But in the example above, the batsman wasn't exactly backing up halfway down the pitch or anything. The batsman is also entitled to be able to watch where the ball is going rather than have to be fixated on the bowler to make sure he actually goes through with the delivery. At the non strikers end, i'd want time to make sure i can move out of the way of a ball that gets smacked straight back to me.
Cricket survived for decades with the simple "1 warning rule". We used this in 3rd grade indoor cricket ffs, when a ball is considered "live"the whole time. Why are we needing to change this understanding now? I get it maybe in t20 (which is ruining cricket), but in any other form of cricket? Just stick to traditions.
Old mate was in his gather and the batter was already out of the crease. And tbf - someone tipped him off based on the way it played out so my guess he'd been creeping for a while. And his body language when the bails went off said he knew he was fckd.
Hate the whole thing myself but if you're looking to find blame, how about the guys who abused the tradition of not running the non-striker out. Seen short form cricket plenty of times where the guy is 3 or 4m out and going - and in kids cricket - its a disease. Its these guys that forced the rule to be enforced, not the bowler.
As for indoor - well played a few years ago and some clown was creeping by 2m. So I kept warning him. And warning him. And warning him. Took the bails off, appealed and copped a gob full from the other team. he's out by a metre but next thing I'm getting pasted by the ump for holding up the game.
Could still fling a ball so did the only thing i could - came into bowl and just bowled it straight at the non striker with a beamer. And apologised, the ball slipped, sorry. Funny - he stayed in his crease after that