That’s not how to win a cricket match

Disgrace really.

I know it's in the rules (I've had it done to me once) but shouldn't the non striker nominally, although not in the rules, be given a warning?

 

Yep, usually given a warning.

 

Doesn't matter whether it's the mens team or now the women's team. Always controversy with the Indians.

 

I don't follow cricket, so apologies if I'm missing something.

When the Lionesses spent the final 10 minutes of the cup final in the corner, they were applauded for excellent game management. They played to the rules and took the trophy. Fair play to them.

If India haven't broken any rules today, what's the problem? And again, my cricket knowledge is limited, but a mankand (I had to Google it) is easily avoided... isn't it?

 

Simply because it is shocking sportsmanship , it is the unwritten law that you hold the ball against the stumps & issue a warning . I played the game for the best part of 45 years & only once did someone take the bails off & appeal but thankfully the captain over ruled the decision by asking the batter to return & what makes this worse today is that India had already won the series & should still have had enough in their locker to take the final wicket & win the contest in a sporting way.

 

Thanks for explaining.

 

Yeah.

It's poor form. Wouldn't have had a problem in the bowler had issued a warning beforehand.

 

Shithousery. The Indian captain should have intervened. That is If the decision could be reversed.

 

Just seen it. Massively out of order that and against the spirit of the game.

 

Shocking sportsmanship, it's like when a player intercepts a throw in which was supposed to be going to the goalkeeper in return for kicking the ball out after an injury. It's legal but frowned upon by fair.minded sportsmen.

 

Expect the unexpected. No rule was broken. England were 1/12 to win before they started batting, so the poor batting when victory should have been easy is where people should look.

 

I generally don’t have an issue with mankads. The one a few years ago where Jos Buttler was done by (I think) Sri Lanka, was perfectly valid because he was taking the Micky with how early he was moving to back up.

But that one today was poor. She never has any intention of bowling the ball and basically wrong footed the non-striker.

If you can do that, then you’ve taken the concept of backing up out of the game completely, because she could probably get a run out every ball.

 

This.

‘Mankad’ing is for me justified where the non-striker is taking the piss pinching yards at a time.

This one was so bad - her bat was grounded behind the crease when she was into her delivery stride beyond the stumps. She wasn’t stealing anything.

It was clearly just a bowler rattled after a bit of a tenth wicket partnership that intentionally went for it. Very, very poor if you ask me.

If that’s the way cricket is going I don’t want any part of it.

 

I was always taught to guard your wicket and crease until the ball was dead. She was out of her crease before the ball was bowled, and therefore by definition (intent doesn't matter) was gaining an advantage.

Schoolgirl error.

 

Sadly cricket is already gone tbf.

 

Can someone explain what happened, but in numpty terms? I've googled mankad but still not really sure whats gone off...

 

Mankad is the modern term for gonads.

 

Except, if you watch it again, the umpire actually calls dead ball when the bowler stops.

Also, if you’re guarding your crease until the ball is dead, you can only ever score boundaries.