[U19 World Cup] Zimbabwe vs Windies

[Googly]

I think today will be a watershed in the interpretation of this rule. I don't care what anybody says about the letter of the law, it's not how the game should have ended. It's just a game at the end of the day and the fact that it gets our juices flowing so much is testimony to what a great game it is. I don't like cricket...I love it!!
Conant I know you played a part in this somehow, do what's right and depart from this forum.

[Googly]

And proof that it's a team game. Possibly one of the weakest sides Zim has ever fielded, yet pulled together to create an unforgettable day. The beauty of cricket is that we could have had Curran, Byrom, Welch, Curtis and won the World Cup, or lost to Fiji, there's no other game quite like it.

[ZIMDOGGY]

Seems to be making alot of noise in Australia as well surprisingly.

From what i can see though, 90% of it is supporting the West Indies.

I saw a comment mentioned that if it happened at the other end (stumping) then would we be up in arms? If a batsman crept forward that way?

I believe that one day this tactic will be employed more frequently, especially in T20, and we will get used to it as just another dimension of the sport.

[eugene]

Bowlers aren't allowed to exceed the white line, why should batsmen?

[ZIMDOGGY]

my only fear is that in the future bowlers will just cannonball themselves into the stumps every over or so in a blind luck attempt to dismiss the bat.

Although if that were to happen, im sure the batsman would counter adapt and stick firmly in their crease and it will become rare again.

[eugene]

A tactical masterstroke if the Windies pre-planned this.

[BMCAtreasurer]

Mankad is within the rules. This is professional sport, not a game of beach cricket. Whatever it takes to win. Zimbabweans clearly lack this mentality.

What he says .

We mustn't be bad losers. We do however need to teach our players the rules of cricket, it is amazing how many don't know them!
As for this being against the spirit of the game i'm afraid i don't get it.
If i present,
1)John the book maker 1994
2)MArlon Samuels Bookmaker 2008
3)Glen McGrath sledging 2003
4)Mike Denness Affair 2001
5)Pakistan Ball tampering 2006
6)Shane Warne banned drugs 2003
7)Bob Woolmer 2007
8)Pakistan spot fixing 2010
9)Underarm bowling 1981
10)Hanse Cronje 2000
Which clearly shows crickets "spirit of the game" murder,drugs,cheating,money. So perhaps we should not be so naive about the "spirit of the game" ?

[CrimsonAvenger]

There is also a reason why I started to support Zim, and not the greatest side of the day, the all-conquering, bossy, sledging Aussies under Steve Waugh. In all those years I was often embarrassed by what happened off the field in Zim cricket, but never by the players and their actions on it.

+1. Add me to that list.

By the way, you guys indicating on the lines of "the rules allow it so take it on the chin and move on"... Have you given a thought about whether Ngarava was actually out of the crease? Remember, this is a case of batsman moving out of the crease as the bails are being broken - like stumping. So, the momentum of both the batsman and the bowler trying to inflict run out are moving forward (not like run out where the batsman is out and is trying to come in from the opposite direction). If you see the image below, he is on the line and the bails are completely off and in the air (and yes, "the line belongs to the umpire") but the previous frame shows a tiny part of Ngarava's bat inside while the bail is not completely broken. So, sometime between these two frames was the instant when the bail was lofted completely from above the stumps and there is no conclusive evidence for me to give that out in the first place. Why was there a hurry to declare it out after two replays? Why no other angles were explored?

CaNOmGKWcAAoBpa.jpg (42.43 KiB) Viewed 1811 times

To me, it is unfair to say the batsman will learn a tough lesson from this and let's move on, because he was already following the rule to the "spirit". I would consider it very harsh on Ngarava if that is the conclusion we want to draw. I agree, in general batsmen should learn a lesson given the rule. But this guy did not even break the rule. He was maximizing his opportunity within the allowed "rules" of the game...

[Kriterion_BD]

Bowlers aren't allowed to exceed the white line, why should batsmen?

Its an emotional thing. Like gay marriage.

My policy is to always root against Zimbabwe until ZC can field a full strength side ie with all the white defectors eg Taylor or Welch. Thus I was rooting for the Windies, yet even I FELT cheated by how the game ended. I FELT for captain Mavuta when i saw how he had very little to say and was visibly distraught. Key word here: FELT.

Thats an emotion.

I KNEW the result was totally legal. But I still grappled with it.

Its no different than a stumping. WKs never warn a batsman and batter stumped is never trying to get undue advantage. But he is still out and no one complains. Because of familiarity. Mankads are rare, and whenever it happens its always controversial due to that rarity. I would be cool with them outlawing the dismissal.

Gay marriage is legal at least in many jurisdictions. Ands its totally fair. Yet I still feel that goes against the spirit of matrimony.

So it is mankading.

[Kriterion_BD]

Crimson, Im not totally aware of the rules...doe the bails have to completely dislodged or merely disturbed? The image you've shown has the bat on the line with none of it behind (clearly out) and some part of the bail possibly still in contact with the stumps. So when the bail is disturbed its likely Ngarava was in, but clearly when its dislodged he was outside the crease. Either way its beyond the scope of 24 frames per sec or whatever they use for HD boradcasts.

Couple months ago during the BD ODI tour Riyad was run out on a dead ball where one bail was accidently dislodged by the WK while the othe bail was intact. Cover fielder fired in a direct hit and dislodged the other bail. Riyad assumed he was out and walked off when Chakabva or Mutumbami completed the stumping correctly. Again i am not sure if the rule is that sen a single bail being dislodged ends the play. The decisio reflects that as well as the fact that whenyou arw clean bowled, only one bail needs to be dislodged. Third umpires ended up ruling in the batsmans favor and Chigumbura seemed to have a short discussion with the rest of the ZIM team. At the time a number of ZCF posters told me riyad was responsible for knowing the stumping was not valid and not walking off ie for being a good sport. If that is true its hypocritical to then say Ngarva has no obligation to look for a mankad and stay in his crease. Im not saying you said that but a few ZCFers did.