The Mankad: Cricket's Most Debated Dismissal and the 2022 Law Change
The full history of the Mankad dismissal — Vinoo Mankad's 1947 original, its 75 years of controversy as 'spirit of cricket' versus legal wicket, Deepti Sharma's 2022 dismissal of Charlotte Dean, the ICC's 2022 Laws change reclassifying it as a run-out, and why the debate will never fully settle.
The Origin of the Mankad
The 'Mankad' dismissal takes its name from Indian spin-bowling legend Vinoo Mankad, who ran out Australian non-striker Bill Brown by removing the bails at the bowler's end before delivering the ball — Brown had backed up too far out of his crease. Mankad had warned Brown earlier in the match and dismissed him the same way in the first innings; when Brown backed up again in the second innings, Mankad dismissed him again without a further warning. The dismissal was legal under the Laws of Cricket but generated fierce public controversy in Australia about whether it was 'cricket' — i.e., within the spirit of the game.
The dismissal is technically a run-out under Law 38 — the non-striker is out of their ground at the bowler's end when the ball is put in play (before the bowler releases it). The non-striker is required to remain within the popping crease until the ball leaves the bowler's hand. Backing up — moving forward from the crease in anticipation of the stroke — is illegal. However, traditional cricket etiquette had established a custom of warning the batsman before executing the dismissal, and many captains chose not to enforce it even when legally entitled.
75 Years of Controversy
Between 1947 and 2022, the Mankad was used only a handful of times in international cricket, each generating significant controversy. Trevor Goddard (South Africa) ran out Ian Redpath (Australia) in 1965-66; Ian Botham was warned by Pakistan's Sikander Bakht in 1978; and Kapil Dev ran out Peter Kirsten (South Africa) in the 1992 World Cup. Each incident produced the same debate: legally correct but morally wrong (in the eyes of those who valued the warning-first custom) versus entirely fair and within the Laws.
The 'spirit of cricket' framing — developed through the MCC's preamble to the Laws — was used to argue that the Mankad was technically legal but unsporting. Defenders of the dismissal argued that the non-striker who backs up too far is gaining an unfair advantage (a shorter distance to run), and the fielding team is entitled to prevent this advantage by enforcing the Law. The argument was never resolved because both sides were correct within their own frameworks: the dismissal was legal; the pre-existing custom of warning was not legally required.
Deepti Sharma's 2022 Dismissal
In September 2022, England's Charlotte Dean was run out by Indian spinner Deepti Sharma at Lord's Cricket Ground during a women's ODI — Deepti removed the bails at the bowler's end as Dean backed up too far, without a warning. England needed 17 runs from the final wicket pair; Dean's dismissal ended the match and gave India a 16-run victory. The incident reignited the debate on a global scale, with English cricket commentators and former players criticising Deepti for the dismissal without a warning, while Indians and many international observers supported the fully legal dismissal.
Why the Debate Continues
Despite the 2022 law clarification, the debate has not fully settled because cricket's culture is strongly shaped by informal customs and perceived fairness alongside formal Laws. Players and fans who believe the non-striker should be warned before being dismissed will continue to view the dismissal without warning as unsporting, regardless of its legal status. The law change removes any legal ambiguity but does not change the cultural expectation held by many players — particularly in English county and Test cricket — that warning-first is the appropriate practice.
Frequently asked questions
Has the Mankad ever been used in a Test match?
Yes — Vinoo Mankad's original was in a Test against Australia in 1947. Peter Kirsten was Mankaded in the 1992 World Cup (a limited-overs match). Several county cricket incidents have occurred. In Test cricket, the dismissal has been used fewer than 5 times at the international level across the full history of the game — the rarity reflects the cultural inhibition around using it, even when entirely legal.
Is there a way the non-striker can legally back up before the delivery?
No — the non-striker must remain within the popping crease (or beyond their own ground at the non-striker's end) until the ball leaves the bowler's hand. Any movement toward the striker's end before the ball is released is technically backing up and is illegal. In practice, very small movements go unpenalised, and the Mankad is typically applied only when the backing up is obviously excessive — the non-striker is well outside the crease before the delivery.
Can a bowler fake a delivery to run out the non-striker?
A bowler who runs in as if to bowl but then runs out the non-striker without delivering the ball is within the Laws under the post-2022 framework. The ball is not in play until the bowler has delivered it, but the non-striker's crease obligation begins when they leave the crease before the ball is delivered. The dismissal is valid whether or not the bowler completes the delivery — the act of removing the bails at the bowler's end before delivery is the trigger, not the delivery itself.