Match 70, which was the last league-stage match of IPL 2025 (Indian Premier League) between the Lucknow Super Giants (LSG) and Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) at the Ekana Stadium on Tuesday, 27 May, saw spinner Digvesh Rathi attempt to run out Jitesh Sharma, who had stepped out of the non-striker’s end even before the ball was delivered. As Rathi dislodged the bails and appealed to the umpire for a “Mankading” dismissal, the decision was ruled not out.
At that point, LSG skipper Rishabh Pant withdrew the appeal to maintain the spirit of the game. It is worth questioning whether Jitesh was actually out before Pant’s withdrawal, or if he was not out according to the rules. There are two clauses in the MCC Rulebook regarding running out the batter at the non-striker’s end, which help explain the situation.
According to MCC Law No. 38.3.1, a batter will be declared out if he or she is out of the crease during the timeframe between the moment the ball comes into play and the normal release point of the ball. In such a case, if the non-striker is out of the crease and the bowler dislodges the bails, it would be considered out, regardless of whether the bowler eventually delivers the ball.
“At any time from the moment the ball comes into play until the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the non-striker is liable to be run out if he/she is out of his/her ground. In these circumstances, the non-striker will be run out if he/she is out of his/her ground when his/her wicket is broken by the bowler throwing the ball at the stumps or by the bowler’s hand holding the ball, whether or not the ball is subsequently delivered,” states the MCC law No. 38.3.1.
What do MCC laws say about Mankading attempt?
As per the MCC Law No. 38.3.1, if Digvesh Rathi had dislodged the bails between the moment the ball comes into play and the normal release point of the ball, Jitesh would be out, as he was well outside the crease. However, there is another clause in the rulebook, the MCC law No. 38.3.1.2, which has a case for the dismissal attempt after the completion of the delivery.
Could RCB have lost if Pant hadn’t withdrawn run-out appeal?
This law states that if the batter in the non-striker’s end had left the crease before the point where the moment the ball comes into play and the normal release point of the ball, and the bowler proceeds to release the ball, only to go for the Mankading dismissal, it will Not be out, irrespective of whether the bowler eventually delivers the ball.
“Even if the non-striker had left his/her ground before the instant at which the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, once the bowler has reached that point it is no longer possible for the bowler to run out the non-striker under this Law,” the MCC law No. 38.3.1.2 states.
As per the above-mentioned MCC law, it was found that Rathi went for the Mankading dismissal when he reached a point where the dismissal would no longer count, that is, after the release point. Hence, the umpire declared Jitesh “not out.” It would have stayed the same even if Pant had not withdrawn the dismissal to uphold the spirit of the game.
