The family of Indian cricket legend Vinoo Mankad is split over the use of his name to refer to the controversial dismissal of running out a non-striker while they are backing up.
The dismissal became widely known as a Mankad after Vinoo ran out Australian batter Bill Brown at the non-striker's end during a 1948 Test match in what is thought to be the first known instance of the dismissal being used in international cricket.
Despite it being a legal dismissal, it remains a polarising issue with some players believing it to be against the spirit of the game and both the Australian Cricketers Association and Cricket New South Wales have called for the term Mankad to no longer be used out of respect for the family.
However, Vinoo's grandson, former professional tennis player Harsh, recently told the Herald Sun: "Personally, I'm always delighted to see my grandfather being remembered. I feel it to be a great honour for our name to be associated with a cricketing term.
"I'd love to see the 'Mankad' or 'Mankading' stay and keep alive his memories and legacy as a great competitor and sportsman deeply respected and admired by everyone I've met and those who knew him and experienced life with him!"
However, his stance is not shared by other members of the family, with Mankad's son Rahul, who passed away last year, telling the Economic Times in 2019: "It is not as if my father was the first person to run out a non-striker, and nor is he the last.
"It is unfair that his name is being dragged into the picture every time such an incident happens. 'Mankading' sounds catchy, but the problem comes when you mix the spirit aspect, in which case, it becomes a moveable feast."
And Rahul's wife, Nishita Rahul Mankad, has maintained her husband's stance on the matter, insisting it is "inappropriate for a legitimate form of dismissal to stigmatise a legendary cricketer".
She told News Corp: "[That's] my nephew's personal view. My late husband Rahul Mankad, son of Vinoo Mankad, fought hard to have the ICC remove the family name from this form of dismissal. [We feel] it is inappropriate for a legitimate form of dismissal to stigmatise a legendary cricketer."
