I believe it is unjust and would not consider it: Stuart Broad

Stuart Broad, one of England’s most successful Test pacers, has expressed his displeasure with the Marylebone Cricket Club’s (MCC) decision to revise the regulation governing runout at non-end. striker’s The change now legitimises the “Mankad” dismissal since it has been shifted from the “unfair play” play category to the “run-out” play category. Broad, who sounded agitated on Twitter, said that “mankad requires zero talent” and that it is a “unfair” way to claim a wicket.

As a result, the mankad is no longer unjust and is now a lawful dismissal. Isn’t it always a lawful dismissal, and whether it’s unjust is a matter of opinion? It is unjust to me, and I would not consider it since, in my opinion, rejecting a batter is based on competency, whereas the mankad requires no ability “He scribbled.

Fraser Stewart, MCC’s Laws Manager, stated: “Since the publication of the 2017 Code of the Laws of Cricket, the game has changed dramatically. The second version of that code, issued in 2019, was primarily clarification and small modifications, but the 2022 Code makes some significant changes, from how we talk about cricket to how it’s played.

The following is a major adjustment made by the MCC regarding Mankad:

38.3: Removing the non-running striker’s

Running out the non-striker has been transferred from Law 41 (Unfair Play) to Law 38 (Runout). The law’s text remains unchanged.