Mankads

[TheJediBrah]

when I first got into cricket (yeah it actually did happen once upon a time) I always thought it was dumb that spinners had to identify as dedicated wrist/finger spinners or whatever at all tbh

What? They don't

 

[Starfighter]

What? They don't

Haven't you ever stepped up to the crease and said to the umpire "I'm bowling right arm off spin"?

Me neither...

 

[TheJediBrah]

I say I'm bowling right-arm lbw's, it gets in their head

 

[SteveNZ]

Free hits are kind of dumb tbf, and I've never been at all convinced they actually add anything positive to the game

Do you think? I don't have the stats but I would imagine they have had an impact on the amount of no-balls bowled. I'm a bowler through every inch of my body, but I'm OK with free hits. You bowl a beamer, you get the field wrong, you overstep, there's a clear penalty. And you can still execute the skill to ensure it doesn't become too costly. And yeah, it's something entertaining for the crowd.

 

[Starfighter]

Do you think? I don't have the stats but I would imagine they have had an impact on the amount of no-balls bowled. I'm a bowler through every inch of my body, but I'm OK with free hits. You bowl a beamer, you get the field wrong, you overstep, there's a clear penalty. And you can still execute the skill to ensure it doesn't become too costly. And yeah, it's something entertaining for the crowd.

There's already a penalty. All free hits are is contrived nonsense. No-one would miss them if they went away tomorrow.

Those who advocate for them is test cricket should be hung, drawn and quartered.

 

[SteveNZ]

There's already a penalty. All free hits are is contrived nonsense. No-one would miss them if they went away tomorrow.

Those who advocate for them is test cricket should be hung, drawn and quartered.

I can unequivocally agree with the second sentence.

I guess with the umpires checking no balls, there really isn't a need to 'punish it' any more, per se, given they'll always be caught therefore no dismissals will be affected. However, I really don't see that free hits are damaging the game or making it too much of a lollipop, Gen Z ****fest.

 

[honestbharani]

I say I'm bowling right-arm lbw's, it gets in their head

Coz its > Wade?

 

[honestbharani]

Mate....there aren't too many who love the game more than me, and try to be as positive in the appraisal of it. I know you've said most, but it's not really fair to suggest people are whingers because it's something they've been brought up to believe. And based on my timeline, which is mostly people from Australia, England and NZ given that's where I've lived and played cricket, most are 'whingers'. One of the biggest issues of facebook etc is that it's an echo chamber of similar thoughts, and that's what I'm seeing as feedback.

Sorry, I should have clarified. I meant the debate online, like twitter, fb etc., not specifically on CW. I guess I have already mentioned what I think of the views here in an earlier post. Sorry.

 

[social]

wat

It’s pretty simple

If the “spirit of cricket” is no longer a criteria then unlimited bouncers should be allowed irrespective of a batters’ skill

Do away with fielding restrictions as well

You can have 9 fielders behind square on the off so why not leg?

Same with having to nominate which arm that you are going to bowl with & negative lines

All those rules exist because they are considered to contravene the spirit of cricket

I would much prefer to watch 90 overs of Bodyline than 1 Mankad attempt

 

[Victor Ian]

I think they are there, not because it contravenes the spirit of cricket, but because they break cricket

 

[cnerd123]

All those rules exist because they are considered to contravene the spirit of cricket

wrong again

 

[social]

I think they are there, not because it contravenes the spirit of cricket, but because they break cricket

Wrong

Bodyline/leg theory/leg side fielding fielding restrictions are all about the spirit of cricket

 

[social]

wrong again

You obviously know nothing about the bodyline era

 

[Daemon]

It’s pretty simple

If the “spirit of cricket” is no longer a criteria then unlimited bouncers should be allowed irrespective of a batters’ skill

Do away with fielding restrictions as well

You can have 9 fielders behind square on the off so why not leg?

Same with having to nominate which arm that you are going to bowl with & negative lines

All those rules exist because they are considered to contravene the spirit of cricket

I would much prefer to watch 90 overs of Bodyline than 1 Mankad attempt

wat

 

[cnerd123]

Has social even read the spirit of cricket blurb in the MCC?

We've gotten this deep in the thread and no one has even quoted it, so here we go:

Cricket owes much of its appeal and enjoyment to the fact that it should be played not only according to the Laws, but also within the Spirit of Cricket.

The major responsibility for ensuring fair play rests with the captains, but extends to all players, match officials and, especially in junior cricket, teachers, coaches and parents.

Respect is central to the Spirit of Cricket.

Respect your captain, team-mates, opponents and the authority of the umpires.

Play hard and play fair.

Accept the umpire’s decision.

Create a positive atmosphere by your own conduct, and encourage others to do likewise.

Show self-discipline, even when things go against you.

Congratulate the opposition on their successes, and enjoy those of your own team.

Thank the officials and your opposition at the end of the match, whatever the result.

Cricket is an exciting game that encourages leadership, friendship and teamwork, which brings together people from different nationalities, cultures and religions, especially when played within the Spirit of Cricket.

Nope nothing about body line or mankads here

 

[trundler]

It’s pretty simple

If the “spirit of cricket” is no longer a criteria then unlimited bouncers should be allowed irrespective of a batters’ skill

Do away with fielding restrictions as well

You can have 9 fielders behind square on the off so why not leg?

Same with having to nominate which arm that you are going to bowl with & negative lines

All those rules exist because they are considered to contravene the spirit of cricket

I would much prefer to watch 90 overs of Bodyline than 1 Mankad attempt

In all of those instances the spirit of cricket just means ensuring player safety. A much more reasonable goal than protecting batsmen's feelings.

 

[social]

Has social even read the spirit of cricket blurb in the MCC?

We've gotten this deep in the thread and no one has even quoted it, so here we go:



Nope nothing about body line or mankads here

Do some research

Banning of bodyline was all about the spirit of cricket

Mankads are so rare because most players believe that they’re not in the spirit of cricket

Hardly ground breaking news

 

[social]

In all of those instances the spirit of cricket just means ensuring player safety. A much more reasonable goal than protecting batsmen's feelings.

Team can bowl 540 balls per day 1 foot outside off stump with 9 fielders on that side of the pitch and nobody will say a word

Can’t do the same outside leg stump as it’s illegal

Team can bowl 540 balls per day at a batter’s ribs but can’t put more than 2 fielders behind square on the leg side

etc etc

 

[honestbharani]

http://instagr.am/p/CjHgCX6KCIT/

 

[Starfighter]

@social I'm not sure what kind of bender you're on here but you've been so off base it's kinda pointless trying to reason you out of a position you didn't use reason to acquire.

The only law that was added after Bodyline became 46.4.vi, and the contemporary discussions centre largely around the physical danger and difficulty of scoring. It also went practically unenforced at periods, particularly when WI was playing in the mid-sixties and eighties, and SA in late fifties-early sixties.

Might add that in 1947 - well within the memory of Bodyline, the new law 46.4.vii, accompanied by an addition to law 27, was made to quite clearly specify that the batsmen leaving their ground early is unfair and the fielding side can run them out "by any recognised method".

The restriction of fielders on the leg side exists because it was perceived leg theory bowling was making the game uninteresting to watch. The 'spirit of cricket' had nothing to do with it. Worth noting this situation would never have arisen had umpires been enforcing the 1935 LBW rule correctly.