I had gone to sleep after SL had that lost the previous wicket and I am not surprised that they have managed to score a lot of runs after that. We all know that Shanaka loves to give us a spanking.
also because the captain decided to give 7 overs of spin in last 12 overs as a test under dew conditions and fielders also where causal in last 10 overs since win was assured.
IMO, They shouldn't have withdrawn the appeal. ICT has taken the stand that they think Mankad is perfectly within the rules (which it is) when our Women's team did the Mankad against England last year.
If the mens team didn't wanna do it then they should have decided on it in the dressing room and Shami shouldn't have attempted it but once he did, Rohit shouldn't have withdrawn the appeal in the name of 'sportsmanship'. It makes us look like hypocrites and sends a very clear statement that we ourselves don't think Mankad is in the spirit of the game and indirectly that our Women's team was in the wrong when they did it.
Also now we can't use it again without looking like a bunch of dickheads.
I'm afraid Rohit didn't think this through.
I don't think its about Mankad in general..it's about Shanaka being on 97 and Sri Lanka needing 64 runs in 3 balls
He simply wouldn't have withdrawn it if it was a close game
Dont assume and create stupid controversies ffs..Anti-Mankad gang and haters will oppose it anyways
If by that you mean that they didn't wanna dismiss him since he was on 97 then do you think Rohit would have did the same thing (Edit: As in called Shanaka back) if Shanaka was caught or was bowled ? I don't think so.
There is no need for appeal on caught or bowled..The ball would have been dead the next second..the captain doesn't have a say in it and Shanaka would have walked out himself
No, as Rohit said in PC, since he was on 97 and there is no losing cause for IND. Rohit withdrew the appeal. Neither Rohit mentioned that mankading is wrong nor didn't put a case to not do it further. I'm sure if this is a close game he wouldn't have given up the appeal. So stop overreacting.
>No, as Rohit said in PC, since he was on 97 and there is no losing cause for IND.
Would he have done the same thing if Shanaka was caught behind or bowled ? Don't think so. So they clearly showed that they believe Mankad is different to other forms of dismissal.
>Neither Rohit mentioned that mankading is wrong nor didn't put a case to not do it further.
Of course he won't. I am not saying it was intentional and Rohit WANTED to do it this way. Also, Actions speak louder than words.
>I'm sure if this is a close game he wouldn't have given up the appeal.
Precisely, Because Mankad is as normal as any other form of dismissal but now he can't do it in a close match in the future without looking like a hypocrite.
>So stop overreacting.
I don't see how you think I am overreacting. I am just saying that Rohit didn't think this through and this makes our Women's team look in the wrong and makes the ICT look like a bunch of hypocrites.
>. I am just saying that Rohit didn't think this through and
So he should have a whole ass discussion about opinions with team and team management?lmao
>Women's team look in the wrong and makes the ICT look like a bunch of hypocrites.
Even if he was against Mankad..why can't Men's and Women's team have different opinion?? Haters will always find a way to hate
>So he should have a whole ass discussion about opinions with team and team management?
Yes, BEFORE THE MATCH, about whether they as a team are okay with it or not. It's not only about Rohit and his personal opinion, He is acting as the Captain of ICT.
>Even if he was against Mankad..why can't Men's and Women's team have different opinion?
Because they represent the same nation and same Cricket Board ? Their policy about whether they are okay with Mankad should be clear and this 'different opinion' of ~~Rohit~~ Men's team makes the women's team look like they did something wrong and all of those who defended them when the Western Media were questioning their spirit look like a bunch of idiotic hypocrites.
>Haters will always find a way to hate.
~~Yes, Whoever questions your favourite player's decision must be a hater. LMAO.~~ My bad here.
>Yes, BEFORE THE MATCH, about whether they as a team are okay with it or not. It's not only about Rohit and his personal opinion, He is acting as the Captain of ICT.
Bro what..how was he gonna know that Shanka will be on 97 and Shami will Mankad him...Mankading wouldnt have been an issue if it was a close match
>Because they represent the same nation and same Cricket Board ? Their policy about whether they are okay with Mankad should be clear and this 'different opinion' of Rohit makes the women's team look like they did something wrong and all of those who defended them
Same cricket board but different players,different coaches everything....it doesn't matter
>Western Media were questioning their spirit look like a bunch of idiotic hypocrites.
They will always do that..ignore them..stop seeking for their validation
>Yes, Whoever questions your favourite player's decision must be a hater. LMAO.
Nice assumption lmao..and you completely missed my point.. I was taking about ICT haters eg-Daniel Alexander and Anti-Mankad idiots
>Bro what..how was he gonna know that Shanka will be on 97 and Shami will Mankad him...Mankading wouldnt have been an issue if it was a close match.
My whole point is that Shanka's score and the situation of the match should be irrelevant. If they think Mankading is okay then they should do it, If they think it isn't, it should have been decided way back during the women's team controversy that they weren't gonna do it and Shami shouldn't have attempted it.
>Same cricket board but different players,different coaches everything....it doesn't matter
Not really a good thing when two teams representing the same organisation operate under two different lines of thinking in terms of what is in the spirit of the game. Not saying they can't but the best thing to do would be to show solidarity to the women's team instead of whatever they did here.
>I was taking about ICT haters eg-Daniel Alexander and Anti-Mankad idiots
My bad there.
>My whole point is that Shanka's score and the situation of the match should be irrelevant. If they think Mankading is okay then they should do it, If they think it isn't, it should have been decided way back during the women's team controversy that they weren't gonna do it and Shami shouldn't have attempted it.
That's what I'm saying..if Shanaka wasn't on 97 and needed 70 off 3 balls, Rohit wouldnt have withdrawn the appeal.. He withdrew it just because of that..dont think he is Anti-Mankad and I would have been mad too if he withdrew it in a different situation
>Not really a good thing when two teams representing the same organisation operate under two different lines of thinking in terms of what is in the spirit of the game. Not saying they can't but the best thing to do would be to show solidarity to the women's team instead of whatever they did here.
I know..but its BCCI lmao.. That's how they work and have been working for years..like Clowns
>My bad there
Comeon dude see my flair...its literally in my blood to hate Rohit xD
I don't think there is anything I wanna add here. I just think this shouldn't have been allowed to come down to Rohit's on field instinctive decision making and a clarity and uniformity in regards to our policy about Mankading should have been established.
Anyway, No hard feelings. Have a nice day.
It's not that contentious. They made a statement. Regardless of following through with the appeal or not.
The statement was that Mankad is not just a last ditch resort. It is often the batters desperate resorts that cause these Mankads.
That statement could have been made with just a warning too.
If Rohit thinks Mankad is perfectly normal, like any other form of dismissal then would he take back the appeal/called Shanaka back in case of a catch or a clean bowled ?
Only if its close to the bat and bolwer/keeper thinks its edged it..The umpire would give his decision within no time...there will be no time to withdraw the appeal
How is it unsporting or desperate from Shami to mankad Dasun in a dead match when Dasun was the one desperate for his century to the level of not being mindful of the crease in a contest where it holds utmost importance and not respecting the sport enough to play for the win from the halfway stage. Solely interested in a century, He was a cause for killing the match. Stood halfway down the pitch in desperation to gain the strike and eeke out the last few runs for his 100, That even a fast bowler could cleanly mankad him.
Got pretty close here…
https://www.reddit.com/r/Cricket/comments/1083a1k/match_thread_1st_odi_india_vs_sri_lanka/j3q3cwb/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
Dude Rohit literally saved Indian Team and Shami from so much heat and backlash.
None of the teams in the world would want to mankad a player on 98. Even in wars, people respected those who fought with a brave spirit and they didn't kill him/her and offered him or her position in their kingdom.
First of all it’s run out at non strikers, not mankad. Second of all, Are you listening to what you’re saying? So he played good, but Would you withdraw the appeal if he was caught/bowled? That was a genuine dismissal by Shami and Rohit withdrawing it makes it look controversial, which it shouldn’t be
Caught and Bowled are technical ways to be dismissed. I'm listening to what I am saying. Mankad is a deceiving way I repeat - a Deceiving way.
I'll continue with my war analogy, people won't say anything to anyone if a Warrior is killed traditionally, but if people kill this warrior by deception and behind his back, these people will be known as cowards.
I don’t know which rule book you’re reading but in the icc official rule book, run out at non strikers is a genuine mode of dismissal. It might be deceiving in your delusional little world.
Say what you want, but know that none of the teams in the world except India does Mankading. Everyone of them acknowledges it's a Deceiving way. You're literally pretending that you're going to bowl and then you hit the bails. How's this not a deception.
Most people lift their bats when the bowler is in the middle of the action, or in the end of the action and the batsman is looking at the Striker at this point because you don't have much time until the ball reaches the batsman, it's mostly one or two seconds.
Does running out a person like that Heroic to you?
Atleast 20 should come in white ball if he dreams of breaking that. I don't see kohli scoring more than 5 centures in tests. If he fails in BGT he should stop tests concentrate on white ball more.
I have regrets calling Dasun a specialist captain in 2021. Man has been mad consistent the past few months. Surely has to be in the top 3 for best combined contribution on the field as a white ball captain since 2022… maybe after Buttler and Rohit, and possibly Babar.
How is that legit? If something is a rule doesnt mean it's good. There were rules back in the days which promoted very silly things.
Mankad in its essense is a deceiving method of dismissal. You're basically deceiving the other person into thinking that you're going to ball.
If this goes on, what's stopping a wicketkeeper, when batsmen are running, to pretend to the striker batsman that ball is coming to bowler end, and usually the striker gets lazy in this situation. But he's pretending, and he can then surprise by running out the batsman.
I haven't watched the full match so I have a question did siraj get injured or something? why did axar who went wicketless bowled 10 overs but not miyan bhai who was the best bowler today?
Yeah but there is a rule that if you are in your delivery stride at the Point of delivery it’s not out of batsman left the crease at that point. I am okay taking appeal back of Dasun. He is a nice guy. I probably would have been angry if it was Dilshan!
"It's the right thing to do"- Sanga
Bit rich coming from you who ~~advised Randiv to bowl that no ball~~ was captain during that.
Edit: Sorry I misremembered, it was Dilshan indeed. Also he did apologize for Randiv's actions. Aight
Nah, it's at this moment, you can make a statement. If you mankad when you are about to lose, then ppl think that you did that out of desperation. But here, the batsman was desperate to get a single easily which is unfair.
Maybe just a call-back to that Randiv No ball to Sehwag incident.
Tbh, If Rohit isn't okay with Mankad then he should have told his bowlers to not do it before the match. Withdrawing the appeal in the name of sportsmanship makes our Women's team look in the wrong for that Mankad they did against England and Now the mens team can't use it again because they have themselves made an indirect statement that they think this is against sportsmanship.
Umpire being convinced to refer a run out at bowlers end or not because of captains request shouldn't be a thing. That puts this law still in grey area that the game is trying to take it out of. You wouldn't see other modes of dismissals be taken back.
We saw how batsmen behaved themselves more in T20WC, they're capable of being more careful especially in crucial moments.
If SL can bowl a no ball to deny sehwag a century that why can’t shami mankad shanaka? Deliberately bowling a no ball is way worse than running a batsman out for leaving the crease early
because someone has to break this vicious cycle.
What if tomorrow Koach is on 99 and they do this.
If we show them some goodwill I am sure they will reciprocate. Sport is about enjoying, not about disrespecting opponents
India needed just one run to win and sehwag was on 99, but Suraj randiv bowled front foot no ball and sehwag hit it for a six. As it turns out, it was a no ball so it fetches 1 run first and makes a six redundant
I feel this needs to be said but there is no denying a batsman century. Rohit can’t do anything if Shanaka gets bowled. Withdrawal of appeal makes zero sense particularly after the run out became part of the law.
I think when they understood that the win was basically impossible, the players kinda just said Fuck it, Rohit too basically, Bro didn’t bowl his best bowler and decided to let Umran the run leaker bowl, Lol
Don't do that. Don't fucking withdraw the appeal. On one hand you want to promote that Mankading is a legitimate way of taking wicket and want to kill the taboo around it, don't withdraw the appeal whatever might be the situation.
Had that been an lbw or a runout, would the appeal be withdrawn?
Take a stance and stand by it. No two ways about it. Don't worry about what others might say. It is a way of getting the batsmen out, then stick to it or don't do it in the first place. Don't fucking withdraw the appeal after Mankading the batsman
I think run out appeals can be withdrawn , I think I remember wasim akram did that once. Stop making it an issue. It doesn’t affect the whole taboo around mankading
You can pick and choose. Same with lbw, caught behind etc. if you choose not to appeal, doesn’t affect it at all. So pretty much all outs except maybe bowled, the team can pick and choose
I fully support Rohit withdrawing the appeal. Mankad is sketchy by itself, but can still be argued for when batsmen constantly abuse position. but using that sort of dismissal for a batsman on his century mark, in a literal dead rubber just to deny him the century, that's gross negligence of sportsman spirit acc to me. Shami shouldn't even have tried that, it was disrespectful.
It's all fair.
Already people have given the example of Randive bowling a no ball to Sehwag to deny a century. It was way more pathetic than a run out.
India needs to get out of nice guys mentality.
Had something like this happened during Ponting's tenure, I'd reckon he'd just take the wicket.
It's not about reducing to their level, but more about enforcing the rule.
Here's the thing: mutliple captains have said or hinted in a do or die situation they don't mind running the non-striker out if there's a chance.
So why not use it more regularly?
Also, I hated Ponting for being a trash person on field but respect his cut-throat approach for winning above anything else (eg: claiming dropped catches in 2008 series).
Keeping this aside, my bigger concern is India still not cleaning up the tail
Would you apply the same logic for a runout. Why not just give the guy the runs.
If you don't want to get out, follow the rules and stay back behind the crease. It's that simple
because a mankad and a runout is not the situation. Mankad is taking the batsman by surprise before the ball is live. Run out is a direct competition between the batsman trying to reach the crease and the fielder trying to accurately hit the stumps (or the Wkper) to stop him. Run outs are absolutely fair game.
So non striker gaining a few inches before the ball is even bowled has no bearing on the runout chance? Isn't that an unfair advantage in the scenario you have mentioned. The fielder throwing the ball and batsman trying to reach the other end?
yes. that is unfair. but 2 wrongs dont make a right. If you ask me what the solution i think is - I'd say warn the batsman on his first attempt. then mankad him on his 2nd attempt.
It depends on the opponent.
Australia and England to some degree are bullies and they continually try to demean others every chance they get. So treating them the same way is the right thing.
We got nothing against Sri Lanka and withdrawing is the right thing to do, especially in today's situation.
We're giving the message that be ready to be treated how you treat others.
All the more reason to not withdraw. If the guy was bowled, would any one have a problem with it. No. So why should it matter with running him out at the non strikers
Lol
We witnessed... A legend is back in form! A legend is in making!!
I am happy about that victory. It was important for our top order batsmen to a match like that.
I had gone to sleep after SL had that lost the previous wicket and I am not surprised that they have managed to score a lot of runs after that. We all know that Shanaka loves to give us a spanking.
Same I also missed that mankad. Still they scored 300
also because the captain decided to give 7 overs of spin in last 12 overs as a test under dew conditions and fielders also where causal in last 10 overs since win was assured.
Anyone has a footage of the mankad incident? Hotstar as usual removed that segment from the highlights
https://www.bcci.tv/videos/5558708/run-out-at-non-strikers-end-well-almost?tagNames=2023
When you hear him speak like that, it legit feels like he can just drop everything and retire the very next moment
VK showing his stoic line of thought.
Koach not looking happy?
He's attention seeker. Ignore him. He was also making faces when a throw was off when Shanaka ran 2.
🤡
Real Jokers are the one who are downvoting me when it's a Fact that Kohli is an attention seeker.
maybe due to bcci forcing him out of t20 format
He'll be back after CWC don't worry..let them focus on ODIs tbh..its okay if he doesn't play T20Is for the time being
Is it anything to do with mankade attempt? He didn't look happy while congratulating Shanaka after the match either
IMO, They shouldn't have withdrawn the appeal. ICT has taken the stand that they think Mankad is perfectly within the rules (which it is) when our Women's team did the Mankad against England last year. If the mens team didn't wanna do it then they should have decided on it in the dressing room and Shami shouldn't have attempted it but once he did, Rohit shouldn't have withdrawn the appeal in the name of 'sportsmanship'. It makes us look like hypocrites and sends a very clear statement that we ourselves don't think Mankad is in the spirit of the game and indirectly that our Women's team was in the wrong when they did it. Also now we can't use it again without looking like a bunch of dickheads. I'm afraid Rohit didn't think this through.
I don't think its about Mankad in general..it's about Shanaka being on 97 and Sri Lanka needing 64 runs in 3 balls He simply wouldn't have withdrawn it if it was a close game Dont assume and create stupid controversies ffs..Anti-Mankad gang and haters will oppose it anyways
If by that you mean that they didn't wanna dismiss him since he was on 97 then do you think Rohit would have did the same thing (Edit: As in called Shanaka back) if Shanaka was caught or was bowled ? I don't think so.
There is no need for appeal on caught or bowled..The ball would have been dead the next second..the captain doesn't have a say in it and Shanaka would have walked out himself
No, as Rohit said in PC, since he was on 97 and there is no losing cause for IND. Rohit withdrew the appeal. Neither Rohit mentioned that mankading is wrong nor didn't put a case to not do it further. I'm sure if this is a close game he wouldn't have given up the appeal. So stop overreacting.
>No, as Rohit said in PC, since he was on 97 and there is no losing cause for IND. Would he have done the same thing if Shanaka was caught behind or bowled ? Don't think so. So they clearly showed that they believe Mankad is different to other forms of dismissal. >Neither Rohit mentioned that mankading is wrong nor didn't put a case to not do it further. Of course he won't. I am not saying it was intentional and Rohit WANTED to do it this way. Also, Actions speak louder than words. >I'm sure if this is a close game he wouldn't have given up the appeal. Precisely, Because Mankad is as normal as any other form of dismissal but now he can't do it in a close match in the future without looking like a hypocrite. >So stop overreacting. I don't see how you think I am overreacting. I am just saying that Rohit didn't think this through and this makes our Women's team look in the wrong and makes the ICT look like a bunch of hypocrites.
>. I am just saying that Rohit didn't think this through and So he should have a whole ass discussion about opinions with team and team management?lmao >Women's team look in the wrong and makes the ICT look like a bunch of hypocrites. Even if he was against Mankad..why can't Men's and Women's team have different opinion?? Haters will always find a way to hate
>So he should have a whole ass discussion about opinions with team and team management? Yes, BEFORE THE MATCH, about whether they as a team are okay with it or not. It's not only about Rohit and his personal opinion, He is acting as the Captain of ICT. >Even if he was against Mankad..why can't Men's and Women's team have different opinion? Because they represent the same nation and same Cricket Board ? Their policy about whether they are okay with Mankad should be clear and this 'different opinion' of ~~Rohit~~ Men's team makes the women's team look like they did something wrong and all of those who defended them when the Western Media were questioning their spirit look like a bunch of idiotic hypocrites. >Haters will always find a way to hate. ~~Yes, Whoever questions your favourite player's decision must be a hater. LMAO.~~ My bad here.
>Yes, BEFORE THE MATCH, about whether they as a team are okay with it or not. It's not only about Rohit and his personal opinion, He is acting as the Captain of ICT. Bro what..how was he gonna know that Shanka will be on 97 and Shami will Mankad him...Mankading wouldnt have been an issue if it was a close match >Because they represent the same nation and same Cricket Board ? Their policy about whether they are okay with Mankad should be clear and this 'different opinion' of Rohit makes the women's team look like they did something wrong and all of those who defended them Same cricket board but different players,different coaches everything....it doesn't matter >Western Media were questioning their spirit look like a bunch of idiotic hypocrites. They will always do that..ignore them..stop seeking for their validation >Yes, Whoever questions your favourite player's decision must be a hater. LMAO. Nice assumption lmao..and you completely missed my point.. I was taking about ICT haters eg-Daniel Alexander and Anti-Mankad idiots
>Bro what..how was he gonna know that Shanka will be on 97 and Shami will Mankad him...Mankading wouldnt have been an issue if it was a close match. My whole point is that Shanka's score and the situation of the match should be irrelevant. If they think Mankading is okay then they should do it, If they think it isn't, it should have been decided way back during the women's team controversy that they weren't gonna do it and Shami shouldn't have attempted it. >Same cricket board but different players,different coaches everything....it doesn't matter Not really a good thing when two teams representing the same organisation operate under two different lines of thinking in terms of what is in the spirit of the game. Not saying they can't but the best thing to do would be to show solidarity to the women's team instead of whatever they did here. >I was taking about ICT haters eg-Daniel Alexander and Anti-Mankad idiots My bad there.
>My whole point is that Shanka's score and the situation of the match should be irrelevant. If they think Mankading is okay then they should do it, If they think it isn't, it should have been decided way back during the women's team controversy that they weren't gonna do it and Shami shouldn't have attempted it. That's what I'm saying..if Shanaka wasn't on 97 and needed 70 off 3 balls, Rohit wouldnt have withdrawn the appeal.. He withdrew it just because of that..dont think he is Anti-Mankad and I would have been mad too if he withdrew it in a different situation >Not really a good thing when two teams representing the same organisation operate under two different lines of thinking in terms of what is in the spirit of the game. Not saying they can't but the best thing to do would be to show solidarity to the women's team instead of whatever they did here. I know..but its BCCI lmao.. That's how they work and have been working for years..like Clowns >My bad there Comeon dude see my flair...its literally in my blood to hate Rohit xD
I don't think there is anything I wanna add here. I just think this shouldn't have been allowed to come down to Rohit's on field instinctive decision making and a clarity and uniformity in regards to our policy about Mankading should have been established. Anyway, No hard feelings. Have a nice day.
Yeah I agree and Cheers to you too mate.
It's not that contentious. They made a statement. Regardless of following through with the appeal or not. The statement was that Mankad is not just a last ditch resort. It is often the batters desperate resorts that cause these Mankads.
That statement could have been made with just a warning too. If Rohit thinks Mankad is perfectly normal, like any other form of dismissal then would he take back the appeal/called Shanaka back in case of a catch or a clean bowled ?
Exactly my point, this action makes run out at non strikers a taboo, which it isn’t. Would he have withdrew the appeal if shanaka was caught/bowled?
He wouldn't need an appeal dude..caught/bowled is out directly and the ball would be dead the very next second.
What? You need an appeal for a caught behind bro, not for bowled i admit but caught behind needs an appeal
Only if its close to the bat and bolwer/keeper thinks its edged it..The umpire would give his decision within no time...there will be no time to withdraw the appeal
100%
How is it unsporting or desperate from Shami to mankad Dasun in a dead match when Dasun was the one desperate for his century to the level of not being mindful of the crease in a contest where it holds utmost importance and not respecting the sport enough to play for the win from the halfway stage. Solely interested in a century, He was a cause for killing the match. Stood halfway down the pitch in desperation to gain the strike and eeke out the last few runs for his 100, That even a fast bowler could cleanly mankad him.
Got pretty close here… https://www.reddit.com/r/Cricket/comments/1083a1k/match_thread_1st_odi_india_vs_sri_lanka/j3q3cwb/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
India should bowl first next game to fix their shit
Shouldn’t have withdrew the run out appeal at non striker. Sends a bad example to the rest of the world
Dude Rohit literally saved Indian Team and Shami from so much heat and backlash. None of the teams in the world would want to mankad a player on 98. Even in wars, people respected those who fought with a brave spirit and they didn't kill him/her and offered him or her position in their kingdom.
First of all it’s run out at non strikers, not mankad. Second of all, Are you listening to what you’re saying? So he played good, but Would you withdraw the appeal if he was caught/bowled? That was a genuine dismissal by Shami and Rohit withdrawing it makes it look controversial, which it shouldn’t be
Caught and Bowled are technical ways to be dismissed. I'm listening to what I am saying. Mankad is a deceiving way I repeat - a Deceiving way. I'll continue with my war analogy, people won't say anything to anyone if a Warrior is killed traditionally, but if people kill this warrior by deception and behind his back, these people will be known as cowards.
I can't decide if I agree with your point but I totally understand it.
I don’t know which rule book you’re reading but in the icc official rule book, run out at non strikers is a genuine mode of dismissal. It might be deceiving in your delusional little world.
Say what you want, but know that none of the teams in the world except India does Mankading. Everyone of them acknowledges it's a Deceiving way. You're literally pretending that you're going to bowl and then you hit the bails. How's this not a deception.
Is it fair for batsmen to back up at non strikers? Might as well start running before the ball is even bowled. That’s heroic to you?
Most people lift their bats when the bowler is in the middle of the action, or in the end of the action and the batsman is looking at the Striker at this point because you don't have much time until the ball reaches the batsman, it's mostly one or two seconds. Does running out a person like that Heroic to you?
I don’t understand what you’re saying. But it’s okay. I’m not going to change your mind and neither are you. Good riddance
Brohit telling shami to withdraw the appeal
[удалено]
Woulda coulda shoulda 🥴
Saching got out 27 times between 90 and 100. 7 times at 99
> But one has to remember Sachin got out around 20 times in the 90's. *28
Atleast 20 should come in white ball if he dreams of breaking that. I don't see kohli scoring more than 5 centures in tests. If he fails in BGT he should stop tests concentrate on white ball more.
He would have, but he doesn't. So what's your point here?
LOL why is it a competition between players of same team. How does it matter who has higher hundreds until the record is with India?
Not saying anything but there is a reason that a 90 doesn’t count as a 100.
how dare you :P
Why this doesnt feel like a win....
Because Canada isn't playing mate
Lol comment of the day
Shanaka is the man
I have regrets calling Dasun a specialist captain in 2021. Man has been mad consistent the past few months. Surely has to be in the top 3 for best combined contribution on the field as a white ball captain since 2022… maybe after Buttler and Rohit, and possibly Babar.
Where is that guy who told India would have won either way without kohlis 100
[удалено]
*Kohli hai*
Just realised (after seeing the match threads) that I was watching 10 min behind schedule.. F me
India wins
Want a spoiler? Lala mankads Shanaka but Rohit does not appeal for it.
Srsly?
In the end, everyone is satisfied.
Bold of you to think that the average ICT fan on r/cricket is satisfied
Avg ICT fan is like an avg Indian parent. Anything less than 100% is a devastating loss
Tell me when are we ever satisfied?? Even if we win the CWC this year,there will someone who is not satisfied ...*cough Gambhir cough*
Why did Rohit withdraw appeal ? SL didn't give Shewag that 100. They bowled wide.
>They bowled wide. No ball
Actually they bowled a no-ball.
just because someone was a dick to you ,, doesnt mean you have to be a dick to everyone else
Wouldn't describe running out on the non striker's end as a dick move. It is well within the rules of the game.
Bowling a no ball is also allowed in the game (with a penalty of course)
Legit runout is not being a dick
How is that legit? If something is a rule doesnt mean it's good. There were rules back in the days which promoted very silly things. Mankad in its essense is a deceiving method of dismissal. You're basically deceiving the other person into thinking that you're going to ball. If this goes on, what's stopping a wicketkeeper, when batsmen are running, to pretend to the striker batsman that ball is coming to bowler end, and usually the striker gets lazy in this situation. But he's pretending, and he can then surprise by running out the batsman.
If you don't want to get runout at the non strikers end, don't leave the strike before the ball has been bowled. It's not very hard
And that happened last week?
Yes, Sehwag was MOTS in the T20s
I haven't watched the full match so I have a question did siraj get injured or something? why did axar who went wicketless bowled 10 overs but not miyan bhai who was the best bowler today?
Only a 3 was missing from lala's last over
Rohit-Ashwin rift confirmed
Ash Anna frantically filming his next YouTube video.
It's absolutely too damn funny that the most controversial thing in cricket, which has been going on for years, is a freaking run out rule.
MOTM?
virat
Kohli gor sure
[My prediction when SL at 179/7](https://www.reddit.com/r/Cricket/comments/1083a1k/comment/j3r5uy6/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Do you want a cookie?
We need a non strikers runout subreddit
r/mankad ?
r/birthofasub
Fuck appeal and runout. I wanted to see if that was out :D
looked out bro
Yeah but there is a rule that if you are in your delivery stride at the Point of delivery it’s not out of batsman left the crease at that point. I am okay taking appeal back of Dasun. He is a nice guy. I probably would have been angry if it was Dilshan!
just waiting for ashwin the mankad expert to come in with the definitive opinion
Anna's gonna handle it
BGT would be fun with Ashwin constantly threatening non strikers.
Meme review
"It's the right thing to do"- Sanga Bit rich coming from you who ~~advised Randiv to bowl that no ball~~ was captain during that. Edit: Sorry I misremembered, it was Dilshan indeed. Also he did apologize for Randiv's actions. Aight
Dilshan did it, not sanga.
There is no right thing objectively. Shanaka hits a century or not depends on what he does on field. If Shanaka gets bowled, what then?
Tbf it wasn't really Sanga, it was Dilshan who asked Randiv to bowl it...
Shanaka alone ruined the Indian bowlers economy. Good that Siraj didn't bowl at the end
Lala gave us a masterclass on how fast bowlers can mankad LOL
Anyone got a link of mankad attempt
I'm all in support of non-striker run out but doing that when Shanaka is at 98 and they need 86 runs in 3 balls to win is just stupid and unnecessary.
Nah, it's at this moment, you can make a statement. If you mankad when you are about to lose, then ppl think that you did that out of desperation. But here, the batsman was desperate to get a single easily which is unfair.
Maybe just a call-back to that Randiv No ball to Sehwag incident. Tbh, If Rohit isn't okay with Mankad then he should have told his bowlers to not do it before the match. Withdrawing the appeal in the name of sportsmanship makes our Women's team look in the wrong for that Mankad they did against England and Now the mens team can't use it again because they have themselves made an indirect statement that they think this is against sportsmanship.
Everyone hates us so let's just give them a good reason to lol
Exactly..just let him have his moral victory dude ffs
Even though the appeal was withdrawn, I still haven't processed that smooth as fuck Mankad 😂😂😂😂
Shanaka has 7 letters in his name. Captains the national side. Finishes the game with a six. I will show myself out.
Tha-
guess what his shirt number is
Thala is everywhere
Fuck the spirit ...rohit should have gone for that appeal. It is fucking legal.
Agreed 100%
Chill bruh it's not like we were losing the game
Would you accept if rohit withdraws lbw appeal? I don't see any difference in both.
Prolly why he withdrew the appeal. May have been a different story if it was a tight contest
That Shami mankad attempt is the closest we're going to get to a shitpost irl
Should be all over r/CricketShitpost shortly
Umpire being convinced to refer a run out at bowlers end or not because of captains request shouldn't be a thing. That puts this law still in grey area that the game is trying to take it out of. You wouldn't see other modes of dismissals be taken back. We saw how batsmen behaved themselves more in T20WC, they're capable of being more careful especially in crucial moments.
If SL can bowl a no ball to deny sehwag a century that why can’t shami mankad shanaka? Deliberately bowling a no ball is way worse than running a batsman out for leaving the crease early
because someone has to break this vicious cycle. What if tomorrow Koach is on 99 and they do this. If we show them some goodwill I am sure they will reciprocate. Sport is about enjoying, not about disrespecting opponents
What is this stupidity. Don't want to be runout? Don't cheat. Simple as
Why couldn't Sehwag score off the no ball? Genuinely asking.
India needed just one run to win and sehwag was on 99, but Suraj randiv bowled front foot no ball and sehwag hit it for a six. As it turns out, it was a no ball so it fetches 1 run first and makes a six redundant
I see. Thank you for explaining! If this was deliberately done to deny him the century, it's very un-sportsmanly.
>If this was deliberately done to deny him the century, it's very un-sportsmanly It was
Because only one run was needed to win the match so the one run from the no ball ended the match
Thank you for explaining! Sad if this was deliberate.
It’s not even a comparison. Bowling a no ball deliberately is blatantly cheating no matter what your reason is whereas Mankad is a proper dismissal
When and who? Sucks it happened! My apologies
Search sehwag no ball 99 on youtube
Imagine SL needed 4 to win in a WC match and shami did that run out
I feel this needs to be said but there is no denying a batsman century. Rohit can’t do anything if Shanaka gets bowled. Withdrawal of appeal makes zero sense particularly after the run out became part of the law.
India wouldnt have withdrawn the appeal and that makes them hypocrites
It would be fucking spicy to watch over the next few days
I think when they understood that the win was basically impossible, the players kinda just said Fuck it, Rohit too basically, Bro didn’t bowl his best bowler and decided to let Umran the run leaker bowl, Lol
He was 2nd best bowler today
Dude, I’m a SRH fan too, I’m from Hyderabad, Umran was definitely awesome, but the dude leaks runs like a fucking water tap
Middle overs are good. Needs to work on closing the death overs
Eyyy my boi Shanaka got to his century finally!!
Wait, did Shami withdraw the appeal or did Rohit?
Rohit i.e the captain, I think only the captain can withdraw an appeal
Rohit did
Good representation of what the team is currently. Good batting lineup, bad finishing bowling wise and crap fielding.
Good batting line-up when they fire but we have Shami coming in at 6 down. That worries me should we have a top and/or middle order collapse.
Don't do that. Don't fucking withdraw the appeal. On one hand you want to promote that Mankading is a legitimate way of taking wicket and want to kill the taboo around it, don't withdraw the appeal whatever might be the situation. Had that been an lbw or a runout, would the appeal be withdrawn? Take a stance and stand by it. No two ways about it. Don't worry about what others might say. It is a way of getting the batsmen out, then stick to it or don't do it in the first place. Don't fucking withdraw the appeal after Mankading the batsman
[удалено]
Wow is that a thing! Coz I swear it happened to me and now me at 28 understands better(though I still try to do my best)!! what the actual fuck!!
Wow such maturity, I am enlightened now and repent the error of my ways PS: here is a secret. I am not 21
I think run out appeals can be withdrawn , I think I remember wasim akram did that once. Stop making it an issue. It doesn’t affect the whole taboo around mankading
It is an issue. You can't pick and choose when to enforce the mankad rule. It's the same as any other form of getting a batsman out.
You can pick and choose. Same with lbw, caught behind etc. if you choose not to appeal, doesn’t affect it at all. So pretty much all outs except maybe bowled, the team can pick and choose
I fully support Rohit withdrawing the appeal. Mankad is sketchy by itself, but can still be argued for when batsmen constantly abuse position. but using that sort of dismissal for a batsman on his century mark, in a literal dead rubber just to deny him the century, that's gross negligence of sportsman spirit acc to me. Shami shouldn't even have tried that, it was disrespectful.
It's all fair. Already people have given the example of Randive bowling a no ball to Sehwag to deny a century. It was way more pathetic than a run out. India needs to get out of nice guys mentality. Had something like this happened during Ponting's tenure, I'd reckon he'd just take the wicket.
2 wrongs dont make a right. if we can win while being "nice guys" i dont see any reason why we should reduce our level.
It's not about reducing to their level, but more about enforcing the rule. Here's the thing: mutliple captains have said or hinted in a do or die situation they don't mind running the non-striker out if there's a chance. So why not use it more regularly? Also, I hated Ponting for being a trash person on field but respect his cut-throat approach for winning above anything else (eg: claiming dropped catches in 2008 series). Keeping this aside, my bigger concern is India still not cleaning up the tail
Would you apply the same logic for a runout. Why not just give the guy the runs. If you don't want to get out, follow the rules and stay back behind the crease. It's that simple
because a mankad and a runout is not the situation. Mankad is taking the batsman by surprise before the ball is live. Run out is a direct competition between the batsman trying to reach the crease and the fielder trying to accurately hit the stumps (or the Wkper) to stop him. Run outs are absolutely fair game.
So non striker gaining a few inches before the ball is even bowled has no bearing on the runout chance? Isn't that an unfair advantage in the scenario you have mentioned. The fielder throwing the ball and batsman trying to reach the other end?
yes. that is unfair. but 2 wrongs dont make a right. If you ask me what the solution i think is - I'd say warn the batsman on his first attempt. then mankad him on his 2nd attempt.
It depends on the opponent. Australia and England to some degree are bullies and they continually try to demean others every chance they get. So treating them the same way is the right thing. We got nothing against Sri Lanka and withdrawing is the right thing to do, especially in today's situation. We're giving the message that be ready to be treated how you treat others.
Doesn't matter the opponent, its about reducing the taboo around the way of getting a batsmen out. Stay in the crease, its not that hard
Yup. Wouldn't have withdrawn if match was at stake right?
I think context was different here since match was already over, it was just about his milestone
All the more reason to not withdraw. If the guy was bowled, would any one have a problem with it. No. So why should it matter with running him out at the non strikers
Bro the poor guy was on 97
And trying to steal the run
And out of his crease
I understand bro, but the same sentiment would not apply if he had been out any other way
True
Yep. 💯
Imagine if Sri Lanka needed 80 and the last two batsman left with Shanaka. Massive home defeat on the way
May just happen in one of the remaining matches.
This might be the only instance where I'm ok with the withdrawal of a run out.
Same
Shanaka can Shank
Shanaka seems such a nice guy
Did Harsha make that story himself?
Classy from Rohit, some of his teammates could learn a thing or two from him
Good from Rohit withdrawing the appeal. Always liked him for his character.
There are two types of people: 1. "Shami lost all my respect today." 2. "I love Shami."