Do not worry. We cover all the categories above. This is the 100% useful explanation of the Briefing.
When in 1948 an All-Round Hall of Famer from India missed an Australian opener on the non-attacking side, cricket writers struggled to find new terminology to describe the dismissal. While unhappy it wasn’t as simple a task as when Trevor Legbeforewicket first hit a batter on the pads, they eventually settled on acronym-based Mankad – MANufacturing Krazy Arguments on Twitter (Old English was used in the 1940s, so crazy was spelled with a K and Twitter with a D).
At the time, there didn’t seem to be much controversy about it, but over the next few decades it became huge for no good reason.
Is it acceptable to call it a Mankad?
Vinoo Mankad’s family (he changed his name to celebrate his most famous sacking; editors please check the facts carefully) said they would prefer the cricket media not use the former’s name player to describe it, due to the negative connotations attached to acting in some parts of the world. In response, some have suggested the dismissal is named after Bill Brown, the hitter who got fired for stepping away from his crease too soon.
“Jos Buttler is getting brown at the IPL, once again.”
Who could oppose it?
Are they legal?
They have always been legal. They were never legal. And for 15 years, the ICC Cricket Committee has indeed made the playing conditions relating to such dismissals less ambiguous, making them – that’s the technical term – Super Duper Legal.
Doesn’t that make the little babies who complain about such dismissals whine?
Wow. These are your words, not mine.
So what about the spirit of cricket?
As the Briefing is from one of the cricket party islands, the only spirit of cricket we recognize is the arrack. If you’re from one of the other party islands, rum works just as well.
But isn’t it strange that the English cricketing establishment, which seems to cling most to the idea of the spirit of cricket, and seems to exhibit its own moral indignation at an act of perfectly cricketing legal as a form of elite sporting ethics, expected people who came across completely different cricketing cultures to subscribe to their very specific unwritten code that no one else agreed to?
Wow please stop trying to get your cricketing political views into this very serious and respectable column.
Is it good that women’s cricket gets this kind of attention?
A triumph. A testament to the hard work and dedication of so many, over many decades, that women’s cricket can now generate controversy almost as stupid and toxic as the men’s game frequently does.
Now that this hyper-educational piece has made us super awake on the subject, what can we do to normalize these layoffs?
If you’re playing ravine cricket, make sure you have a set of stumps on the non-striker’s end to make it easier to eliminate the non-striker. In school cricket matches, have the covering or midwicket players constantly keep an eye out for batters coming out of their crease. In club matches, ruthlessly weed out non-strikers, then warn them after the fact just to rub off on the fact that you’re completely allowed to follow this nonsensical streak.
And at home, where so many core values are learned, get your kids outside as soon as they get up each morning.
Next month on the Briefing:
– Australia flatly rejects all other versions of the spirit of cricket and instead offers a rubber boot brimming with the bogan moonshine of cricket.
– “We are not just a Guinness country.” Ireland annoyed to be treated like minnows for all this wit.
Andrew Fidel Fernando is ESPNcricinfo’s correspondent in Sri Lanka. @afidelf