Mankad (cricket)

The term “Mankad” in cricket refers to a method of run-out dismissal where the bowler removes the bails at the non-striker’s end before delivering the ball if the non-striker leaves the crease early. Although the dismissal is entirely within the Laws of Cricket, it has often been a topic of debate concerning sportsmanship and the so-called “spirit of the game.” The name originates from Vinoo Mankad, the Indian cricketer who famously executed this dismissal during a Test match in the late 1940s, thereby lending his name to this distinctive and sometimes controversial form of run-out.

Definition and Rule

Under the Laws of Cricket, a batsman is run out if, at any time while the ball is in play, they are out of their ground and the wicket is fairly put down by the opposing side. Law 38.3 of the current MCC Laws of Cricket (2022 Code) specifically clarifies the “Run Out of the Non-Striker” rule.
The relevant section states:

“If the non-striker is out of their ground at any time from the moment the ball comes into play until the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the bowler is permitted to attempt to run out the non-striker.”

This rule means that if the non-striker backs up too far before the ball is released, the bowler has the right to break the stumps at their end and claim a run-out. Contrary to common misconception, such a dismissal is not illegal or unsporting; it is a legitimate cricketing act, now widely accepted under modern interpretations.

Origin and Historical Context

The term “Mankad” originates from an incident involving Vinoo Mankad, one of India’s greatest all-rounders, during India’s 1947–48 tour of Australia. In a Test match at Sydney, Mankad ran out Bill Brown, the Australian non-striker, after repeatedly warning him not to leave the crease prematurely.
Although some commentators initially criticised the action as unsporting, Australian captain Sir Don Bradman publicly defended Mankad, stating that Brown was at fault for leaving the crease early and that Mankad had acted within the laws. Bradman’s support helped legitimise the practice, though the term “Mankading” stuck in cricket’s vocabulary to describe this particular dismissal.

Procedure and Conditions

A Mankad dismissal can occur only under the following conditions:

• The non-striker must leave their crease before the bowler releases the ball.
• The bowler must remove the bails with the ball in hand before delivering.
• The dismissal must occur before the bowler’s front foot crosses the popping crease.
• The ball must be considered “in play.”

In professional cricket, the third umpire is often consulted for close Mankad decisions to determine whether the bowler completed the dismissal legally and whether the non-striker was indeed out of their ground.

Evolution of the Law

Over time, the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) — the custodian of the Laws of Cricket — has refined the rules surrounding the Mankad dismissal to eliminate ambiguity. Historically, bowlers were required to issue a warning before effecting the dismissal, though no such obligation has ever been part of the official laws.
In 2017, the MCC shifted the relevant clause from Law 42 (Fair and Unfair Play) to Law 41.16, which deals with Unfair Play. Then, in the 2022 revision, the dismissal was moved again to Law 38 (Run Out), symbolically reinforcing its legitimacy as a standard mode of dismissal rather than an act of unfair play. This reclassification officially acknowledged that “Mankading” is a lawful and acceptable cricketing act.

Modern Interpretation and Controversy

Despite being legal, Mankad dismissals often provoke debate about sportsmanship. Critics argue that it violates the “spirit of cricket,” suggesting bowlers should instead warn the non-striker. Supporters contend that batters who seek to gain an unfair advantage by backing up early are themselves at fault, and dismissing them under this law ensures fairness.
The controversy lies largely in perception rather than legality. In professional cricket, the spirit of the game is a guiding principle rather than an enforceable rule. Thus, whether a Mankad dismissal is deemed acceptable often depends on the match situation and the attitudes of players and spectators.

Notable Instances in Cricket History

Several high-profile Mankad incidents have reignited the debate over the years:

• Vinoo Mankad vs Bill Brown (1947–48, Sydney Test): The original instance that gave the dismissal its name. Mankad dismissed Brown twice during the series, sparking global discussion.
• Brian Luckhurst (England) vs Charlie Griffith (West Indies, 1969): Another famous early example of a bowler running out a non-striker.
• Kapil Dev vs Peter Kirsten (India vs South Africa, 1992): Kapil Dev ran out Kirsten during an ODI at Port Elizabeth after the latter repeatedly left his crease early.
• Sachithra Senanayake vs Jos Buttler (Sri Lanka vs England, 2014): Senanayake’s dismissal of Buttler in an ODI created considerable debate, even prompting the England captain to question the spirit of the act.
• Ravichandran Ashwin vs Jos Buttler (IPL 2019): In a match between Kings XI Punjab and Rajasthan Royals, Ashwin’s dismissal of Buttler reignited global debate, with many modern players defending Ashwin’s actions as entirely within the rules.
• Deepti Sharma vs Charlie Dean (India Women vs England Women, 2022): Deepti Sharma’s run-out of Charlie Dean at the non-striker’s end at Lord’s in an ODI brought widespread attention to the issue in women’s cricket, with global consensus increasingly favouring the legality of the act.

Role in Modern Cricket

Today, Mankad dismissals are more common and increasingly accepted, especially in T20 cricket, where every run is crucial. Bowlers are trained to be aware of non-strikers leaving the crease early, and teams use such dismissals as a strategic deterrent against unfair backing up.
With the Decision Review System (DRS) and advanced video analysis, Mankads are now adjudicated more transparently, reducing controversy around legitimacy. Many coaches and analysts argue that as batters seek to exploit every advantage, the same right should extend to bowlers acting within the law.

Ethical and Sporting Perspectives

The debate around Mankading often centres on the balance between fairness and sportsmanship:

• For the dismissal: It enforces discipline, discourages non-strikers from leaving early, and maintains equality between bat and ball.
• Against the dismissal: Critics claim it disrupts the gentlemanly spirit of cricket and prefer that a prior warning be issued.

The modern stance, however, increasingly recognises that the non-striker bears responsibility for remaining within the crease until the ball is released. The MCC has clarified that the dismissal should be regarded as “a legitimate run out”, and not an act contrary to fair play.

Contemporary Usage and Acceptance

In contemporary cricket — particularly in franchise leagues and international limited-overs formats — Mankad dismissals have become more accepted. Players, commentators, and governing bodies now refer to the act as a “run out at the non-striker’s end” rather than “Mankading,” to avoid personalising the law and to normalise its acceptance.
Younger players are being educated from early stages to remain within the crease, and umpires are instructed to uphold the dismissal without hesitation if performed correctly.