TOPIC:

With the new rule/law being written into the game re the bowler running a batsman out for leaving his crease early,  a new question arises.
prior to the rule/law, the umpires could ask the captain of they wanted the appeal to go ahead.  I believe the new rule/law, takes that option out of the equation now.
But I noticed it happened in an over night game.
If the umpire can ask that question about this type of dismissal,  can they also ask the same about all other dismissals. The bowler  run out is now legal.  In the rules/ laws of the game. 
It is no longer a sporting decision.It is a legal legit dismissal. The over night decision bemused me.
This has been a hotly disputed.form of dismissal for many years. 
There is no right or wrong, or sportsmanship involved. It is now a legal dismissal. 
 

Batsmen just need to be aware of the new rule and change their running habits accordingly. So they don't leave the crease until the bowler is delivering the ball.

it's now a rule so batters need to be careful, or they will lose their wicket. 

It's always been a rule, it's simply a runout. The fact that the umpire could ask the bowling sides captain if he wanted to proceed with the appeal was done on a so called sportsmanship basis as it was viewed as poor form, which I have always disagreed with.
The new interpretation/confirmation of the rule removes this silly concept. Bowlers used to give a warning by almost taking the bails off, but if the batters want to take an unfair advantage, then the bowlers within their rights to run them out.

In the BBL Melbourne derdy.Zampa ran out the Renegades batsman.Or as we always called Mankad.It went to the 3rd umpire and was given not out??
The weirdest one was a catch completed over the rope.Nesser threw the ball in the air over the boundary.Then threw it in the air and caught again on the field..It was given out..Should of been 6 not out imo.

GTX - if you complete the bowling action then you can't complete the run out or Mankad as they call it.

Zampa did the right thing he just didn't know the rules, you need to whip off the bails before you roll the arm over.

As for the catch that was crap, why have ropes is fielders can run over them, jump up and hit the ball back over the rope and then catch it

If that's the rule, then go back to having fences as the boundary to stop that shit

Thanks for the heads up on that PH.Was wondering what happened.Was watching around lots of people with lots of noise.

the rule is once it goes past half way with the arm so if you are on your upward motion you can do the mankad but once at the top you can't.

Cricket is not the only sport where you can throw the ball back in once you are out of the field of play as long as your feet are not touching the ground. Its not unique to cricket. The other one for me is when a catch can pass through 6 hands and still be considered out. That's like 1 hand 1 bounce in my opinion.

It's using the rules of the game to your advantage i guess. definitely don't agree with them all for a lot of sports. Not being allowed to move on the mark sucks in my opinion and I have to officiate it. Giving a 50M penalty for a player moving on the mark as the ball carrier baulks him is ridiculous but that's the rule.

Hey SS is TOGS coming back??