ICC news June 6, 2014

Deter batsmen from backing up - ICC cricket committee

ESPNcricinfo staff
  shares 77

A few days after Jos Buttler became the first batsman to be mankaded in international cricket since 1992, the ICC's cricket committee has recommended non-strikers need to be "deterred" from backing up. The committee also supported the view, expressed by certain international captains, that there was no need for the on-field umpire to check with the fielding captain if his team's appeal stood in case the non-striker was mankaded.

"The cricket committee believes that a non-striker should be deterred from leaving his or her crease before the time the bowler normally delivers the ball," the committee's statement said. "It did not support a formal warning being introduced prior to a bowler being eligible to run out a non-striker, but it did support the view expressed by some captains that the umpires shouldn't ask the captain whether he wanted the appeal to stand before making a final decision. The law strikes a sensible balance between preventing a batsman from gaining an advantage, whilst at the same time preventing the bowler from unfairly seducing the batsman into leaving his crease by faking to deliver and then holding on to the ball."

The recent incident of mankading took place during the series decider between England and Sri Lanka at Edgbaston. In the 42nd over of England's innings, offspinner Sachithra Senanayake warned both Buttler and Chris Jordan for backing up too far. He followed up on his threat in his next over, mankading Buttler, who was nearly a yard out of his crease. The umpires declared Buttler out after Sri Lanka captain Angelo Mathews upheld the bowler's appeal.

The incident escalated immediately after, when England captain Alastair Cook expressed his disappointment and suggested Sri Lanka had "crossed a line". According to Mahela Jayawardene, Buttler had been backing up too much despite two warnings, leaving Senanayake with no choice but to run him out.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on June 9, 2014, 11:06 GMT

    so many people say mankading is unsportsmanlike and all that but not one has failed to justify why. I have heard descriptions saying its unusual and rare but that doesn't mean anything. so how is mankading unsportsmanlike anyone.

  • joeyinoz on June 8, 2014, 8:43 GMT

    Oh my goodness, there are a lot of bad ideas in this feedback! When will people realise that the laws, as they are, are perfectly fine. There is nothing unfair, unsportsmanlike or illegal about a non-striker backing up too far. Nor is there anything unfair, unsportsmanlike or illegal if a bowler runs him out for doing so. End of story. Move on people.

  • bouncer709 on June 8, 2014, 7:09 GMT

    @Nawas Azeez: before this, it happend iin 1992,,, guess who was the bowler to do this? Kapil dave.... So why you inidans blame srilankans to be unfair?

  • Kav11 on June 7, 2014, 17:54 GMT

    The rule should be followed as is, and to the letter, without warnings being given and umpires consulting the captain about it. After all no one asks a captain if he wants to let the ruling for a catch stand. And if it were followed to the letter, batsmen would learn, really quickly, that they shouldn't do it. After all the number of no balls in ODIs have gone down to almost none since the free hit rule was introduced, and a free hit is almost nothing to loosing a wicket.

    And to people claiming that it should only be used as deterrent to getting an undue advantage: With the technology today and batsmen being ruled in or out by mere fractions of inches, a foot is quite a lot isn't it?

  • on June 7, 2014, 15:09 GMT

    Sri Lankans,English,Australians,Pakistanis,Indians,South African as well as West Indians they are all matured cricketers and as such they themselves should understand what is wrong or what is right in cricket of these days. As far as Buttler's case is concerned, if he was crossing the line even before ball being balled and run taken it can as well be argued that is NO RUN. But no the umpires do not rule it as NO RUN. Every team as well as players should play cricket. Buttler was out and England lost the match and the series. The story ends there.

  • on June 7, 2014, 13:29 GMT

    @cricketisagame, I was thinking of trying to find a solution to the present situation since even though there is law, once the batsmen is Mankaded it raises the issue of Spirit of the Game into being. If the Umpire at first gives a warning to the non-striker, in the 2nd instance he can deduct some runs from the batting team and in the 3rd instance to declare the batsman out thus taking this whole issue of Spirit of the Game out of the equation. After few instances I am sure the batting team would be more careful and batsmen would wait till the ball is bowled to start their running.

  • cricketisagame on June 7, 2014, 11:30 GMT

    @Lalith Andrady, Your suggestion is not practical mate. How many times the umpire can recall the batsman? How many times a fast bowler in his run up can be asked to abort his delivery when he is already in delivery stride. If you recall, the present day captains are fined for slow over rates in all the formats. Do you think this will help when it comes to time and slow over rate..?? If there is slow over rate who should be punished? This will open a new issue which is open for discussion with no solution. The present solution of declaring the batsman out, when he is out of the crease for naked eye, without warning him or discussing with the fielding captain, is the best way.

  • on June 7, 2014, 8:26 GMT

    It is like a stumping at the non striker end, simple as that. Imagine a striker comes out of the crease the bowler bowls a wide and the keeper stumps him. It is a wide, ball not counted but the batsmen is out. Same law and principal applies here. This can be made official and for history sake it cane be call "Mankaded".

  • D-Coach on June 7, 2014, 7:01 GMT

    @Nawas Azeez Well Said. Rules are used for most unusual reasons and it hurts the spirit of game. No more gentlemen game since it's in the hands of businessmen.

  • on June 7, 2014, 5:59 GMT

    Well people have to respect the rules of the game.. They have to understand anything within the rules ( and mind you, there was a warning ) is perfectly within the spirit of the game..

    what happened to the good old days when non-striker will start walking well behind the crease along with the bowler,, with his bat in crease till the bowl is delivered... this gives the batsman moment to take the quick single and yet obey the rules by staying in the crease till the ball is delivered..

    Why do you have to start walking outside the crease even before the ball is delivered..

  • on June 9, 2014, 11:06 GMT

    so many people say mankading is unsportsmanlike and all that but not one has failed to justify why. I have heard descriptions saying its unusual and rare but that doesn't mean anything. so how is mankading unsportsmanlike anyone.

  • joeyinoz on June 8, 2014, 8:43 GMT

    Oh my goodness, there are a lot of bad ideas in this feedback! When will people realise that the laws, as they are, are perfectly fine. There is nothing unfair, unsportsmanlike or illegal about a non-striker backing up too far. Nor is there anything unfair, unsportsmanlike or illegal if a bowler runs him out for doing so. End of story. Move on people.

  • bouncer709 on June 8, 2014, 7:09 GMT

    @Nawas Azeez: before this, it happend iin 1992,,, guess who was the bowler to do this? Kapil dave.... So why you inidans blame srilankans to be unfair?

  • Kav11 on June 7, 2014, 17:54 GMT

    The rule should be followed as is, and to the letter, without warnings being given and umpires consulting the captain about it. After all no one asks a captain if he wants to let the ruling for a catch stand. And if it were followed to the letter, batsmen would learn, really quickly, that they shouldn't do it. After all the number of no balls in ODIs have gone down to almost none since the free hit rule was introduced, and a free hit is almost nothing to loosing a wicket.

    And to people claiming that it should only be used as deterrent to getting an undue advantage: With the technology today and batsmen being ruled in or out by mere fractions of inches, a foot is quite a lot isn't it?

  • on June 7, 2014, 15:09 GMT

    Sri Lankans,English,Australians,Pakistanis,Indians,South African as well as West Indians they are all matured cricketers and as such they themselves should understand what is wrong or what is right in cricket of these days. As far as Buttler's case is concerned, if he was crossing the line even before ball being balled and run taken it can as well be argued that is NO RUN. But no the umpires do not rule it as NO RUN. Every team as well as players should play cricket. Buttler was out and England lost the match and the series. The story ends there.

  • on June 7, 2014, 13:29 GMT

    @cricketisagame, I was thinking of trying to find a solution to the present situation since even though there is law, once the batsmen is Mankaded it raises the issue of Spirit of the Game into being. If the Umpire at first gives a warning to the non-striker, in the 2nd instance he can deduct some runs from the batting team and in the 3rd instance to declare the batsman out thus taking this whole issue of Spirit of the Game out of the equation. After few instances I am sure the batting team would be more careful and batsmen would wait till the ball is bowled to start their running.

  • cricketisagame on June 7, 2014, 11:30 GMT

    @Lalith Andrady, Your suggestion is not practical mate. How many times the umpire can recall the batsman? How many times a fast bowler in his run up can be asked to abort his delivery when he is already in delivery stride. If you recall, the present day captains are fined for slow over rates in all the formats. Do you think this will help when it comes to time and slow over rate..?? If there is slow over rate who should be punished? This will open a new issue which is open for discussion with no solution. The present solution of declaring the batsman out, when he is out of the crease for naked eye, without warning him or discussing with the fielding captain, is the best way.

  • on June 7, 2014, 8:26 GMT

    It is like a stumping at the non striker end, simple as that. Imagine a striker comes out of the crease the bowler bowls a wide and the keeper stumps him. It is a wide, ball not counted but the batsmen is out. Same law and principal applies here. This can be made official and for history sake it cane be call "Mankaded".

  • D-Coach on June 7, 2014, 7:01 GMT

    @Nawas Azeez Well Said. Rules are used for most unusual reasons and it hurts the spirit of game. No more gentlemen game since it's in the hands of businessmen.

  • on June 7, 2014, 5:59 GMT

    Well people have to respect the rules of the game.. They have to understand anything within the rules ( and mind you, there was a warning ) is perfectly within the spirit of the game..

    what happened to the good old days when non-striker will start walking well behind the crease along with the bowler,, with his bat in crease till the bowl is delivered... this gives the batsman moment to take the quick single and yet obey the rules by staying in the crease till the ball is delivered..

    Why do you have to start walking outside the crease even before the ball is delivered..

  • on June 7, 2014, 5:39 GMT

    whatever the rule its damn poor spirit by the lankans for no dbt...This has happened b4 wen ashwin mankaded thirimanna and sehwag the indian skipper said no to hold the decision whuc was the right way to play with spirit...but look at the lankans...they once conceded 5 runs of last over wen 5 qas needed to win...sehwag was stranded on 99..by bowling a huge no ball...such poor spirit ...and every good bowlers of srilanka except nuwan and rangana are caught by icc for suspected action atleast 1se in their career...malinga legend muttiah now mendis now sachithra all...wat a team srilanka is.....Raise up Sri Lanka...play fair!!play with spirit....

  • on June 7, 2014, 2:50 GMT

    Concerning the incident of Jos Buttler being run out at the non-striker's end, did anyone thought about the fact that he had been warned twice by the bowler and the Umpire being well aware of it had the opportunity to notice the batsman walking out of the crease before the ball being delivered and could have stopped the bowler in his run up and recalled the batsman back the crease? It would have prevented this incident and would have helped to maintain the cordial atmosphere of play. If there are no laws at the present moment to allow the Umpires to stop the bowler and recall the batsman back to his crease, then the ICC should consider granting the Umpires such powers. Definitely it would help the game and play.

  • regofpicton on June 7, 2014, 0:36 GMT

    The ICC stance seems perfectly appropriate to me. But there is now a question of a bowler faking deliveries. If the result was a wicket, or just an appeal for a wicket, replays available to the umpires could resolve the matter easily enough. Trickier are situations where the bowler almost comes to a halt at about the start of his delivery stride. A couple of slow bowlers now seem to be using this tactic. More extreme was an instance during the recent IPL, where the bowler was clearly pulling out of his run-up a yard or so short of the crease. But when the batsman pulled away to leg the bowler was able to deliver the ball outside the off stump without any risk of conceding runs. The only profit was a dot ball, but even that was undeserved. And as the umpire pointed out to the batman, who naturally complained, he could not see what happened behind me so, basically "bad luck". While fully understanding the umpire's problem, I don't think that's quite good enough.

  • coolbunny200 on June 6, 2014, 23:19 GMT

    Micheal Vaughan, English media What do you say to this now???

  • on June 6, 2014, 21:49 GMT

    Batmen can keep the Bat inside the line and stay outside, that's the way we use to play, Buttler before the bowler deliver the ball in the loard's game, him and Bopara ran like crazy in that game, Buttler and the English team should obey the laws of the game, they dont have rights to talk about spirit of the game with their history

  • on June 6, 2014, 21:35 GMT

    Buttler was "Senanayaked".... Well, rules are rules hence this incident stays within the spirit of the game..What transpired out of this is, the batsmen at the non-striker end be more watchful going forward...

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on June 6, 2014, 21:22 GMT

    Bowler oversteps his crease by a mm and he will be bashed black and blue with a free-hit. The runner oversteps his crease by a yard and a half or more and the bowler will be bashed for running him out. How shameful and disgraceful are these double standards! Umpires need to be trained better and they need to be made more sensitive to rules and they need to make sure that cricket is played in the right spirit with respect for rules at all times. They have no business to demonize the bowler and make it look as though the bowler is the one who is the one that lacks spirit. Disrespecting rules and breaking them at will, cannot be conceived as upholding the spirit of cricket or any sport, for that matter. Is that so hard for our respectable umpires to understand? Is that too much to ask of them? People on their moral high horses - are you all serious?

  • on June 6, 2014, 20:12 GMT

    Here's Sir Don Bradman's view on this issue as stated in his autobiography "Farewell to Cricket":

    "An early sensation came in Australia's innings when Brown was once more run out by Mankad, who, in the act of delivering the ball, held on to it and whipped the bails off with Brown well out of his crease…….and immediately in some quarters Mankad's sportsmanship was questioned.

    For the life of me I cannot understand why. The laws of cricket make it quite clear that the non-striker must keep within his ground until the ball has been delivered. If not, why is the provision there which enables the bowler to run him out?

    By backing up too far or too early the non-striker is very obviously gaining an unfair advantage. On numerous occasions he may avoid being run out at the opposite end by gaining this false start……he (Mankad) was scrupulously fair that he first of all warned Brown before taking any action. p146-147

  • Greatest_Game on June 6, 2014, 19:49 GMT

    In years to come it will be asked why, in 2014, there was a change in the rules and practices of backing up/running out the non-striker, the answer will of course be "Because the Buttler did it!"

  • shenshen on June 6, 2014, 19:35 GMT

    It would be a lot better, just as most people have been suggesting on the comments to the recent articles, if the run was cancelled if the non striker backs up, umpire could call it a no-run along the line of no-balls.

    This will make the non striker conscious of not taking an unfair advantage while at the time not penalizing him excessively i.e. costing his wicket.

    The third umpires could keep a check on such backing-up and discretely tell the umpires through their ear-pieces, so the umpires on the field will not have to waste their time for looking at the back-uppers.

  • Mel-waas on June 6, 2014, 19:18 GMT

    Mankading is against the spirit of the game. Mankading is only valid if a person starts running and is sort of stranded mid pitch. Like Saleem Jaffer was in 87 world cup, He was so far down the pitch that he could not even ran back. Yet Courtney Walsh let it go. Butler was no way near that. Rules are never perfect, remember the underhanded last ball when New Zealand needed a Six to win. That was within the rules but Was completely against the spirit of the game. Mankading should be outlawed. Umpire should call it dead ball, If someone backs too far.

  • on June 6, 2014, 19:16 GMT

    Cricket rules provide for an umpire to warn the batting side if a batsman deliberately runs a short run and that warning remains for the rest of the innings for the entire team i.e. every subsequent batter is warned. The consequence of not heeding that warning is a 5 run penalty for each indiscretion thereafter. This same rule can be applied to this situation. The bowling side would need to demonstrate the misdemeanour on the first occasion, the umpire warns the batting side with the threat of 5 run penalties for future indiscretions, problem solved.

  • on June 6, 2014, 18:28 GMT

    For all the Sri Lankan fans, here is what happened in the Ashwin-Thirimanne case:

    http://www.espncricinfo.com/commonwealth-bank-series-2012/content/story/554756.html

    1. Ashwin did give a warning in the previous over 2. ayawardene said that it was "nice and clean" to not run a batsman out who is technically indulging in unfair play. "I wouldn't have got the bails off in the first place, to be honest," 3. Thirimanne, though, kept backing up too far even after the let-off. He was careful with Ashwin, but with Vinay Kumar and Irfan Pathan, he kept taking the liberty.

  • on June 6, 2014, 17:23 GMT

    The time will come when the non striker will reach the other crease before the ball has been delivered. Joss Butler is a wonderful player but it was surprising to see him doing it repeatedly. It puts off the striker and may get run out. It should be up to the umpire to warn the batsman to give a warning and give him out. The same is with bouncers about warning.

  • ksquared on June 6, 2014, 15:36 GMT

    All these people who are making a huge noise regarding the 'spirit of cricket' should realize that it does not exist in international cricket anymore. So people like Alistair Cook shouldn't even be talking about it as his own team mates don't even adhere to it (Root dismissal, Broad during Ashes,......). One good thing to come out of this incident is that now batsman will think twice before trying to steal runs and prevent batsmen like Buttler 'dozing' off at the non strikers end.( in my opinion he must have been asleep when Senanayake gave the warnings which is the only explanation I could think of not involving anything fishy!)

  • SThilakRaj on June 6, 2014, 15:33 GMT

    How can we declare the runner out, when the ball is not bowled and hit by the batsman! We can introduce a law saying it is a one-short if the runner leaves the crease before the ball is released from the bowlers hand and can be checked if the opposition requested for it; so as to avoid delays.

    It is totally unfair for the bowler to get into bowling action and not deliver the ball to the batsman and get a wicket!

  • steve48 on June 6, 2014, 15:25 GMT

    There is a very simple compromise to this problem, the batsman should be free to move once the bowler has landed his front foot in his delivery! He can still pull out as his back foot lands this way, but cannot deliberately dupe the batsman by not releasing the ball. I agree batsmen should not steal ground, but nor do we want to see cat and mouse between bowler and non striker! In reality, batsmen would probably go a fraction earlier than the front foot landing, esp with a seam bowler, but would gain a minimal advantage. If we are not careful, bowlers will stop their action and attempt to throw the striking batsman out if he advances down the pitch!

  • Twinkie on June 6, 2014, 15:18 GMT

    Mr. Boycott. Buttler may not be the only one backing up too far. But he was the only one who was warned more than once and refused to abide by the rule which the bowler pointed out to him. He was the only one who thought the bowler should be ignored. He was the only one who could have kept his wicket intact with a little common sense. And really... we wouldn't have everybody "Mankadding" (sorry, Mr. Mankad) according to the letter of the law if the batsman stayed behind the line. It's in the batsman's hands... or feet. If I didn't know you were a batsman that's what I'd guess. You can't seem to see it from a bowler's perspective. And yes, I watch cricket regularly, from a side view and with both eyes open. Even saw you face Mikey Holding at Kensington.

  • on June 6, 2014, 14:38 GMT

    Absolutely. Non-strikers should not be allowed to leave their crease until the batsman executes a strike or the ball passes his bat or hits his pads or body. It is unfair for a non-batsman to be quarter way down the pitch and the ball is not played et al.

  • Twinkie on June 6, 2014, 14:02 GMT

    To those people who are advocating"'one short" calls as the answer if the batsman gets a run with a head start, this would not deter a batsman who is desperately trying to claim the strike from a No. 11, would it? The batsman would also need to return to his starting point. The rule is a good rule which should be followed to the letter. With the type of footage available it would be easy to tell if a bowler has tricked the batsman or vice versa. Stiff penalties should be given to bowlers who fake delivery. Really really stiff penalties.

  • Clyde on June 6, 2014, 13:53 GMT

    There is absolutely no need for a batsmen to allow himself to be run out. All he has to do is wait till he sees that the ball is in the air on its way to the batsman and that the receiving batsman is not going to hit the ball straight back toward the wicket at the bowler's end so that it many be deflected by a fielder on to the stumps. Backing up is still a good thing, for example, if the batsman facing is shaping to play a cut or leg glance. I am amazed that the Buttler case is thought controversial and that there have not been a lot more cases of run-outs before the bowler has bowled. If the bowler can fool the batsman into leaving his crease, all credit to the bowler for getting rid of a careless batsman.

  • Mutukisna on June 6, 2014, 13:43 GMT

    Simple! When an International batsman ignores the warnings, not just once but TWICE, he is showing disrespect to his International bowling opponent. Accordingly, he got the punishment he deserved.

  • saithesailor on June 6, 2014, 12:47 GMT

    It is totally within the law and spirit of the game.

  • MelFerns69 on June 6, 2014, 12:37 GMT

    Due to the controversial nature of such a dismissal, the Umpires (who are entrusted with ensuring the game is played in good spirit) appear to be compelled to check with the fielding Captain before giving the decision. This is their way to ensure that the match atmosphere does to degenerate and there is a tit-for-tat reaction by the Batting side as well. While the Rules are clear, the key factor here for the Umpires is to ensure that the match atmosphere is not vitiated and bad blood is not created between the two teams as it happened when Kartik mankaded in the County game.

  • on June 6, 2014, 12:31 GMT

    England captain Alastair Cook expressed his disappointment and suggested Sri Lanka had "crossed a line". He should have disappointed his team mate Jos did not fallow the ICC rules. As a captain he should ask his coach to point out the mistake he made and not to repeat in the future. I think as a captain and knowing all the ICC rules, by commenting he himself cross the line.

  • on June 6, 2014, 11:36 GMT

    I dont understand how Mankading is against the spirit of Cricket. If a batsman is run out by a fraction of an inch, in the spirit of Cricket would the fielding team captain allow him to be called back. If a marginal run out is ok, then mankading too is well within the spirit of Cricket.

  • geoffboyc on June 6, 2014, 11:00 GMT

    By all means let's have everybody "Mankadding" according to the letter of the law and see where it takes us. We'll probably need a third on field umpire for a start in non-televised games. Does anyone who watches cricket regularly from a side view with both eyes open really believe that Buttler and his team mates are the ONLY batsmen in world cricket who walk up with the bowler and finish out of their ground before the ball is released? You see it all the time at all levels but unless the batsmen take undue advantage bowlers generally ignore it, as the almost complete absence of such incidents in professional cricket demonstrates. I don't mind deterring batsmen from sneaking an inch or a yard but it will probably mean altering the way we play the game, at least for a time.

  • Yevghenny on June 6, 2014, 11:00 GMT

    Thilina, what if the batsman hits it straight back down the pitch and the bowler gets a finger on it, that supposed advantage suddenly becomes a massive problem for the batsman. Besides, they can just increase the tempo of their first step outside the crease, and still get to where he ended up. To try and claim England cheated with those 44 runs is quite frankly embarrassing

  • on June 6, 2014, 10:46 GMT

    The spirit of cricket is a wonderful thing but it cannot be selectively invoked. Butler taking unfair advantage by being out of his crease before the bowler had bowled was effectively taking one run 'short' and that is hardly in keeping with the spirit of cricket. And it is in keeping with the spirit of cricket that the Sri Lankans warned Butler and Jordan - remember, under the Laws, they were not obliged to. Butler's dismissal was fair and square. If anything, he's shown himself to be a slow learner!

  • on June 6, 2014, 10:31 GMT

    @Yevghenny,the way Jos & Ravi ran, very few times in international cricket mate.I noticed the way they ran when I was watching the match live but only noticed they scored around 44 after Mahela's press conference and after checking highlights he was right.If Jos was allowed to do the same in 5th odi there was a good chance of England scoring at least 250 which would've been a challenging total on that wicket at night for any team.And no butter was not outside the crease by an inch but more like 0.2-0.3 meters when the bails were removed, which would have given him the upper hand in either a tight run out in wicket keepers end or converting a comfortable single to a tight 2.Tell me now is this fair ? If a bowler goes even a 0.1 cm outside the crease he is penalized with a no ball & an extra run but batsmen are allowed to gain such advantage.

  • ladycricfan on June 6, 2014, 10:21 GMT

    When a batsman is runout even a millimetre short of the crease, the non striker backing up giving him unfair advantage. Non striker or his bat should be behind the crease until the ball is released. Rules are rules.

  • Yevghenny on June 6, 2014, 10:14 GMT

    @Rizwan Mahmooth,well this happens after Buttler & Bopara scored around 44 runs thanks to this method I nearly costed SL the 4th odi,check some highlights if you don' believe me === It's funny how absoultely nobody noticed anything with this until after the 5th odi. Can you honestly say that their running was any different to any other side you've seen in the last 20 years?

  • Yevghenny on June 6, 2014, 10:11 GMT

    I mean, what is to stop the bowler from holding onto the ball going through with his action and releasing it down by his hip so it goes backwards? Is that international cricket?!! Think about what you are encouraging, all because Buttler was an inch outside the crease

  • Barquerme on June 6, 2014, 10:04 GMT

    It's very simple really. Bowlers get penalised for no balls, so batsmen should be penalised for leaving early. Whether the penalty is to be given out, or runs deducted is the debate. I vote for the runs deducted as then the bowler is taken out of the equation. But who deducts and how is it performed? Perhaps with all the technology available it will be like the spy on the line as they have in tennis. A green light or red light shows every time a ball is bowled. Or if the technology can't do it then an extra umpire/ adjudicator is employed just watching for that. Like in long jump. See how simple it is?

  • Ennarkay on June 6, 2014, 9:57 GMT

    One possible way forward, at least in limited-over games, is to disallow the dismissal part and count it as a dot ball. This should stop the batting side from stealing unfair singles.

    As for the bowlers, they should not be allowed to mankad once they land their front foot. This should also give the non-striker a good view of when he's okay to run.

  • Chris_Howard on June 6, 2014, 9:42 GMT

    This could be so EASILY solved if the rule was made that a "short run" could be called if the non-striker had left his crease too early.

    The square leg umpire could easily watch for it.

  • on June 6, 2014, 9:26 GMT

    The ICC backs it as evidenced from the above article, and YES folks it is a rule, not something you can challenge when a match, series or championship is at stake !!! Making a fuss about it. Should not even be debated.

  • on June 6, 2014, 9:21 GMT

    @Rizwan Mahmooth,well this happens after Buttler & Bopara scored around 44 runs thanks to this method I nearly costed SL the 4th odi,check some highlights if you don' believe me. Buttler was given a chance for a whole innings in 4th odi and 2 warnings in last odi and he still didn't learned,what was Mathews supposed to do go to him,pat him in the back and ask very nicely not to do it again ? This is international cricket not little league mate.

    Also anyone commenting about Thirimanne incident in down under first of all Ashwin never gave him a warning(where Sachithra gave 2) and I think that is one of the main reason why MS asked Viru to withdraw it from the boundary line & the Indian captain had no guts to face the media if he went with decision but Mathews did.Besides Thirimanne should've been given out that day and if that actually happened I think the likes of Buttler will be more careful than this.

  • willsrustynuts on June 6, 2014, 9:11 GMT

    NWorsn

    Problem is, given that the bowler can do it at any point before he releases the ball, he can effectively stop mid-action (like Senanayake, with Buttler at that point an inch out of his ground), duping the batsman and claiming the run-out.

    Agree. And to make matters worse this seems to be the only type of dismissal where the bowler is judge and jury. The umpires did nothing to check that the bowler was correct in his guess that the batsman had broken the rules.

  • willsrustynuts on June 6, 2014, 9:08 GMT

    Clearly the ICC have no regard for the fans at all. I do not want to pay to see this gamesmanship. This is not sport.

    The umpires have to take a lead. How can the bowler be judge and jury? The TV replays need to be used to see exactly when the batsman started to move etc. In other words, another break in play to watch tv commentators argue the toss over whether frame 23 or 24 shows the batsman was really taking advantage.

    YAWN.

  • Yevghenny on June 6, 2014, 9:05 GMT

    I hope it was worth it Sri Lanka as now potentially every delivery we are going to have a mini farce of a bowler stopping mid-delivery stride and looking at stumps. What a joke this is, Buttler was hardly half way down the pitch was he? But Sri Lanka won the game, and that was what was really important wasn't it? And now we have the ICC, who themselves brought in a rule a few years ago that the batsmen WERE allowed out of the crease saying that it should be enforced all the time

  • on June 6, 2014, 8:39 GMT

    for all those indians who thinks srilankans were crying about thirimanna mankading in australia, no we werent, its just that indian captain didnt have the guts to stand by his bolwers perfectly legal action, and plus their were no warnings thats why it looked bit nasty, but still some of us were on aswin's side, if shewag had the guts to stand by his bowler that day, this butler-senanayake incident would never happen, and indians wanted to mankade thirimanna but they were too afraid of criticism, srilankans weren't, their is no need to sympathize batters who leave their crease, its not rocket science they can easily hold on the the crease until the bowler does his thing, we dont allow to have a runner for an injured man, its ok to stump a batter who over balanced and left the crease, its ok to suspend a bowler for the whole match if the balls slips from his hand and over the waist of batter, its all ok with sprit of cricket, bt not mankading, funny

  • on June 6, 2014, 8:28 GMT

    The truth is all those 22 players + all cricketers has done what Buttler did in their cricketing life at least once, but players and captains hasn't really bothered to make an issue. But now every once eye will be on 11 players. Cant afford to do that mistake by these 11 players..if they do..the whole episode becomes a joke..

  • AlJay on June 6, 2014, 8:26 GMT

    My suggestion: Force the bowler to release the ball in the delivery stride in order to run the non-striker out. Similar to Baseball. However, if the bowler misses, the batsmen are allowed to run plus the ball becomes a no-ball and an extra ball must be bowled. Also, make this a no warning rule. i.e. if its out, its out. This at international level will take responsibility away from the players.

    This will be in line of the dead ball rule and no-ball rule.

  • on June 6, 2014, 8:11 GMT

    @denax.dude ashwin didnt gave any warning...u haven't even watch the match both matches.sachitra gave 2 warnings,,,,

  • on June 6, 2014, 8:01 GMT

    The easiest way of dealing with this, as Naman has said, is to change the sanction from a wicket to a "one-short" scenario. Give the responsibility to the square leg umpire (easy enough to see) and if runs are scored then one is deducted from the total. Remove the responsibility from the bowler and captain to prevent silly squabbles as we've just seen. Losing runs in an ODI and T20 will see the practice wiped out immediately. At the end of the day, backing up too far is sharp practice and there has to be some sanction in place otherwise it will continue. But losing a wicket is too much as it stands.

  • NWorsn on June 6, 2014, 7:53 GMT

    Problem is, given that the bowler can do it at any point before he releases the ball, he can effectively stop mid-action (like Senanayake, with Buttler at that point an inch out of his ground), duping the batsman and claiming the run-out.

    Definitely should be a 5-run penalty against the batting team, instead of a run-out.

  • jomish on June 6, 2014, 7:50 GMT

    cook must tell to butler this is not kids playing match, all are international cricketers, when we playing at home doesn't matter how I jump. after given two warnings and the any batsman with a brain should know that, not only butler all the cricketers obey the rules, now butler study what to do next time when bowler warning two times,

  • Reggaecricket on June 6, 2014, 7:44 GMT

    Looking on the bright side, this will lead to batsmen from both sides being more cautious from now on,playing the game according to the rules of Cricket. Let's put an end to this theory that "spirit of cricket" was violated by the Sri Lankans. The ICC states that no warnings are needed, but the Lankans gave him two warnings, so the Lankans did play in the spirit of the game. Like I said, this might be an eye opener to other batsmen to not steal violate the rules that are clearly laid out.

  • on June 6, 2014, 7:41 GMT

    Umpires should just declare the run scored after backing up by a non-striker,invalid just like while running a double if batsman doesn't touch the crease then the run is considered invalid.Thus deriving an analogy here,a ball is in the game after delivered thus when the "game" starts the batsman starts with out of crease(if he is backing-up).This will curb such actions and also will remove problems like mankading which are considered against the spirit of game.

  • Denax on June 6, 2014, 7:36 GMT

    The same Sri Lankans cried foul when Ashwin Mankaded one of their batsman after giving warning and now they are talking like they are not on the wrong side. Anyway i am not saying mankading is wrong .The bowler has full right to dislodge the bails if the batsman is not inside the crease but after giving a warning.

  • Manowara on June 6, 2014, 7:33 GMT

    If SL could not score just 1 run over the England total of 219 at the end of 50 overs who will win the contest. Why should you ask the bowler give warning. If SL bowlers had acted to the ICC rules from the first ball of the English innings, they would not want to score over 200 runs to win. Their senior players were watching this 'crossing of line' for fair amount of overs and asked the bowlers to be watch full. ICC should amend the rule of 'crossing the line' as below. If the non-striker 'crossing the line' before the ball is legally delivered, bowler should stump him out. If the bowler feels of giving him warning he can refrain from appealing. Then Umpire can make note as a warning. If the umpire cant decide the run out from the naked eye he would as the help from the 3rd umpire. @ Rizwan Mohomooth- The genrelmens game had expired by now. if that is existing the non striker would not cross the line before the ball is delivered and steal good 6 to 8 runs from opposition.

  • on June 6, 2014, 7:20 GMT

    @BhaskarHajong. I never spoke about spirit, I spoke about character of individual an in large represent the character of country. Winning is not every thing. People still Loves NZ cricket and WI of Old cricket.. Not the all Winning Ausies. Why? Its because of Character shown by those gentleman. could have withdrawn and shown how great individuals they are..

  • Kavum on June 6, 2014, 7:16 GMT

    Re. mankading, why give the batter a warning at all? Its not for the bowler/fielders to control the actions of the batter. Their business is to take wickets and curb the runs. A quiet word to the ump before doing it may be a prudent measure, though. The ump (is supposed to) control the game and adherence with the laws. The bowler should mankad the batter at the very next instance of a casual/intentional stroll down the pitch being taken by the batter. At this point, the umpire asking the skipper whether he upholds the appeal or not becomes redundant. Why should the non-striker have to run one or two yards less when s/he has done nothing to score the run which is all due to the effort of the striker? When the non-striker is running to the "danger end", excessive backing up becomes all the more unfair. Kudos to the ICC cricket committee.

  • ksquared on June 6, 2014, 6:52 GMT

    @Ravi Shankar is it the bowlers fault that the batsman in this case Buttler has either no respect towards the bowler or simply ignorant? Of coarse the bowler would be watching if the batsman keeps on doing the same thing even after being given two warnings and the any batsman with a brain would know that. By your logic a bowler setting up a batsman before dismissing him is also against the 'spirit of cricket'

  • BhaskarHajong on June 6, 2014, 6:48 GMT

    @ravi shankar? What u said its not true. If u have watched the game( which i doubt u did) butler has left the crease even before senanayeke completed his ful bowling action which have huge chance that it may distract the bowler and senanayake ran him out which NOT AGAINST THE RULE OF ICC. Now how is that against the spirit of cricket. It was butler who went against the spirit of cricket by backing away a yard before the delivery of the ball.

  • richcricketguru on June 6, 2014, 6:44 GMT

    Are the Sri Lankan's perfect? Of course not, they are regularly taking advantage by "backing up" just like everyone else - and in this series. Wonder what the response would have been if Jayawardene or Sangakkara was dismissed backing up by Cook? Outrage! The umpires have to manage this just like they manage no balls - you don't appeal for a no ball. Keep the players out of it or it will become another contentious issue in the game.

  • on June 6, 2014, 6:31 GMT

    @Rizwan Mahmooth , it is the batsmen taking an unfair advantage over the bowler, and if he is not adhering to the rules there is not much the opposition side could do. There is nothing about sportsmanship in this.

  • Cricket_theBestGame on June 6, 2014, 6:30 GMT

    the rule should be changed. it should be bowler must give 1 warning to the batsman in front of the umpire. the umpire then should signal to the square leg umpire "1" like they do with bouncers. after that if batsman leaves his ground he can be run out by the bowler. this way everyone will be happy.

    another change could be that square leg umpire must keep watch on the batsman and if he see him stepping out before the ball id bowled, he should notify the umpire at the end when the ball is dead and any runs scored off it goes towards bowling side.

  • on June 6, 2014, 6:27 GMT

    "mankading Buttler, who was nearly a yard out of his crease."

    even though, he was warned twice genuinely - the particular delivery (the virtual one, obviously) where he was mankaded involved Senanayake going through with his bowling action *completely* but never releasing his ball. It was more like, enticing the batsman to leave his crease - making him expect the ball in his sight walking ahead - without the ball actually being bowled. It was very much against the spirit of the game.

  • BhaskarHajong on June 6, 2014, 6:25 GMT

    @rizwan mahmooth. The spirit of cricket is dead. It is a game played by human not by spirit. Mankading is just run out, and an out is out, whether the spirits like it or not

  • on June 6, 2014, 6:25 GMT

    "The law is pretty clear - It is an unfair advantage to be out of the crease."- MCC

  • on June 6, 2014, 6:23 GMT

    @Rizwan : Senanayake did the same thing by warning the batsmen twice. IF the batsman can't act like a Gentlemen after a warning by a Gentlemen, the law would intervene. Simple as that.. And Jaffar didn't backed up again when Walsh deliver the final bowl after the warning.

  • on June 6, 2014, 6:19 GMT

    Mankading has absolutely nothing to do with spirit of cricket because there was a rule that you can run out a batsman if he is backing up too much. it definitely gives advantage to the batting side because too much of backing up eliminates the chance of run outs.

  • on June 6, 2014, 5:54 GMT

    I remember Cortney Walsh who did the same but did not appeal for it. That showed true gentleman character. The sport of Cricket has lost its character and its about win at any cost..Such as shame

  • GlobalCricketLover on June 6, 2014, 5:50 GMT

    Ironcial that Cook says the opposition crossed a line when in fact it was his own teammate, Buttler, who crossed that white line when he shouldn't have. Is there no one in the truck-full Eng's support staff who can teach Buttler the basics?

  • Thitha on June 6, 2014, 5:31 GMT

    Now who has spoiled the Spirit of the Game Mr. Cook. It is really unfortunate that the inventors of the cricket has done this at Lords as well as Edgbaston. Butler and Bopara durig the previous match did the same according to Mahela and it is quite evedent each time we see the Highlights of that Match. Sri Lanka didnt spoiled the Spirit of The Game but England did. So hats off to Mathews for taking the correct desision and Sachithra for keeping a close look at non striker crease. So England at leaset play fair for God Sake.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Thitha on June 6, 2014, 5:31 GMT

    Now who has spoiled the Spirit of the Game Mr. Cook. It is really unfortunate that the inventors of the cricket has done this at Lords as well as Edgbaston. Butler and Bopara durig the previous match did the same according to Mahela and it is quite evedent each time we see the Highlights of that Match. Sri Lanka didnt spoiled the Spirit of The Game but England did. So hats off to Mathews for taking the correct desision and Sachithra for keeping a close look at non striker crease. So England at leaset play fair for God Sake.

  • GlobalCricketLover on June 6, 2014, 5:50 GMT

    Ironcial that Cook says the opposition crossed a line when in fact it was his own teammate, Buttler, who crossed that white line when he shouldn't have. Is there no one in the truck-full Eng's support staff who can teach Buttler the basics?

  • on June 6, 2014, 5:54 GMT

    I remember Cortney Walsh who did the same but did not appeal for it. That showed true gentleman character. The sport of Cricket has lost its character and its about win at any cost..Such as shame

  • on June 6, 2014, 6:19 GMT

    Mankading has absolutely nothing to do with spirit of cricket because there was a rule that you can run out a batsman if he is backing up too much. it definitely gives advantage to the batting side because too much of backing up eliminates the chance of run outs.

  • on June 6, 2014, 6:23 GMT

    @Rizwan : Senanayake did the same thing by warning the batsmen twice. IF the batsman can't act like a Gentlemen after a warning by a Gentlemen, the law would intervene. Simple as that.. And Jaffar didn't backed up again when Walsh deliver the final bowl after the warning.

  • on June 6, 2014, 6:25 GMT

    "The law is pretty clear - It is an unfair advantage to be out of the crease."- MCC

  • BhaskarHajong on June 6, 2014, 6:25 GMT

    @rizwan mahmooth. The spirit of cricket is dead. It is a game played by human not by spirit. Mankading is just run out, and an out is out, whether the spirits like it or not

  • on June 6, 2014, 6:27 GMT

    "mankading Buttler, who was nearly a yard out of his crease."

    even though, he was warned twice genuinely - the particular delivery (the virtual one, obviously) where he was mankaded involved Senanayake going through with his bowling action *completely* but never releasing his ball. It was more like, enticing the batsman to leave his crease - making him expect the ball in his sight walking ahead - without the ball actually being bowled. It was very much against the spirit of the game.

  • Cricket_theBestGame on June 6, 2014, 6:30 GMT

    the rule should be changed. it should be bowler must give 1 warning to the batsman in front of the umpire. the umpire then should signal to the square leg umpire "1" like they do with bouncers. after that if batsman leaves his ground he can be run out by the bowler. this way everyone will be happy.

    another change could be that square leg umpire must keep watch on the batsman and if he see him stepping out before the ball id bowled, he should notify the umpire at the end when the ball is dead and any runs scored off it goes towards bowling side.

  • on June 6, 2014, 6:31 GMT

    @Rizwan Mahmooth , it is the batsmen taking an unfair advantage over the bowler, and if he is not adhering to the rules there is not much the opposition side could do. There is nothing about sportsmanship in this.