Non striker running in with bowler on last ball

[madgagoo]

Came across this in a Sunday game at the weekend, where I was standing as a favour to the club, so not a formal appointment.

On the last ball of the innings, the non-striker started 10-15m behind me and effectively ran in alongside the bowler for his last few strides and was sprinting by the point of delivery, obviously looking to ensure he made it to the striker's end for run, whatever happened. I hadn't noticed this but the bowler did and stopped his delivery and warned the batsman he was liable to be "Mankaded" - he was out of his ground.

The fielding team then objected to the batsman's conduct and I was minded to agree; either on the basis he was distracting the field (law 42) or perhaps under the general spirit of the game/unsportsmanlike conduct. I therefore asked the batsman to back up in a normal manner, which he did without objection.

On reading through the laws after the game, I'm not certain my interpretation was correct and perhaps I was overly harsh on the batsman.


Thoughts or evidence?

[rmurphy65]

In my opinion the non-striker is allowed to run/walk as he wants when backing up - as long as he does it (i) where the non-striker would normally be and (ii) it didn't physically obstruct any of the fielders.

If the bowler wants to run him out then that's his business - he's fully entitled to do it, but he can't tell the non-striker how to back-up.

[chiggers]

Just come across this, so here's something from an ex-player's viewpoint. Many moons ago (and I know that the law has changed since, but the principle remains the same) I went out to bat in a local midweek league match. My predecessor was out of the last ball of an over, so I was at the non-striker's end for the new over. As I approached the middle I was loudly warned by the bowler, a cantankerous old 'pro' with a reputation for 'stalking' non-strikers, for backing up too far - before he had even seen what I was going to do - on the basis that having warned me (as was custom and practice at the time if not law) he could then run me out without compunction.

The law at the time was that once the bowler had begun his action i.e. in his delivery stride and bringing his bowling arm forward so there was a reasonable assumption that the bowler would then release the ball, then then the non-striker could not then turn round or bring his arm full circle and attempt to run out the non-striker. I entered into discussion with the umpire on this point and he agreed that was the correct interpretation. In the presence of the umpire therefore I made it that if he caught me out of my ground outside those circumstances and those circumstances only then he was quite entitled to attempt to run me out. As he walked back to his mark, I walked back with him, on my own side of the stumps so about 3 or 4 yards away from him. As he began his run-up (a short one of about 6 or 7 yards), I let him take a pace and then followed him - about half a step behind and at the same pace. As he let go of the ball, I was just behind him and following through the popping crease at a perfect pace to back up. He did glance sideways over his shoulder at first, and it did seem to distract him, but as far as I was concerned I was doing nothing illegal and that it was he that was attempting to stretch the law

A couple of times in the over he tried to get me to transgress by stopping or stuttering in his run, but being that fraction behind I could see what he was doing. Eventually he gave that up, and he never tried that approach that again when I was batting. I did though stick with the 'run-up' from the non-striker's end - just behind the bowler pace-wise for the last 6 or 7 yards but on the correct side of the stumps. I never did get 'Mankaded' and I think that even now that would be the best approach for the non-striker