|
|
Post by Acumen on Apr 14, 2015 22:48:31 GMT
Can anyone explain why the term "backing up" is used for a non-striker starting a run?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deepak on Jun 25, 2015 4:17:04 GMT
This is the old Mankad scenario. The Law now dictates that in delivering the ball, once the bowler’s back foot lands in his delivery stride, the bowler can no longer attempt to run out the non-striker. That means that once this happens, the non-striker can start “backing up”. There is a rise in the number of non-strikers being Run out after straight drives have been deflected onto the stumps by the bowlers.
|
|
|
|
Post by gooders on Jun 25, 2015 17:21:32 GMT
This is the old Mankad scenario. The Law now dictates that in delivering the ball, once the bowler’s back foot lands in his delivery stride, the bowler can no longer attempt to run out the non-striker. That means that once this happens, the non-striker can start “backing up”. There is a rise in the number of non-strikers being Run out after straight drives have been deflected onto the stumps by the bowlers. Call me pedantic, but how does this answer Acumen's question? He asked why it is called "Backing up" not when it can happen, or what can happen when it does happen. |
|
|
|
Post by nompere on Jul 2, 2015 11:51:55 GMT
I guess by taking the start that is the non-striker leaves his popping crease and walks towards the other end of the wicket so that it will take him less time to reach the other end and hence the backing up term ?
|
|
