England v India: A controversial runout secures a 3-0 series plaster for the visitors.

Main menu


England v India: A controversial runout secures a 3-0 series plaster for the visitors.

featured image

The most controversial form of dismissal in cricket.

With England needing 17 runs to beat India and with one wicket remaining, Charlie Dean ran out at the non-striker’s end as bowler Deepti Sharma stopped in his delivery strides to take the wicket. I was.

It is often informally referred to as Mankad after Indian batsman Vinoo Mankad, who was the first player to enact the type of runout in a test match.

Much discussion followed the wicket, diverting attention from Juran Goswami’s farewell to international cricket and India’s 3-0 one-day international whitewash.

England captain Amy Jones said: “We are divided. I’m not a fan, but India feels that way.” “It’s in the rules and I hope we don’t lose the shine of a good summer and a good series.

“Dean didn’t seem to get out any other way.”

Indian captain Harmanpreet Kaul, who was named Player of the Series, defended his teammates’ decision.

“I thought you would ask about the first nine wickets because they weren’t easy to take. It’s part of the game. I don’t think we did anything new. It was the ICC rules,” she said.

“I think it shows that hitters know what they’re doing and I’m going to support them.”

Dismissal is permitted by the Laws of the Game and is stipulated as follows: Releasing the ball may cause the non-striker to run out.

“In these situations it is an out-run-out if the bowler throws the ball over the stumps or if the non-striker leaves the ground when the wicket is placed by the hand of the bowler holding the ball. regardless of whether it is subsequently delivered.”

The MCC, the cricket parliament, issued a statement on Sunday, saying batsmen on the non-striker side “should remain on the ground until they see the ball leave the hands of the bowler. It can’t happen,” he repeated. .

“Yesterday was an anomalous end to a truly exciting match, but it was properly arbitrated and should not be viewed as anything more than that.”

The MCC also moved the dismissal from the “unfair play” section of the law to “enforcement” in changes that apply from October 1, making it clear that it is justified.

However, sending off, which has only happened four times in men’s ODI cricket and has never been done in women’s ODI cricket, is considered by many to be against the spirit of cricket, and one There is an expectation among division players that the bowler should give the batsman a warning first. Wandering from their folds.

England all-rounder Georgia Elwes told the BBC’s Test Match Special: ‘Doesn’t that just leave the sourest taste in your mouth at the end of this international summer? .

“I can’t believe that an Indian team thought it was the only way to win wickets. I don’t think Charlie Dean was trying to get any sort of advantage. That’s ridiculous.

“For me, Harmanpreet Kaur needs to look at her side and think ‘Does that want to win a cricket match?’ Can she drop the appeal?

“It took the shine away from Juran Goswami’s big send-off. She’s doing an honorary lap, but everyone else on the ground is amazed at how it all ended.

England’s players were visibly unimpressed by the sending off, and Dean, just three runs away from her first international half-century, was in tears at the end of the match.

Former England international spinner Alex Hartley told the BBC’s Test Match Special: “I don’t think it fits the spirit of the game, so I’m not sure how I feel.

“I can’t believe it happened, but I can believe it happened and that it is Deepti Sharma.

“She always threatens to do so, so we’ll talk about it as a team. England are much closer than India expected and she’s actually done it.

“I don’t think that should be the end of the international game. England will definitely go crazy.”

“I was waiting for India to win this game. I was waiting for England to make a mistake and India to win outright.”

England bowler Kate Cross, who took 4-29 to bowl India for 169, said it was India’s choice, but she personally would not have done so.

“In the end it was Deepti’s choice what she would do about it and we lost the cricket match,” Cross said.

“What I said in the dressing room was that we didn’t lose the game because of the last wicket. Losing the game is more disappointing than anything else.”

“This has always been a divisive dismissal and that’s all there is to say about it. Some like it, some don’t. Deepti has decided to dismiss Charlie Dean as such.

“I’m more disappointed that Charlie didn’t get 50 on Rose today because she was going to. If you’re looking at real positives, that’s probably the only way to get Diano out.” That’s why I’m just disappointed in her.”

But could this dismissal cause a rift between the two teams going forward? Test Match Special’s Daniel Norcross thinks so.

“This is going to feel incredibly sour,” Norcross said.

Vote below to give your opinion on the dismissal of “Mancado”.