The Art of Mankading: The Comprehsive Guide to This Cricketing Controversy | Cricket coaching, fitness and tips

The Art of Mankading: The Comprehsive Guide to This Cricketing Controversy

Filed in:

Is there anything that divides opinions more than "mankading"?

When England's Joss Buttler was run out at the non-striker's end while backing up in an ODI, the range of reactions went from "quite right!" to "downright cheating!".

Whatever you opinion, there are some important coaching lessons we can glean.

 

Making a stand: The culture of mankading in your club

Unlike a well-timed drive, the mankad is not universally admired by players and coaches. It's this cultural fact that must inform how we approach it in our games.

That's a vital point, because without developing a conscious culture around these kind of practices (also see walking, appealing, and sledgin ) we risk defaulting to an unconsidered, uncomfortable consensus that at the least makes playing the game less fun and at the worst takes a chunk from the very Spirit of Cricket itself.

To be clear though, this is about spirit rather than Law. Law 42 even makes a point of it:

"The bowler is permitted, before entering his delivery stride, to attempt to run out the non-striker."

But those who frown on the practice say that it's about playing the game the way it was intended.

As I see it there are three positions you need to consider for your bowlers:

  1. "If the batsman is out of his ground he is fair game the same as a stumping. I will execute a run out and be perfectly within the Laws of the game."
  2. "I don't want to do it, but if I think the batsman is trying it on I will run him out after a warning."
  3. "It's never acceptable. Cricket is the challenge between bowler and striker, the non-striker is just waiting his turn."

Each case has it's supporters. You will find that even in your team there will be all three of these views. So, it's good to discuss such matters and come to your team conclusions about what you are going to do if the situation arises.

In the field, it's worth having a player who is keeping an eye out for the non-striker pinching ground. Everyone agrees that this is unacceptable, even if there is debate over the degree of distance taken. Those who fully support mankading can execute it.

Those who are against it totally can speak with the umpire about the batsman who is taking liberties. The umpire can award 5 penalty runs if they feel the batsman is trying to steal a run (Law 42).

Either way, it's good to be aware and active rather than passive and ignoring the problem, as many do, so as not cause a fuss.

When you are batting, decide on your approach to backing up. There is a lot of grey area between leaning on your bat and trying to steal a run. Decide how far into the dark you want to go, and what the risk is that you will be mankaded.

Very sharp operators will know the bowlers who can't bring themselves to run out a batsman. The door is open to set off as early as you like. But that's not for everyone.

You can play safe and still back up effectively though. Simply moving out as the bowler enters his delivery stride will get you a yard down the wicket with no danger of being run out.

Coaching the mankad: Ignoring is not a option

With the senior culture broadly in place, you can filter the same points into your coaching setup. It's sensible to do so as if you ignore it you will get a problem.

Young players often back up at the non-striker's end too far. For most this is simply because they don't understand the nuance of the Law and are simply full of high spirits to "run the first run quickly" as they have been told.

A mankading to an unaware player is devastating, especially the younger, less mature kids.

So, when that happens in your middle practice, freeze the game. Gather in the boys and girls and talk through what they think is right and how to combat the problem.

I would say that the answer is simple: No matter what your view on mankading, you can stop it by staying in your crease until the ball is bowled.

There are 2 ways to do this yet still back up:

  • Start outside the crease, with your bat behind the line as if you are turning for a second run.
  • Walking out of your crease as the bowler arrives so you are moving down the wicket as the ball reaches the batsman.

Either way works fine to fairly gain ground and it's personal preference.

But whatever you talk about in those few moments, and reiterate over the coming season, it's important to be consistent across the club. If your youth coaches insist mankading is always unfair, and your senior teams are happy to mankad, kids will ignore the coach.

The bottom line with the Buttler incident is the bottom line in every mankad case: Had the batsman been a little more aware it would not have happened.

So, whatever your morality, come to a conclusion about the practice, stick with it across the board and coach sensible play into everyone.

Maybe then the practice will die out because nobody falls for it anymore.

Broadcast Your Cricket Matches!

Ever wanted your skills to be shown to the world? PV/MATCH is the revolutionary product for cricket clubs and schools to stream matches, upload HD highlights instantly to Twitter and Facebook and make you a hero!

PV/MATCH let's you score the game, record video of each ball, share it and use the outcomes to take to training and improve you further.

Click here for details.

Comments

Backing up too early, backing up before the bowler has released the ball is (in my view), straight forward cheating and against the spririt of the game. Mankading is a perfectly acceptable antidote that is explicitly WIHTIN THE LAWS of the game. Backing up before the ball is released IS NOT.

The only grey area is really about whether the bowler should offer a warning or two warnings. This 'tradition' is a good one, and is one of many that act as 'lubricant' around certain rules: but it a batsman chooses to break the spirit himself, then its entirely at the fielding sides discretion whether or not to run the cheat out.

A not dissimilar issue are bowler who repeatedly try to start their run ups before batsman are ready and get annoyed if a batsman pulls away from his stance as a result. Unfortunately in that case there is no 'ultimate penalty' that can be given against the bowler to keep him honest - other than a ban after multiple warnings from an Umpire - which simply never happens

The problem is not the spirit, the problem is the laws. For hundreds of years cricketers have known that once the bowler has entered his action, you can leave your crease. There is a rhythm to walking alongside the bowler and crossing the line as his front foot lands that every cricketer learns. This rule has worked perfectly well for centuries, so WHY change it now?

The rule should be simple. Once the bowler has passed the stumps, the opportunity for a run out should be over. If he wants to mankad the batsman, he must knock off the bails as he reaches them, he should not be allowed to deviously fake a bowling action to try and tempt the batsman forward and then spin around.

Warnings are ridiculous and unnecessary; its up to the administrators get the laws right in the first place.

The rules were changed not long ago to say that a warning is not necessary before mankading. Also the rules now state that a bowler cannot fake their action then run out the batsman so surely it's fair for bowlers to mankad.

Besides cricket is played over 22 yards and the batsmen need to run the full length to complete a run.

DrCricket - the batsman is supposed to be ready to receive the ball by the time the bowler is ready to deliver it. It isn't the bowler that is at fault (unless he turns around halfway back to his mark and runs in from there)

AB - I don't disagree, but I think the law _is_ right - once the bowler begins his delivery stride (when the back foot lands) he cannot mankad.

Cups - Actually cricket is played over rather less than 22 yards (66 feet). The distance between the two batting creases is only 58 feet (19 1/3 yards), which is the distance that the batsman is required to run.

David I'm a bit bemused by the decision to give Butler out and the lack of discussion about this. Didn't Senanayake enter his delivery stride? Surely the delivery stride starts with the landing of the back foot? Michael Holding says he didn't enter his delivery stride in commentary so tell me please, what is the delivery stride? Love your work.

David - a great article, and one that every club needs to address. I suspect there will be numerous attempts at Senanayake-ing this weekend, and the poor umpires will need to have their wits about them! And look out in the bar afterwards...

On the Laws and ICC Match regulations.

The Laws of Cricket (2000 Code, 5th Edition, 2013) state:

"The bowler is permitted, before entering his delivery stride, to attempt to run out the non-striker." (Law 42.15; my emphasis)

The ICC playing regulations for Test, ODI and T20 (under which the England v Sri Lanka game was played) say:

"...the bowler is permitted, before releasing the ball and provided he has not completed his usual delivery swing, to attempt to run out the non-striker "

So Senanayake was within the match regs to run Buttler out. He had not completed his delivery swing.

But he could not have done it in a game played to the Laws of Cricket as currently drafted (unless, of course, the match regs on the day were in line with the ICC), as he had entered his delivery stride (defined in the ECB ACO umpiring course I took over the winter as beginning as the back foot lands immediately before the ball is delivered).

As far as I can find out the convention of warning a batsman before running him out in this way has never been in the Laws of Cricket, only in the traditions...which does not mean it should not be honoured, of course.

"Those who are against it totally can speak with the umpire about the batsman who is taking liberties. The umpire can award 5 penalty runs if they feel the batsman is trying to steal a run (Law 42)."
Not true. Stealing a run is quite different from one or even both batsmen being out of their crease when the ball is delivered. It requires both batsmen to be trying to get to the other end before the bowler has delivered the ball. If the bowler doesn't attempt to run one of them out, the umpire should call and signal dead ball when the batsmen cross and award penalty runs. There's no possibility of the bowler delivering the ball - if he hasn't tried to run one of them out, the umpire will have already called and signalled dead ball.
Presumably, back in the mists of time, some bright spark worked out that because the ball comes into play when the bowler starts his run up, there was nothing to stop a run being scored before the ball had been bowled. This law was designed to stop that happening, and I doubt if a legitimate case of stealing a run has occurred for a hundred years or more.
Regarding the Buttler case, I agree that it's confusing when ICC regulations and the laws of cricket differ: this is merely one of several (in my view) unnecessary differences. Having said that, if the batsman's warned twice and he still does it, I don't think he deserves much sympathy.