Murali Kartik in Mankading Controversy Again

Former India spinner Murali Kartik found himself embroiled in a controversy as he mankaded a batsman in a Ranji Trophy game. Kartik playing for Railways, Mankaded Bengal batsman Sandipan Das after warning him ones for leaving the crease before the ball was delivered.
Bengal coach and former India international Ashok Malhotra was livid and charged Kartik with not playing the game in its spirits. Bengal seamer Ashok Dinda too had a few words to say to Kartik and he was joined by some of his teammates too.
This is not the first time Kartik had to face the fury of some of the traditional apologists of stealers who defend cheating in the name of the spirit of the game. He had a similar experience in county cricket last year, but good on him he didn't back down under the sustained attack. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ranji-trophy-2013-14/content/story/698449.html

Kartik warned the batsmen once so I don't what the problem is. I mean if you're not willing to run the batsmen out whats the point in warning them?

Personally, I've always thought that if the batsmen was allowed to leave his crease and have the run not called one short, the bowler should be well within his rights to run him out.

msp83 wrote:
...

This is not the first time Kartik had to face the fury of some of the traditional apologists of stealers who defend cheating in the name of the spirit of the game. He had a similar experience in county cricket last year, but good on him he didn't back down under the sustained attack. ...

Msp - There may be more to this than first meets the eye. I would be interested to know how ''similar'' this was to Kartik's experience in county cricket in 2012.

That was when Kartik was playing for Surrey against Somerset at Taunton and ran out Alex Barrow. My initial reaction upon hearing of that was very much on the same lines as your's above. As Barrow had already been warned by Kartik (pretty sure that is right), I initially took the view that if he was stupid and reckless enough to again try to steal a run then he had it coming!

There was an awful lot of comment at the time on the Surrey Supporters' Club website. There's been ill feeling between these two counties for some time and, as you might imagine, this incident added fuel to the fire. Some Somerset supporters gatecrashed the site to complain about despicable gamesmanship whilst the vast majority of Surrey supporters shed no tears for a cheat who had been done bang to rights.

However, when film of the incident appeared (sorry, I don't have a link) things did not appear so straightforward for those of us who had sided with the bowler. It appeared that Kartik had turned his arm over but not released the ball in a deliberate attempt to trick Barrow into believing the ball had been bowled and for him to then (and only then) step outside his crease. Whilst Barrow had been naive in being suckered like this (particularly having had a warning), the moral highground did not nearly so much belong to Kartik in my view and that of many other Surrey supporters. There was also a lot of comment suggesting that the umpire's decision of ''out'' was incorrect as the latest laws of the game stood relating to the bowler's arm having come over (maybe Mike or someone else could comment on that technical aspect?).

It was further suggested by some that Kartik deliberately targetted Barrow as a rookie batsman rather than having the bottle to try and take the scalp of someone like Trescothick in this way. Does Sandipan Das fit in that ''Barrow category''?

guildfordbat wrote:

msp83 wrote:
...

This is not the first time Kartik had to face the fury of some of the traditional apologists of stealers who defend cheating in the name of the spirit of the game. He had a similar experience in county cricket last year, but good on him he didn't back down under the sustained attack. ...

Msp - There may be more to this than first meets the eye. I would be interested to know how ''similar'' this was to Kartik's experience in county cricket in 2012.

That was when Kartik was playing for Surrey against Somerset at Taunton and ran out Alex Barrow. My initial reaction upon hearing of that was very much on the same lines as your's above. As Barrow had already been warned by Kartik (pretty sure that is right), I initially took the view that if he was stupid and reckless enough to again try to steal a run then he had it coming!

There was an awful lot of comment at the time on the Surrey Supporters' Club website. There's been ill feeling between these two counties for some time and, as you might imagine, this incident added fuel to the fire. Some Somerset supporters gatecrashed the site to complain about despicable gamesmanship whilst the vast majority of Surrey supporters shed no tears for a cheat who had been done bang to rights.

However, when film of the incident appeared (sorry, I don't have a link) things did not appear so straightforward for those of us who had sided with the bowler. It appeared that Kartik had turned his arm over but not released the ball in a deliberate attempt to trick Barrow into believing the ball had been bowled and for him to then (and only then) step outside his crease. Whilst Barrow had been naive in being suckered like this (particularly having had a warning), the moral highground did not nearly so much belong to Kartik in my view and that of many other Surrey supporters. There was also a lot of comment suggesting that the umpire's decision of ''out'' was incorrect as the latest laws of the game stood relating to the bowler's arm having come over (maybe Mike or someone else could comment on that technical aspect?).

It was further suggested by some that Kartik deliberately targetted Barrow as a rookie batsman rather than having the bottle to try and take the scalp of someone like Trescothick in this way. Does Sandipan Das fit in that ''Barrow category''?

Well if it happened as you say , guildford , it should have been given not out. Would have to see the video...

Guildford, Sandipan Das is a 19 year old batsman who is playing his first FC season, he has been an India U-19 player.

I don't have a vedio available. But I don't think the batsman's age can be a reason to slate Kartik. If anything, an emerging youngster should learn to respect the rules of the game rather than crying foul when caught out on cheating.
And Railways and Bengal don't have a troubled history as such.

Msp - I don't know the full facts and background to either incident although there was something of an immediate background to the Barrow dismissal. In the immediately preceding overs, words had been exchanged between members of the two sides and things were clearly hotting up. It was this background which in the view of quite a few led to Barrow being targetted by Kartik.

I completely agree with your general tone that if a professional batsman is unfairly trying to gain an advantage and has been warned, then he has no one to blame but himself if he is run out and that his age should not enter into it.

However, based on what had gone on before with Kartik, I wonder whether this latest incident might not be so clear cut and feel that there is no need to rush in putting Kartik on a pedestal.

The Bengal coach and players behaved like 3 year old cry babies after the incident and were iching to pick a fight with Kartik on every given opportunity. Ashok Dinda even tried a Mankiding of his own, but he proved even useless to hit the stumps even from his run-up!. Kartik reacted by making Bengal bowl all the overs of the day despite it becoming clear that a result was never a realistic possibility half-way into the 2nd session of the day.
Someone mentioned on cricinfo live Ranji blog that the stigma associated with Mankading has to be addressed pretty soon. The suggestion was that some international cricketers should take the lead by Mankading batsman whenever there is an opportunity without any warning. The wicketkeeper doesn't warn the batsman before trying a stumping, the fielders do not take catches and let the batsman off with a warning the first time.......

guildfordbat wrote:

msp83 wrote:
...

This is not the first time Kartik had to face the fury of some of the traditional apologists of stealers who defend cheating in the name of the spirit of the game. He had a similar experience in county cricket last year, but good on him he didn't back down under the sustained attack. ...

Msp - There may be more to this than first meets the eye. I would be interested to know how ''similar'' this was to Kartik's experience in county cricket in 2012.

That was when Kartik was playing for Surrey against Somerset at Taunton and ran out Alex Barrow. My initial reaction upon hearing of that was very much on the same lines as your's above. As Barrow had already been warned by Kartik (pretty sure that is right), I initially took the view that if he was stupid and reckless enough to again try to steal a run then he had it coming!

There was an awful lot of comment at the time on the Surrey Supporters' Club website. There's been ill feeling between these two counties for some time and, as you might imagine, this incident added fuel to the fire. Some Somerset supporters gatecrashed the site to complain about despicable gamesmanship whilst the vast majority of Surrey supporters shed no tears for a cheat who had been done bang to rights.

However, when film of the incident appeared (sorry, I don't have a link) things did not appear so straightforward for those of us who had sided with the bowler. It appeared that Kartik had turned his arm over but not released the ball in a deliberate attempt to trick Barrow into believing the ball had been bowled and for him to then (and only then) step outside his crease. Whilst Barrow had been naive in being suckered like this (particularly having had a warning), the moral highground did not nearly so much belong to Kartik in my view and that of many other Surrey supporters. There was also a lot of comment suggesting that the umpire's decision of ''out'' was incorrect as the latest laws of the game stood relating to the bowler's arm having come over (maybe Mike or someone else could comment on that technical aspect?).

It was further suggested by some that Kartik deliberately targetted Barrow as a rookie batsman rather than having the bottle to try and take the scalp of someone like Trescothick in this way. Does Sandipan Das fit in that ''Barrow category''?

Guildford et al,

Under the laws as they currently stand, the decision to send Barrow packing was incorrect - the run-out has to be effected before the bowler enters his delivery stride, therefore before his back foot (left in Kartik's case, being left-handed) lands.

For this reason, when I first heard of the incident I think I commented along the lines that under the current laws, if a batsman is run out in this way correctly then he really deserves what's coming, as he has to go so early it can only constitute a deliberate attempt to cheat, or a moment of complete dopiness. I'm not sure that a warning is needed anymore, but this seems so embedded in cricket's psyche that I think the warning will remain; in any case if there is a warning, then it really should exclude the latter case, so only the former remains.

I should say at this point that I was umpiring one of our juniors' practice matches, and one of our batsman was correctly mankaded; the bowler said "I'm not appealing on this occasion, but if you do it again I will" to our batsman; I said "fair enough" and explained to the young lad that he had to be careful to only leave the crease once the bowler's foot landed - in his case it was I believe a pure case of being dopy, I don't think he ever had any intention to gain an unfair advantage.

For that reason, in Kartik's case (and having seen the incident since) I would be more inclined to blame the umpire than Kartik (or Batty for maintaining the appeal). Barrow maybe should have been more careful, but within the laws of the game he was entitled to leave the crease when he did, and should feel incredibly hard done by.

As a coach of the batting side my gripe would be with the umpire, and I would be having a chat at least after the game (and possibly between innings - under the disguise of clarifying the law); at an official tournament I would also register the law error with the umpire manager (I don't think doing that is wrong or harsh - at the level we're at, the umpires are also there to learn, and if nobody points out their mistakes then they won't). I would underline to my player that he had done nothing wrong, but in future at least at this event that we should collectively be more careful with our backing up; I would emphasise at the next meeting what the law said, and that we're not to attempt to mankad outside the laws simply because the umpires seem to be unaware of the law in its current wording (in any case, I believe that having registered my complaint with the umpire manager, the umpires would have been swiftly made aware of what the law says, so any attempt to "retaliate" would be futile).

As a coach of the bowling side, I would have tried to get the message to my captain that the dismissal was unfair, and that we should try to withdraw the appeal. However that is not always the easiest thing to do (I have a good relationship with my captain, and believe that in the obvious controversy that would follow, he would look to me for guidance - this happened last summer when we got a somewhat controversial run-out (no mankadding involved) and I signaled "out" by raising my index finger to confirm that I thought we were correct; in the converse case I would have signaled "not out" by crossing my arms over in front of me, like an umpire confirming a not out call after DRS) and I wouldn't ever blame the opposition coach for failing to do so, nor would I blame the team - if the umpires don't know the laws, why should the coach and players be expected to?

At first class level it is of course a bit different, but even then, how many players were aware of the "evasive action" law before Harmison incorrectly ran out Inzaman in that way? I think most would be surprised at how many of the more obscure laws the players are unaware of...

The argument that somehow Barrow should have been spared because he is young and inexperienced is nonsense.

Without having seen this most recent incident, I can't really comment. In principle though, my stand remains: if done within the laws of the game, then nothing wrong with it, as the batsman has to leave VERY early for that to be possible.

Mike Selig wrote:
...

At first class level it is of course a bit different, but even then, how many players were aware of the "evasive action" law before Harmison incorrectly ran out Inzaman in that way? I think most would be surprised at how many of the more obscure laws the players are unaware of...

The argument that somehow Barrow should have been spared because he is young and inexperienced is nonsense.

Without having seen this most recent incident, I can't really comment. In principle though, my stand remains: if done within the laws of the game, then nothing wrong with it, as the batsman has to leave VERY early for that to be possible.

Mike - thanks for clarification of the laws (and to you, Alfie, for earlier confirmation). A massive part of the problem with the dismissal at Taunton was that no one directly involved appeared to fully know the laws.

I quite agree with you that Barrow being young and inexperienced was no reason to spare him. That has never cut any ice with me and I stated so at the time. For heaven's sake, he's a professional cricketer. It was though the view of some that Kartik wouldn't have had the balls to do it to a more senior member of the Somerset side like Trescothick - I just don't know.

I was going to ask you your view on deliberately targetting a batsman for a ''Mankad'' dismissal although now see that question rather falls away as the laws stand.

guildfordbat wrote:

I quite agree with you that Barrow being young and inexperienced was no reason to spare him. That has never cut any ice with me and I stated so at the time. For heaven's sake, he's a professional cricketer. It was though the view of some that Kartik wouldn't have had the balls to do it to a more senior member of the Somerset side like Trescothick - I just don't know.

Sorry, I seem to have somewhat missed your point. I think the fact that it was an inexperienced cricketer probably made it easier, and Kartik may very well have thought twice about mankading someone like Trescothick, but I'm not sure there's any way of telling for certain. In any case, that doesn't really affect the principle of the thing.

guildfordbat wrote:I was going to ask you your view on deliberately targetting a batsman for a ''Mankad'' dismissal although now see that question rather falls away as the laws stand.

I wouldn't see an issue with it. If a batsman is known to like to back up early, then you are just planning for that particular batsman. Not sure there's anything wrong with that - if KP were batting with say Monty, nobody would complain that all the throws went to Monty's end would they? For me, that's just smart cricket.