Mankadding

Mankading (pronounced man-kad-ing)

In cricket, the action of the bowler, during his delivery, effecting a run-out of the non-striking batsman.

1947: Named after Indian all-rounder Mulvantrai Himmatlal Mankad (1917-1978 and usually styled Vinoo Mankad) who ran out Australian batsman Bill Brown (1912-2008) on 13 December 1947 in the second test (Australia v India, Sydney).

Vinoo Mankad, Lords, 1952

The mechanics of a Mankad is that as a bowler enters his delivery stride, the non-striking batsman usually leaves the crease and moves towards the other end of the wicket meaning it will take him less time to reach the other end if he and his batting partner choose to attempt a run.  If the non-striking batsman leaves the crease before the bowler has actually delivered the ball, the bowler may, rather than bowling the ball to the batsman on strike, use the ball to dislodge the bails at the non-striker’s end, thereby running-out the non-striker (said to be "out of his ground").  A long-standing convention is that, on the first instance of the bowler noticing it, he should warn the batsman to return behind the crease.  This has always been understood as a convention; nowhere is it mentioned either in the ICC’s (the International Cricket Council (the old Imperial Cricket Conference)) the Laws of the Game nor the MCC’s (Marylebone Cricket Club) guidance notes on the spirit of cricket.

Mankad’s example of this method of dismissal became so famous as to become eponymous.  During the second Australia v India test at the Sydney Cricket Ground (SCG), on 13 December 1947, Mankad ran out Bill Brown, the second time the bowler had dismissed the batsman in this fashion on their tour, having done it in an earlier match against an Australian XI and on that occasion he had first warned Brown.  There was, at the time, some unfavorable comment in the press suggesting bad sportsmanship but most, including the Australian Captain, Sir Donald Bradman (1908-2001), defended Mankad and there seems to be a consensus that, given the history and having been warned, Brown was a bit of dill for trying it on again; even Brown agreed.  Since this incident, a batsman dismissed in this fashion is said to have been "Mankaded".

It’s since been a troublesome thing although the ICC has made attempts to clarify things, essentially by defining when the bowler may Mankad.  By 2011 rule 42.11 read:  The bowler is permitted, before releasing the ball and provided he has not completed his usual delivery swing, to attempt to run out the non-striker. Whether the attempt is successful or not, the ball shall not count as one of the over. If the bowler fails in an attempt to run out the non-striker, the umpire shall call and signal dead ball as soon as possible."  Mysteriously to some, but very much in the tradition of cricket, under the ICC's rules, at this time, the Mankad remained defined both as "lawful" and "unfair" which of course favored the bowler and in 2014, the World Cricket Council, an independent consultative body of former international captains and umpires, commenting on the issue, unanimously expressed a lack of sympathy with batsman.  The Laws of Cricket were reissued in October 2017 with the relevant clause renumbered 41.16, permitting Mankading up to "…the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball".

The latest (an presumably the last) attempt came as part of a new set of laws announced by the MCC in March 2022, to take effect in October.  Probably reflecting the reality imposed by 20/20 cricket in which margins tend to be tight and risky runs accepted as an essential part of the game, Mankad dismissals will no longer be considered unfair play.  In the 20/20 game, Mankading has been far from the rare thing it remains in the longer forms; in that fast and furious world, a concept like "unfair" must seem something from a vanished world.  This the ICC seems to accept, explaining the rule revision by saying the Mankad "...is a legitimate way to dismiss someone and it is the non-striker who is stealing the ground. It is legitimate, it is a run-out and therefore it should live in the run-out section of the laws."

That should be the end of what has for decades been controversial: something within the rules but thought not in the spirit of the game.  That's always been explained by "unfairness" in this context being something subjective, the argument being that if a non-striker was out of his ground by an inch or two, then to Mankad him was unfair whereas if he's blatantly cheating by being several feet down the pitch, then (especially if he's already been warned), the Mankad is fair enough.  One can see the charm of that approach but the inherent problem always was where to draw the line and the ICC has finally removed all doubt: while the ball is in play, if the bails are dislodged by the ball and the batsman is not behind his crease, he will be given out.  The Mankad is now just another run-out.

The four instances of Mankading in test cricket

Bill Brown by Vinoo Mankad, Australia v India, Sydney, 1947–1948

Ian Redpath by Charlie Griffith, Australia v West Indies, Adelaide, 1968–1969

Derek Randall by Ewen Chatfield, England v New Zealand, Christchurch, 1977–1978

Sikander Bakht by Alan Hurst, Pakistan v Australia, Perth, 1978–1979