Adelaide Strikers coach Jason Gillespie would have no issue if one of his players emulated Adam Zampa and ran out a creeping batter because leaving the crease early is “cheating”.
Gillespie, who took 402 wickets for Australia during his stellar fast bowling career, also echoed calls for the same technology which catches out no balls to be used to penalise creeping batters.
The issue consumed cricket discussions on Wednesday after Zampa’s failed attempt to run out Tom Rogers during the Melbourne Big Bash derby at the MCG on Tuesday night.
Zampa, the Stars captain, whipped off the bails after halting his bowling action as Rogers was out of his ground at the non-strikers end.
It was given not out because Zampa’s bowling action had gone too far under the rules, and his coach David Hussey suggested they would have withdrawn an appeal should it have been given out.
But Gillespie went the other way and said if the bowlers were penalised for overstepping the crease, the batters should be too, and if that meant being run out under the current law, then so be it.
“It’s pretty simple isn’t it ? If a batter stays behind the line until the bowler releases the ball … You’d have to ask Adam if he was trying to make a point. I don’t know,” Gillespie said on Wednesday.
“For me, it’s very simple, if batters stay behind the line until the ball has been released, we’ve got nothing to talk about.
“I would have no issue if any of our players ran out the batsman at the bowler’s end, because the batsmen is cheating. So stay behind the line and you won’t have a problem.”
Australian fast bowler Mitchell Starc, who stopped short of running out South African batter Theunis de Bruyn during the Boxing Day Test, has suggested technology used to catch no-balls be used to penalise batters who leave their crease early.
Gillespie said that could work.
“Bowlers get penalised every time they step over the line, why not, if when the ball is bowled and the batter is out of his crease, there’s a penalty there. That would take it out of the player’s hands,” he said.
“At the moment the bowler is seen as the bad guy for just pointing out the batter is doing the wrong thing.”
The term “Mankad” was coined after Indian Vinoo Mankad ran out Australia batter Bill Brown in 1947 at the non-striker’s end for backing up too far.
Gillespie said the traditional idea it was outside the spirit of the game had been surpassed by the need to follow the rules.
“Growing up we all were educated it was a bad thing and it’s the wrong thing to do and outside the spirit of cricket. I would argue that gaining an unfair advantage is outside the spirit of the game,” he said.
“I actually feel for the family of Vinoo Mankad, he was just implementing that because Bill Brown was running out of his crease constantly and he ran him out.
“You can argue it should be called a Brown, instead of a Mankad, he was the one gaining the unfair advantage.”