (on the line is out – you or the bat must be grounded behind).

Cricket is a game of marginal decisions. But this is different. At the moment when the bowler would normally have entered his delivery stride, the bat was still grounded well and truly within the crease. It is plain that the bowler had run up with no intention of actually bowling, but purely with the intention of completing a mankad. There was no early run by the batsman that triggered the mankad. The batsman was not attempting to steal an advantage. Had the bowler completed his delivery in the normal way, the batsman would still have had his bat grounded at the point of release.

I am not against all mankads on principle, but I do think that the accepted convention that the bowler gives a warning first if he feels the batsman is backing up too enthusiastically is a good one. Here no warning was given.

Zimbabwe needed two runs to win with six balls remaining and one wicket left. By this bit of cheating West Indies have knocked Zimbabwe out of the U-19 World Cup. I use the word cheating because I am convinced there was never any intention to bowl a legitimate delivery, while the batsman was plainly attempting to operate within both the spirit and laws of the game.


53 thoughts on “Why That Particular Mankad Was Cheating

1 2
  • John Spencer-Davis

    Hello Craig,

    It’s good to see you back, and I hope you are well.

    I know zero about cricket and care less, just pleased you are posting again. Think we’ve all missed you.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • Neil McKenzie

    I too couldn’t give sh1t about cricket (not a sporty person either), but hey, differ strokes…

    I’m not one of these patriotic Scots, I’m more anti establishment, so I been missing your political blogs as it’s easy to get disheartened (which is exactly what they want)

  • Clark

    Craig, good to see a new post from you. Mary has left us; I think it’s a bad loss. Many commenters here cheat frequently, and often seem to feel that they have a right to do so.

  • Tony_0pmoc

    Craig, Nice to see a new article, but I have never had any interest in cricket, except occasionally playing it.

    Here’s another bit of cheating. I hadn’t read this before today. Its very long and detailed. I may have read much the same as the final comment on here, by Tony, a few months ago. Maybe the “Tin-foil hat loony.. conspiracy theorist” who really didn’t care about the result, but cared a lot about corruption of the democratic process came to the correct conclusion within 12 hours of the Scottish Referendum. It was the lack of an Exit poll that convinced me, as well as observations of US elections, and the likely spread of such corruption to the UK.

    So there in little point in voting even in any EU Referendum.

    “How the Scottish Referendum was rigged”

    http://tapnewswire.com/2015/07/how-the-scottish-referendum-was-rigged/

    Tony

  • Ba'al Zevul

    It would have been perfectly legal between the hours of 0600 and 0615 GMT on a Wednesday if the wicket-keeper had been left handed.

    Mornington Crescent!

  • eddie-g

    I wouldn’t call this cheating. Cheating, for me, implies breaking the rules, and the WI bowler has not broken any rules here.

    I would also say that the batsman started to leave his crease before the bowler had entered his delivery stride, which is never advisable.

    However, in terms of the “spirit of the game”, which cricket loves to harp on about, there is no question at all that the bowler should be issuing a warning before mankading a batsman. Whatever the match situation, and however far out of his crease a batsman is, you warn first. A batsman leaving his crease before the ball is bowled is as much cheating as mankading is cheating. As in, they are not actually cheating, but it’s not something you want to see in the game.

  • Bob smith

    Glad to see you back Craig, and as a cricket lover I agree with you entirely. The umpires should be ashamed of themselves and the ICC should take action.

    I can’t say I am surprised that contributors to your blog are already off topic and will no doubt read in the next day or so that it is all a Zioist plot.

    Here’s a thought for contributors. If you have no interest in the subject, or no on topic comment, shut the fuck up and don’t post. My apologies for the colourful language but I, and I suspect many who read your blog, are sick to death of a few crazed sad sacks who use your generosity to post on anything and everything other than the topic you raise.

    My commiserations to the Scottish U19 side who got stuffed by the South Africans this morning. It is shaping up to be a great tournament although I am sad that the Australian Cricket authorities felt they couldn’t send a team to the tournament in Bangladesh for security reasons.

  • ------------·´`·.¸¸.¸¸.··.¸¸Node

    The striker is clearly offside. There are no defenders between him and those little goalposts.

  • eddie-g

    @Bob Smith

    I read the write-up on this match at Cricinfo, and to be fair to the umpires, they did what they could and asked the WI captain if he wanted to withdraw the appeal (note to any young captains out there – when an umpire asks this question, answer in the affirmative).

    The onus here is on the captain to make the correct decision, and he made a mistake. At age 19, I’m inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and say he can learn from this, but the ICC should be making clear what it expects of players in these situations.

  • TonyB55

    Also great to see you back Craig?

    – Has Mary left because the participants in this blog – have despite some legitimate points – as a whole demonstrated a failure to recognise the importance of 1st 2nd and 3rd wave feminism in woman’s/people’s lives.
    Or was it for another reason?
    I agree with John Pilger about the curse of identity politics and the misuse of a fake concern for women gays etc. by imperialism, etc. etc. BUT if I were female I would find your blog an unpleasant place to visit based on the last topic and the comments it elicited.
    Craig.
    I have in the past tweeted along the lines of some of the ‘legitimate points’ made by some of your nicer blogees but not in future. My tweets probably felt like the n word in US or the C word which I demand my boys not use (they ignore me).
    On one point – Assange – I am very supportive of him but perhaps some your geriatric male blogees like me [I’m 60] have to revise their views on sexual etiquette into the future.
    OK up to now males have assumed that if a woman sleeps with them then they will be pleased to be awaken by penetration. OK I/we/other blogees don’t wish to be thought of as retrospectively guilty of “rape”. But perhaps now given the incontrovertible sins of patriarchy and the terrible violence still meted out to women by men we can agree that we should tech ourselves and our sons that “assumed consent” for such a form of awakening is NO LONGER acceptable.

    Once again glad you are back – hope you are well.

  • Sixer

    Ba’al Zevul 12:43 pm

    I beg to differ. The Murray Variation requires the wicket keeper to be ambidextrous. This can only be overridden by a majority vote of the Blog Caucus.

    (I once played a game of email Mornington Chocolate – you had to get to the Cadbury’s Creme Egg – that lasted several years).

  • K Crosby

    Cricket is the English game and so the most corrupt of all; two umpires a telly umpire and a minder? It is cricket old chap. I like to interject when TMS is on with “Has money changed hands?” because even Geoffrey daren’t say it.

    That said, this was a one-day game so who cares, it isn’t real cricket.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    I beg to differ. The Murray Variation requires the wicket keeper to be ambidextrous. This can only be overridden by a majority vote of the Blog Caucus.

    I think you are confusing the Murray Variation, which applies only to Surrey wickets, with the Opmoc Free Pass (wicketkeeper must wear watch on left ankle) But I digress, though it is good to see a fellow idiot.

  • Dr William Grace (aka Habbabkuk)

    Have all cricket internationals which would normally be played in Pakistan or Bangladesh been moved to a location/locations in the Gulf?

  • Dr William Grace (aka Habbabkuk)

    Crosby

    I don’t think one should let one’s enjoyment of the great game of cricket be spoilt by the knowledge that there is probably some corruption around.

  • Republicofscotland

    “I don’t think one should let one’s enjoyment of the great game of cricket be spoilt by the knowledge that there is probably some corruption around.”

    __________________

    Habb, Yes I agree, I’d imagine all major sports have a level of corruption, human nature I’m afraid.

    Still when India and Pakistan get together on the cricket field, like they did in 2011 ICC world cup, thoughts of corruptions fade.

  • Dr William Grace (aka Habbabkuk)

    The following, from George Orwell, seems to match Craig’s post rather well.

    “Cricket is a game full of forlorn hopes and sudden dramatic changes of fortune and its rules are so ill-defined that their interpretation is partly an ethical business.”

  • Paul

    I’m with you entirely Craig. That is indeed not cricket. I hope the West Indies get well and truly thrashed in the next round.

  • Republicofscotland

    Habb old boy I couldn’t help but notice Dr William Grace added next to your usual handle with the letters aka attached.

    Tell me are you just fooling around as usual or are you that very person, I for one believe that you’re not that person, and that you’re acting mischievously.

    Is this the same Dr Grace, that you claim to be.

    http://weisenthalcancer.com/Home.html

    Thanks in advance for your candour.

  • Loony

    On the surface this article refers to a minor controversy in the sport of cricket. At a deeper, more fundamental level the captioned picture is a subtle representation of both Zionist aggression and a metaphor for the murderous rampage of Vladimir Putin.

    How long will it be before Israeli gunships launch hell-fire missiles against village cricket teams up and down the green and pleasant land of England. How long before Alistair Cook and AB de Villiers fall victim to Polonium 210 poisoning? These are the important questions posed by this picture of a seemingly ordinary wicket.

    Those who cannot appreciate this blindingly obvious message have likely been brainwashed by the MSM and are incapable of independent thought. Only immediate independence for Scotland can rectify this sad situation. And another thing…

  • John Goss

    I agree. The batsman was clearly not cheating and for Zimbabwe to go out on such a decision is very bad. I used to love cricket. And we did take it seriously right from the days when I played for St George’s on a pitch called “The Clam” up on the moors. The sheep and cows kept the grass down when we were not playing so if you were in the outfield you had to watch where you were treading or diving. Fortunately, having first class reflexes, 20/20 vision and tremendous courage I used to field in all the positions that mostly kept me out of the outfield, leg slip, first slip or silly mid on.

    Tough on Zimbabwe. The Windies have been caught cheating.

  • Bob smith

    Eddie-G, I agree with your points other than the umpires were clearly wrong. Craig’s photo and description show the batsman would have been in his crease and the bowler had no intention of bowling a ball. Their decision should have been not out. Post match, the match referee needs to look at the footage and take action.

  • Tony_0pmoc

    I apologise that none of this has anything to do with cricket, or watching paint dry.

    Its a special day, today, celebrated by numerous different cultures, under different names including the Pagan Imbolc, the Christian Candlemas, and the German/American Groundhog Day.

    The Groundhogs were the first band I ever saw live nearly 50 years ago. I was completely mesmerized. It was an English band playing rock/blues music all inspired from Black America. I have seen them multiple times including fairly recently, though its doubtful if they will play again.

    I also love the film Groundhog Day as it really appeals to my weird sense of humour.

    In theory, I shouldn’t like this. I find this quite scary, but artistically brilliant in every way. However, I think life especially for youth was much better in the 1960’s, and we can only blame the world we are leaving to our children and grandchildren on our generation. Their world should be so much better than ours was – but what does the music and the video express to you?

    This is the next band I am going to see tomorrow. This is our youth now….I hope the dancer Joshua Hubbard turns up on stage. Scary as hell. He reminds me of Clockwork Orange (far better in the theatre).

    The Scottish Band Young Fathers won The Mercury Prize.

    “Young Fathers – SHAME”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PdYvkaYsaU

  • eddie-g

    @Bob Smith

    This is what I have read. The on-field umpires asked if the WI wanted to withdraw the appeal. They did not, so the on-field umpires referred the decision to the third umpire. He reviewed the footage and gave the batsman out. (and nothing I have read has argued he was wrong)

    Unfortunately, your point about “no intention of bowling a ball” is irrelevant to the laws of the game. This is entirely within the grey area covering the spirit of the game, and the WI are to blame for not upholding it in this instance.

  • Kempe

    The umpires are clearly Neo-Con Zionists in the pay of the NWO and the angle of the stump is indisputable evidence of controlled demolition. The ball was obviously added on afterwards using CGI.

1 2

Comments are closed.