by Booney » Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:05 pm
by mighty_tiger_79 » Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:09 pm
by on the rails » Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:23 pm
by Lightning McQueen » Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:49 pm
Booney wrote:Anyone else of the understanding that you had to complete your action before being able to mankad someone? ie - roll the arm over and then you could have them.
by Booney » Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:55 pm
Lightning McQueen wrote:Booney wrote:Anyone else of the understanding that you had to complete your action before being able to mankad someone? ie - roll the arm over and then you could have them.
The rule has changed, you have to be anywhere in your delivery stride.
by FlyingHigh » Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:59 pm
by PatowalongaPirate » Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:00 pm
Lightning McQueen wrote:Booney wrote:Anyone else of the understanding that you had to complete your action before being able to mankad someone? ie - roll the arm over and then you could have them.
The rule has changed, you have to be anywhere in your delivery stride.
by whufc » Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:59 pm
by whufc » Wed Feb 03, 2016 5:00 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:Is a batsman cheating when he takes a stance outside his crease before the ball is delivered?
Love cricket's contradictions.
by whufc » Wed Feb 03, 2016 5:02 pm
bennymacca wrote:I feel like mankad is a pretty crappy thing to do, but so is backing up a long way.
What if the batters are warned, and then called for a short run if they continue to back up too far?
That seems to be a pretty decent compromise imo, and would it wouldnt take long to change their behaviour.
There needs to be some sort of penalty for backing up too far, but as LM pointed out, even batters not cheating can be done mankad so i feel like that is too harsh
by bennymacca » Wed Feb 03, 2016 5:22 pm
by woodublieve12 » Wed Feb 03, 2016 5:55 pm
by whufc » Wed Feb 03, 2016 6:03 pm
bennymacca wrote:No different to having to make the mankad decision
by Grenville » Wed Feb 03, 2016 6:35 pm
MatteeG wrote:Booney wrote:Keep in mind, mankads in indoor cricket not quite so frowned upon.
Yep, par for the course at Morphett Vale ICA.
by Grenville » Wed Feb 03, 2016 6:42 pm
by heater31 » Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:37 pm
by Dogwatcher » Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:44 am
by Lightning McQueen » Thu Feb 04, 2016 9:27 am
heater31 wrote:Don Bradman didn't have an issue with it so neither should we!
by Tony Clifton » Thu Feb 04, 2016 9:51 am
Lightning McQueen wrote:Booney wrote:Anyone else of the understanding that you had to complete your action before being able to mankad someone? ie - roll the arm over and then you could have them.
The rule has changed, you have to be anywhere in your delivery stride.
by Dogwatcher » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:34 am
Tony Clifton wrote:Lightning McQueen wrote:Booney wrote:Anyone else of the understanding that you had to complete your action before being able to mankad someone? ie - roll the arm over and then you could have them.
The rule has changed, you have to be anywhere in your delivery stride.
Not quite - the batsman can leave his crease legally as soon as the bowler enters his delivery stride. My understanding is that the 'delivery stride' commences at back foot landing.
In this case his back foot had landed prior to him taking off the bails so it shouldn't have been given out IMO.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |