The cricket fraternity went crazy in the 4th game of IPL 2019 as Ravichandran Ashwin effected a very controversial dismissal by ‘Mankading’ Jos Buttler who was looking in imperious form.
The opposition team, Rajasthan Royals were chasing 185 again Kings XI Punjab when Ashwin effected the dismissal.
Buttler had taken a few steps out of his crease, and Ashwin stopped midway in his follow through and took this opportunity to take the bails out in utmost nonchalance
This was followed by a heated argument as Ashwin complained to the batsman about this destroying his bowling rhythm by repeated movements out of the crease at the non strikers end.
The third umpire rightly declared Buttler out and the reaction when it was displayed on the big screen was of utmost anger and disappointment as Buttler walked back on 69, on what our EssentiallySports cricket experts feel was the game changing moment of the match.
Ashwin later defended himself saying, “No really argument to that and it’s pretty instinctive. I actually didn’t load and he left the crease. That’s always been my take on it because it’s my half of the crease. He wasn’t even looking at me and he just left the place.”
This is the first time that somebody has been dismissed in this fashion in IPL history. Buttler has been the victim of this 5 years ago in an ODI against SriLanka when Sachitra Senanayake dismissed him at the non-strikers end.
The mankad law has always been under scrutiny for being against the game. It has evolved from the point where only fair warnings were given 3 times before effecting dismissal to the latest amendment in 2017, where the bowler is allowed to run the non striker out up to the instant when they “would be expected to deliver the ball” rather than from before entering the delivery stride.
The MCC have changed the wording of the Mankad rule from “Bowler attempting to run out non-striker before delivery” to “Non-striker leaving their ground early” in a bid to put the “onus on the non-striker to remain in their ground”.
“It is often the bowler who is criticised for attempting such a run out but it is the batsman who is attempting to gain an advantage,” the MCC explained.
“The message to the non-striker is very clear – if you do not want to risk being run out, stay within your ground until the bowler has released the ball.”
Separate from the ICC’s ‘Playing Conditions’, the Laws apply to all levels of cricket.
To put the the entire incident into perspective, Mankading isn’t one of the most controversial forms of dismissal in cricket. Obstructing the wicket is another form of dismissal that leaves a lot to question in terms of the batsman’s intention. Sometimes, it is purely unintentional and in the flow of the game, that these instances occur. Take for example the Inzamam-ul-Haq against India. That incident can be seen in either light – intentional or absolutely playful and totally in the spirit of the game (since Inzy could’ve got back inside the crease very comfortably). The decision again depends on the core intention.
Sport should always have a flavour of human error and on field humour/charade to it, otherwise it’s nothing but an endless series of numbers and results amongst players and fans alike. Mankading can or cannot be construed against the law of the game, but it sure does catch a batsman unaware most of the times, and we at ES believe that there should be fair warning (3 times as per the previous rule) before deciding or not whether it should be declared out.
The incident already has given rise to major controversy, about the rule and we expect a lot more action on this in the days to come. We leave you with some Twitter reactions on the same:
In the end, Kings XI Punjab managed to win by 14 runs at the Sawai Mansingh Stadium. Now, all Rajasthan can do is sit and think about what could have been if Buttler had not been dismissed in such a controversial manner.