Mankad

There should be no stigma about this legitimate way to dismiss a batsman who is trying to gain a head start. With Bradman as character witness, Mankad needs ...

If not, why is the provision there which enables the bowler to run him out? More closely scrutinised, the mood of the meeting is changing. Please don’t try to tell me that he’s not in the game and therefore not fair game. In 2000, the MCC tried to codify it in a preamble to the updated laws. “For the life of me, I can’t understand why [the press] questioned his sportsmanship. “This coming from a batter – we should just stay in the crease.” It shouldn’t be of any account when a batsman is taking liberties, only that he is taking them. Implicit in this is the idea that if they don’t get it right, they are liable to be fairly run out under the laws of the game. Hussey said it was only meant to be an admonition to the batsman not to exercise crease creep “because at the end of the innings, that’s generally what happens”. If anything, it is the non-striker who comes nearer to infringing the spirit of cricket in a Mankad. The spirit of cricket is a nebulous thing anyway. That is, he failed on a technicality, not a test of character.