International Cricket, Autumn/Winter 2022-2023

[Etienne]

Okay.

I don't think it's been wholly unproductive as your assertion that "[Dean] wouldn't have been out if she had waited for Sharna to deliver the ball" prompted me to look again and realise I was wrong on that point. I still think that there is a grey area between "batter is trying to gain an advantage by backing up before the bowler has delivered" when it is totally appropriate to run them out and "batter is trying to leave their crease at the moment the ball is released and only fails to do so because the bowler does something unexpected".

[ursus arctos]

I think you are only in a minority among English people who follow cricket (and perhaps only those of your age and older).

[Etienne]

Incidentally, I try not to use the term Mankaded or Mankading because a) it feels like it reduces a great cricketer to that one incident, b) he wasn't the first, or even the most high profile to do it (that's probably Ashwin to Buttler) and c) Rahul Mankad has said his father disliked the term.

[San Bernardhinault]

Okay.

I don't think it's been wholly unproductive as your assertion that "[Dean] wouldn't have been out if she had waited for Sharna to deliver the ball" prompted me to look again and realise I was wrong on that point. I still think that there is a grey area between "batter is trying to gain an advantage by backing up before the bowler has delivered" when it is totally appropriate to run them out and "batter is trying to leave their crease at the moment the ball is released and only fails to do so because the bowler does something unexpected".

I genuinely don’t think it matters. She’s allowed to start running at any point, and can be run out at any point. The bowler doing something unexpected should be one of the weapons in her arsenal. The batswoman leaving her crease at any point is an opportunity. You only run when you know it’s safe. If you don’t know it’s safe you know you’re taking a risk. There’s no magic in creeping out of your ground after the ball is delivered. The bowler can tap a return drive on to the stumps. I see no difference. You’re out of your ground taking advantage.

[Satchmo Distel]

Incidentally, I try not to use the term Mankaded or Mankading because a) it feels like it reduces a great cricketer to that one incident, b) he wasn't the first, or even the most high profile to do it (that's probably Ashwin to Buttler) and c) Rahul Mankad has said his father disliked the term.

I'm not sure what shorthand term you'd replace it with. I agree that there's really no debate here as to the sporting nature of the dismissal, given everyone knows the rules before the start of play (and given, as noted above, that you should expect it in T20). It's no different than, say, getting a stumping by firing a wide down the legside.

[Etienne]

I genuinely don’t think it matters. She’s allowed to start running at any point, and can be run out at any point. The bowler doing something unexpected should be one of the weapons in her arsenal. The batswoman leaving her crease at any point is an opportunity. You only run when you know it’s safe. If you don’t know it’s safe you know you’re taking a risk. There’s no magic in creeping out of your ground after the ball is delivered. The bowler can tap a return drive on to the stumps. I see no difference. You’re out of your ground taking advantage.

I think the equivalent is that you're not allowed when fielding to pretend you have got the ball when you haven't and there's a five run penalty if you do. To my mind Sharma pretended to bowl just long enough for Dean to leave her crease. I don't see a difference. I've also seen a clip which looks to me like Kaur instructing Sharma to do it, which would confirm the premeditation, but also suggest that Dean had been regularly backing up too far.

[Tony C]

Regardless of one’s view of the ethics of the situation the real shame here is that the painfully inevitable “outrage” headlines dominate the coverage of the match, with more column inches and social media debate seemingly given to it than to the series as a whole. The fact that the incident was barely relevant in the context of India’s total domination appears to have been conveniently overlooked. Harmanpreet Kaur’s brilliance is all very well but a raging row over the game’s sacrosanct moral code really gets people involved.

[ad hoc]

Which is why is it was a total mistake to do it. India were going to win the match anyway, and they'd already won the series so to finish it that way means that the shine is taken off the achievement (rightly or wrongly, it doesn't matter)

[Tony C]

I’m sure Sharma wishes she hadn’t done it now.

[Tony C]

In a lovely piece of symmetry my Instagram page has just shown a photo from today’s match in which Charlie Dean, bowling for Southern Vipers, stops during her run up to give a warning to the non striking batter for backing up beyond the crease.

[ursus arctos]

I found this to be a thoughtful analysis, particularly the discussion of how Deepti often walks through the crease, where her arm was when Dean stopped watching, and the evolution of the law.

I also hadn't realised that "normally" is in the Law, which meant that I was more dismissive of Etienne than his comment deserved. Apologies.

[diggedy derek]

ta for that

[Satchmo Distel]

They imply that the 3rd umpire was negligent in not checking that provision in the law.

Norcross seems to feel the cold a lot more than Collins.

[ursus arctos]

It strikes me as a very subjective test for the third umpire, especially with a bowler like Deepti, given the variations in her deliveries,

[ursus arctos]

Ah, we've got another good one in the India-Australia T20I.

Glenn Maxwell tries for a questionable two.

Axar Patel's throw from the deep is on target, but Dinesh Karthik makes contact with the stumps with his gloves before the ball arrives.

That contact triggers the lights and moves one of the stumps, but appears not to fully dislodge both bails,

The ball the hits the wicket dislodging the other bail. Maxwell still hasn't made his ground and is given out,

I think that this is the technically correct decision, but it sure looked bizarre on the replays,

FdgbyJuaIAAkxxw?format=jpg&name=medium.jpg

[Etienne]

I also hadn't realised that "normally" is in the Law, which meant that I was more dismissive of Etienne than his comment deserved. Apologies.

No worries.

[Satchmo Distel]

Jarrod Kimber has written this week that the bails will soon be taken out of the game so that it will become purely a call on the technology; in future cases that repeated the above, the out would be overturned.

https://wickets.substack.com/p/the-f...Freemail=false

[ursus arctos]

Ta

It seems to me that while the concept of a "normal" release point can work for the majority of professional bowlers, applying it to bowlers with variable actions poses problems,

[Etienne]

Yes, I think that Collins and Norcross are right and the next revision will try to address that ambiguity.

[ursus arctos]

https://twitter.com/mccofficial/status/1574011091134324737?s=21&t=6sS6pzd_GOKOA7zpAbY5LA

MCC's message to non-strikers continues to be to remain in their ground until they have seen the ball leave the bowler's hand. Then dismissals, such as the one seen yesterday, cannot happen.

Whilst yesterday was indeed an unusual end to an exciting match, it was properly officiated and should not be considered as anything more.

[Hot Orange]

Was just about to post that. Very level-headed of them. Presumably they hadn't cracked open the sherry yet.

[Etienne]

At the risk of relitigating everything, if that's what they think the law should be, perhaps they should have written that.

[ursus arctos]

I have the sense that they feel that they have

[diggedy derek]

England in Karachi are nine down and need five runs.

[diggedy derek]

Hat-trick ball is not out after a DRS review, four runs needed with seven balls remaining...