Mankading and the absurdity of ‘the spirit of cricket’
What is the spirit of cricket? The man to ask these days is Virat Kohli – somehow. But he – like all of us – will have his own very personal interpretation. And it is the infuriating fluffiness of this unquantifiable cricketing spectre, floating in the ether, that makes debates like the rights and wrongs of mankading a debate in the first place.
“If the non-striker is out of his/her ground from the moment the ball comes into play to the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the bowler is permitted to attempt to run him/her out”.
That’s Law 41.16, or a ‘mankad’ – named after Vinoo Mankad, who became the most famous cricketer to exhibit such gumption.
But in his day, the bowlers could only attempt a run-out before entering their delivery stride. Now, bowlers at all levels are able to run-out the non-striker up to the instant at which they “would be expected to deliver the ball” – which in itself is an incredibly vague guideline.
Should they have changed the law in the first place? Probably not. The bowlers complain that a batsman can gain easy yards, while they are penalised for overstepping by a millimetre. But if they stop and warn the batsman once, as was previously the practice, they won’t do it again. It was a rule change for a problem that didn’t really exist.
But that is besides the point. It’s the abstract concept of the spirit of cricket that has caused the debate – everyone’s favourite high horse.
— James Anderson (@jimmy9) January 31, 2020
Did Ravi Ashwin or – more recently – Noor Ahmad break the rules when they ran out their unwitting mankad victims? Nope, but that didn’t stop people getting very, very annoyed about it.
Shane Warne called Ashwin “an embarrassment to the game” while the Indian spinner’s dismissee, Buttler, claimed it “set a bad precedent”.
And two statements by lawmakers the MCC within the space of 24 hours, sums up the keyboard-head-banging issue. At first they said that the law was “essential” and added “without it, non-strikers could back up at liberty”, before “clarifying” a day later that “we don’t think it was in the spirit of the game.”
That is not a clarification – the very use of the term spirit of the game makes any such attempt paradoxical.
Who is the judge and jury of this spirit? Perhaps an actual apparition is hailing or condemning cricketers? Or do they have a direct line to Kane Williamson?
Oh no, it’s no-one – we all just sort of decide for ourselves…
This spirit has drawn an invisible line in the sand which professional cricketers are expected to blindly toe at all times. And while other sports do all they can to remove subjectivity, cricket takes narcissistic pride in these enshrined, undefined parameters that can be interpreted in whichever way we fancy.
This isn’t to be confused with sportsmanship: Flintoff consoling Brett Lee in the 2005 Ashes; New Zealand under-19’s carrying an injured West Indies batsman from the pitch; sharing a beer after a hard-fought Test match. That’s all great.
It’s all the grey areas. Calling a someone “fucking knobhead” is bad, and matters of race, ethnicity or religion are left on an untouchable moral high ground, but a mother’s alleged promiscuity is fair game? A sledge laughed off by one individual, may be way over the line for another.
A batsman that walks is now held up as a pillar of honour and honesty whereas in the past it was expected, and if they didn’t they would be bringing the game into disrepute. If a fielder claims a catch that was grounded it is now often dismissed as competitiveness when before that was a clear lack of spirit.
For the true spirit of cricket to be upheld in the modern game it needs to be defined, or its virtues will simply become rungs on a holier-than-thou step ladder for cricketers to tread when it suits them, as it does them no professional harm if they don’t.
And as long as it remains a concept rather than a rule, cricketers cannot be hounded for failing to comply.
England’s new dawn and Commonwealth Games – cricket’s summer highlights
The Hundred returns for a second season while India return to finish last summer’s Test series.
Zak Crawley rediscovers form as Kent’s clash with Northamptonshire is drawn
Crawley started the week averaging under 20 in this season’s LV= Insurance County Championship.
India recall Cheteshwar Pujara for rescheduled Test against England
The 34-year-old has scored four hundreds in eight innings for Sussex this season.
Keith Barker blows away Somerset to help Hampshire to victory
The visitors needed just one run in their second innings to seal victory.
Craig Overton claims 400th first-class wicket in Somerset-Hampshire clash
The England seamer’s three-wicket burst left the contest delicately balanced at the halfway stage.
Three positive Covid tests confirmed in New Zealand’s tour party
Batter Henry Nicholls, seamer Blair Tickner and bowling coach Shane Jurgensen will self-isolate for five days.
Zak Crawley outdone by Ben Compton as Kent start strongly at Northamptonshire
Opener Compton stole the show with an unbeaten 125.
Mark Wood admits frustration over slow progress from elbow surgery
Wood is targeting a Test return towards the back end of the summer.
McCullum hopes ‘attractive brand of Test cricket’ can see red-ball game thrive
New head coach Brendon McCullum is looking to transform England’s fortunes.