Mankading in Cricket: Should the ICC Outlaw This Ancient Trademark?

The Mankading incident during Ravichandran Ashwin's dismissal of Jos Butler provides a fascinating lens into the intricacies of cricket's rules and traditions. This Mankading action, where a bowler attempts to run out a non-striker who leaves the crease too soon, is a legal and strategic maneuver according to the laws of cricket, as dictated by the MCC (Marylebone Cricket Club).

What is Mankading?

The rules of cricket strictly define Mankading under section 41.16 of the laws. This states that if a batsman leaves their crease before the ball is actually bowled, the bowler is allowed to run them out. Furthermore, if an attempt is unsuccessful, the umpire declares a Dead Ball. It's a clear-cut yet sometimes controversial part of the game's strategy.

Historical Context: Srilanka vs England 2014

The incident in 2014, during the Srilanka vs England match, provides a poignant illustration of how Mankading works. In this instance, Joe Butler was dismissed by Sachithra Senanayake. Senanayake warned Butler about leaving the crease early, stating that he would be run out if he did. Despite this clear warning, Butler left the crease, and he was duly mankaded. Joe Butler displayed an open defiance of the rules, which triggered a negative reaction from the crowd and even from England's captain, Alistair Cook. This event was a stark reminder of the importance of the game's spirit.

The Spirit of Cricket

Although Senanayake adhered strictly to the rules, the intention behind Mankading often gets lost in the heat of the moment. The John MacCALL principle, highlighting the importance of the Spirit of Cricket, suggests that players should play with integrity and sportsmanship, regardless of legality. In this case, Butler’s behavior contradicted this principle, leading to a two-year-long acknowledgment of his error.

Is Mankading Justified in Today's Game?

Moving to more recent instances, when Ravichandran Ashwin dismissed Jos Butler, Ashwin followed the rules to a T. His dismissal was legal, and he did not require a prior warning. The incident brought into question whether Mankading should be reconsidered or even outlawed by the International Cricket Council (ICC). Should players be required to issue a warning before attempting to run out a non-striker, or should the current system suffice?

Arguments For and Against Mankading

For Mankading:
1. It serves as a deterrent for non-strikers to leave the crease too soon.
2. It highlights the importance of following the game's rules and spirit.
3. It maintains a level playing field where both sides adhere to the same principles.

Against Mankading:
1. It can be seen as a harsh action that might cost a player their wicket without a fair warning.
2. It may undermine the notion of fair play if abused by bowlers for strategic advantage.
3. It can lead to unpredictability in the game, especially in high-pressure situations.

Conclusion

The Mankading incident with Ashwin and Butler highlights a balance between the rules of the game and the spirit of cricket. While Mankading can be a strategic necessity, it should not come at the expense of a player's fair play. The ICC must carefully evaluate whether maintaining this tradition is in the best interest of the game's integrity. Bowlers should always play within the spirit of the game and consider the impact of their actions on the opponent and the game's ongoing narrative.

Bibliography:

1. England fury as Sri Lanka run out Jos Buttler Mankad-style in last ODI

2. MCC clears Sri Lanka of going against sprit of cricket over Butters Mankad

3. Buttler admits fault in Mankad dismissal

4. WATCH: After match Ashwin comes face-to-face with Buttler