How Rohit Sharma Acted Against 'Spirit Of Cricket' By Withdrawing Shanaka's Run Out Appeal

A run out at the non-striker's end while the batter is backing up has been regarded as an act against the 'Spirit of Cricket', still being termed as 'Mankad' by most of the cricketing fraternity. However, the laws of cricket state otherwise, and hence a bit of drama was witnessed when Mohammed Shami ran out Dasun Shanaka, who was batting at 98*, and captain Rohit Sharma decided to go against the laws and withdraw the appeal. 

Sri Lanka were at 291/8 in the last over, requiring 83 to win off the last 3 balls. Kasun Rajitha was on strike while Sri Lankan captain Dasun Shanaka was on the non-striker's end, unbeaten on 98*. Apart from Pathum Nissanka, only the Sri Lankan captain stepped up in a mammoth run chase of 374 runs. 

Running in to bowl the fourth delivery of the over, Mohammed Shami saw Dasun Shanaka backing up to run too early and instead of completing the delivery, Shami dislodged the stumps with Shanaka out of the crease and appealed. On-field umpire Nitin Menon referred it to the 3rd umpire.

However, Indian captain Rohit Sharma intervened and after a chat with Shami, the bowler withdrew his appeal. Shanaka was handed the strike on the next delivery and smacked a four and six on the last two deliveries, finishing on 108* as India won the match by 67 runs. After the match, Rohit Sharma said that 'Shanaka batted brilliantly and we cannot dismiss him like that.'

This raises the question that whether a cricket law is made to be followed at all times or in just specific situations. How fair is it to gift the opponent a century with the match already in hand, and run out a batter when his team needs the player on the crease to stand a chance in the match? Ravichandran Ashwin sparked the fire of run-out at the non-striker's end, which resulted in a new law stating 'Mankad' as a run-out and a legal way of dismissal.

Deepti Sharma similarly ran out Charlie Dean to register the first clean sweep for the Indian women's team against England in England. A lot of Indians stood up to classify this method as a legal dismissal, and yet the Indian captain backed down from following this law when it didn't matter. The right process of thought should be that a team either uses this method, or it doesn't. It isn't meant to be used occasionally. 

Interestingly, in 2010, Virender Sehwag was in blazing form and was on 99* when India required 1 run to win. Sehwag was on strike and on the advice of Tillakaratne Dilshan, spinner Suraj Randiv bowled a no-ball which denied Sehwag his century. Sehwag smacked the delivery for a six, but the match finished before as it was a no-ball and India already achieved the target. Bowling a no-ball was against the rule, but Sri Lanka didn't hesitate. In Shanaka's case, the runout was legal, and yet it was withdrawn. This, in plain sight, is in the actual sense against the 'Spirit of Cricket'.

Also Read: SA20, 2023 - Squads & Schedule

A bowler pays the price with a free hit if he crosses the bowling line by even a cm, and yet the batters are given a second life for not staying in the crease and gifted a ton. In the name of the spirit of cricket, the rules are made to seem unimportant and used at one's convenience. Batters should learn to stay inside the crease until the ball is bowled, and this wouldn't be possible if big players like Rohit Sharma falsely display the 'Spirit of Cricket'.