Custom Bats Cricket Forum
Equipment => Helmets => Topic started by: cheese on November 27, 2014, 06:14:38 PM
-
In light of the tragic incident that has occurred with Phillip Hughes yet more questions will be asked about Helmets and Head protection in cricket. Without completely reinventing the helmet what more can be done? Will we see a helmet that fully covers the head like the helmets used in motor sports or an NFL style helmet?
Another question id like to ask is will this have an effect on your helmet use? For those who don't wear one, will you?
For those who do wear a helmet will you upgrade to the new and more safe models to be as safe as possible?
I personally will most likely upgrade to new style Masuri, it's highly unlike that I will sustain an injury of this type but it is a shared opinion between me, my friends and family that safe is better then sorry.
I was truly shocked and saddened when i heard the news this morning, I lump in my throat to say the least.
RIP Phillip Hughes
Forever 63 not out
-
Problem I foresee is that people truly are unique and so are there head size.
So generally helmets are universal. And as with all universal things. They don't fit one person Perfectly.
A helmet or bump cap could easily be made/invented to cover around the ears and down to the lower neck, offering full protection.
Unfortunately what will fit one head will not fit another, so they'd have to be individually molded and therefore very unique and very expensive......
The other way to protect said area, without a unique to user shape, would be some kind off skirt that comes out of the rear of the helmet covering the neck are from rear to rear.
This could be a inflatable pad like the inners off an ayrtek to aid movement. Or could be a Stretton fox style padding cut into strips and dangling free so as to not limit movement.
Unfortunately all 3 of the above will be met with disgust (very much like the new masuri of which I was guilty) and would probably not take off. and an
-
Get rid of them in amateur cricket. Definitely.
And sledging and all the other nonsense.
It's about time the penny dropped...
-
Get rid of them in amateur cricket. Definitely.
And sledging and all the other nonsense.
It's about time the penny dropped...
Going on your post from the other thread. I'm gonna presume you would ban them under the pretence you also ban bouncers?
If so you are presuming all bowlers know what there bowling?
We have a quick bowler that is very fast but very irratic. I believe he has no idea where he is pitching it.
Calling a no ball isn't gonna help the batsmen if he is struck by said ball?
Same with a beamer, it's very very much illegal, and when I tried to bowl a yorker and the damp ball slipped and hit the batsmen in his grill, I definately didn't mean to bowl it. I was so thankful he was wearing a helmet!
Add to that the 2 incidents I've had that resulted in injuries, both were off the edge of the bat before finding there way to my head, and the actual reason I know wear a helmet, not due to fear off a bouncer.
-
For me it took our opening bat to top edge a pull shot into his face and break his cheek Bone and eye socket to buy a helmet and I wear it but I don't wear the chin strap and the helmet is cracked at the side after I threw it against a wall after a bad decision( not my proudest moment ) so I will buy a new one for sure but to honest not sure what will happen ICC will surely have to fund R&D into improving helmets so this can't happen and incidents like kieswetter and broard will not happen again. Like to see what ayrtek and masuri come up with in the future.
RIP Phil Hughes and got to feel for Sean Abbott to
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
I think regardless of the standard of cricket you play a helmet should be law I for one will be wearing a lid next season
-
Yep, I have been seeing a lot about Sean and although tragic for Phillip and his family I hope Sean gets the support he needs to get through this and an awful incident doesn't define the life of a young person and cut short his career also.
Personally I had never really batted using a helmet although I did own one. I had decided at the end of last season that safe was definitely better than sorry and being self employed with a young family I decided to get an arytek.
We all have to decide for ourselves but no doubt this will make a lot of people consider a helmet more. Which in the long run will be a good thing. As for changes and banning this and that I'm not a fan. However tragic and hard this event is its such a rare event we really have to be careful about an in appropriate reaction to what on the whole is a sport that has a good mix of risk and safety that makes it enjoyable to play. I know Phillip has lost his life but I don't view playing cricket as putting my life in danger anymore than getting out of bed in the morning. We have to innovate to enjoy the game. Not eliminate all the risk that most of us partly play the game to be part of.
-
I think regardless of the standard of cricket you play a helmet should be law I for one will be wearing a lid next season
Yeah I agree with that and likewise
-
I am not a fan of compulsory helmets. I agree that under 18's should have to wear them as then they get used to it and will continue that practise for the rest of their career. However, as an older guy I have never worn one (although I top edged a Beamer into my face while playing junior county cricket), I also have never worn a box or thigh pad (thankfully I have never been hit there, I'm sure it improves my technique) It is individual choice.
To some degree the batsmen are more at risk of a wayward throw as often a shot played in front of the wicket will be thrown in with the back of the batsman exposed.
also, if we go down this route will we see fielding positions such as short leg banned?
It is a tragic incident but I am sure that He would want the game to continue as it was. It was a game he loved and the battle between batsman and bowler a challenge he relished.
-
intersting article on it here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30206381 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30206381)
-
I imagine most of you here agree that masuri's tweet trying to distance themselves from the accident while Philip Hughes was on life support was crass in the extreme. However putting emotion to one side (which is hard because I'm a bit shocked by how upset I feel about an incident which happened to somebody I never knew personally) do we know EXACTLY where he was hit, and is it possible that the more extensive grille on the post-2012 elites and on the current vision series provides just a bit more protection to this area. It might not have saved him but might reduce the risk of this kind of impact? It'll certainly make me think harder about what helmet to get this winter, was going to replace my old Masuri anyway.
-
http://youtu.be/JcsCgsmsRLM (http://youtu.be/JcsCgsmsRLM)
ICC must react and alter rules for players safety, i m not comfortable with players standing close to batsman for catching purpose.
However i blame modern day cricket also i-e T20 's where players just close eyes and whack, the way warner pulls the ball is an example, i dont know why bowling bouncer 1 for the over is allowed lol i mean seriously, i am afraid for modern day batsmen emerging to international scene, just watch this example above where Cameron White wanted to whack a ball :-[
-
I remember buying a helmet when I was at school many moons ago. Back then staff and pupils alike all mocked me and took great delight in terming me a big timer, etc. Unlike the herd, I just cracked on as I was always happy to put my safety first and just hope others can find something positive in this very sad turn of events. I would like to offer my thanks to all the manufactures such as Ayrtek, Masuri, etc that spend so much money and time trying to constantly push the boundaries and make things as safe as possible for all levels of cricketers.
I am a distinctly average cricketer now and need the protection more than ever! Keep up the good work chaps in protecting our noggins!
-
@ManHOOS That is a poor example. Bowlers should always have the right to bowl a bouncer. Likewise, batsmen shouldn't be forced to wear a helmet.
I think we will see helmet manufacturers looking at what they can do at the back of the head, but this is the hardest area to protect effectively whilst maintaining movement that doesn't impact a batsman's ability to see the ball.
I'm sure we will see some additional changes although I'm not clear what those might be.
-
IMHO the bouncer should still be legal, but I don't think we will see a bowler bowl one for a while, just because of what's happened. Hopefully whats happened to Phil Hughes will create a review of all cricket and where it's heading including protection. I personally think T20 needs to be looked at. I think the Dilscoop should be banned, I've thought for a while it won't long before a batsman, keeper or close fielder not there for that shot will be hurt. Also you see kids playing it which is very worrying, you could also put in there the reverse hit and slower ball bouncer, which puts the batsman in exactly the position Hughes was hit with the ball still in flight. Anyway just my thoughts, I'm often wrong.
Tonight I've been listening to radio 5, a replay of Hughes talking about his youth and playing cricket brought tears to my eyes.
-
I am strongly of the opinion that you don't ban any type of bowling or batting. The stats indicate that the type of injury that he had is incredibly rare.
Leave the players to make the decision on the pitch.
Make sure that kids and adults are all coached and aware of the risks.
-
I agree with Tim - plus at club level very few people play on pitches hard enough to bowl a proper bouncer, most of the time it is a long hop.
The most important thing is coaching how to play the short ball.
as for helmets and helmet design, there will always be the fight between looks and protection - helmets can and will improve.
But this was very much a freak accident.
-
Imo a tragic accident and I can't see any rules being changed as a result. Changes to helmet / other protection yes.
I'm sat watching American Football, I know full head helmets will be heavier but if they are manoeuvrable for AF then surely it can work in cricket. Or baseball style ear protection?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
(http://thumbs1.ebaystatic.com/d/l225/m/mwc09Liv566rT_6T8E0M-lQ.jpg)
Hard to judge how far the protection would actually go without it being on someone but would a design like that not work in getting more protection?
-
Going on your post from the other thread. I'm gonna presume you would ban them under the pretence you also ban bouncers?
I wouldn't ban helmets. I would ban bouncers in amateur cricket.
-
99% of he time amateurs can't really bowl bouncers, more long hops. Pros are paid and know what they are doing, well paid for the minimum risk (compare it to he forces etc!!) . You can't stsrt banning bouncers, it's too batsmen friendly already. I'd question the logic in modem batsmen being expected to score off bouncers rather than getting out the way tbh.
Why must every ball be slogged to be entertaining ???
-
I don't find slogging entertaining!
Grown men wearing helmets in 5th XI cricket looks ridiculous.
-
Grown men wearing helmets in 5th XI cricket look ridiculous.
Only ridiculous thing is that you beleive that!
As a rule of thunb the bowling is more erratic in lower leagues, I wiuldnt go out without a lid playing 5th XI cricket as beamers aren't uncommon!
-
I don't find slogging entertaining!
Grown men wearing helmets in 5th XI cricket look ridiculous.
Top edge to the teeth, stray throw from the outfield, beamer, ball flies off a length or some other strange occurance you never know what can happen!
Might seem ridiculous for 99% of the time but better safe than sorry!
-
[url]http://youtu.be/JcsCgsmsRLM[/url] ([url]http://youtu.be/JcsCgsmsRLM[/url])
ICC must react and alter rules for players safety, i m not comfortable with players standing close to batsman for catching purpose.
However i blame modern day cricket also i-e T20 's where players just close eyes and whack, the way warner pulls the ball is an example, i dont know why bowling bouncer 1 for the over is allowed lol i mean seriously, i am afraid for modern day batsmen emerging to international scene, just watch this example above where Cameron White wanted to whack a ball :-[
My God. Watching that video makes me think Cameron White is lucky to be alive.
As far as the bouncer debate goes. I do not believe the bouncer should be outlawed. It is a valid part of the game and should remain so. As we all know the bouncer is a weapon used to unsettle a batsman. To get him second guessing his footwork and thinking more about self preservation than technique. Knowing how to handle the short ball is a large part of what separates good batsmen from great ones.
While subjecting a opening batsman to few bumpers should rightly be looked at as no big deal. Bombing a tail ender or a batsman who cannot play such deliveries is not on in my opinion. Watching Monty take his eyes off the ball when facing Johnson in the last ashes series was cringe worthy in the extreme. The dangers of ball impact to the head and neck area have been demonstrated at its most extreme with the recent tragedy. With this in mind I feel umpires should be given even more authority to clamp down on the "roughing" up of less skilled batsmen by fast bowlers.
The same could apply to the amateur scene. Bumpers in amateur cricket rarely carry the same injury potential as those seen in the professional game. However on the occasion where short pitched bowling is clearly dangerous, due to the lack of skill level of the batsmen dealing with it, the umpire should have the authority to tell the bowlers to cut it out. Of course this will not be popular with fast bowlers who might enjoy roughing up the odd old fart on the weekend but at an amateur level we should be focused on fun. Everyone wants to enjoy the game and be able to go to work the next day. A bit of common sense from all around should be enough to find the right balance between good competition and safety.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2Do9dJw30I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2Do9dJw30I)
It's unbelievable to think that you can still see nonsense like this. Unbelievably dangerous.
-
I think perhaps mandating that all cricketers wear helmets in club cricket is not a bad idea (I know some will disagree with this). Take the choice out of their hands. I know a long time ago I used to feel they were unnecessary (accompanied by some foolish bravado on my part as well), and that they were a pain in the backside. Getting hit changed that very quickly. Personally I always have a helmet on even when facing spinners. A ball even at 50 miles an hour can hurt or cause damage if it hits some areas of the body let alone at 80 miles or more. Make it sort of like a OH&S regulation perhaps.
In the near future I can see some repercussions. I agree the other posters that the bouncer should not be banned - it is part of the game and has been always. In the old days, there was a gentlemans agreement of sorts in international cricket that quicks did not bowl short at tail enders, as they did not have the ability to deal with them and it could lead to someone getting badly hurt. With all the protection these days, that went out the window since for the most part people felt no serious damage could happen (a few bruises aside or the odd fracture to the fingers, ribs perhaps, all of which would heal and have no long term impacts). For the most part this has been the case.
Even with no outlawing of the bouncer I can see fast bowlers now becoming reluctant to use it in the near future. Seeing quicks like Mitch Johnson having both top end and lower end batsmen hopping about with fear was something of a spectacle that many enjoyed (myself included) without a second thought that perhaps someone (more likely a tailender) might get hurt. Part and parcel of the game. The sight of an express bowler having the opposition running scared has always been one of the greatest contests in cricket and one that got the crowd going. There is something primal about that that has always excited crowds (cricket's equivalent of the roman gladiators in ancient times). More than anything else, facing up to someone quick is not just a test of skill or technique but a test of your will and courage to guts it out. I think that should always remain a part of the game.
However, I think in the near future at least that won't be the case anymore. I think any quick bowler will be at least a little hesitant to use the short ball particularly against lower end batsmen. Crowds may turn on the fast bowler instead of cheering them on now when they do so, which completely changes the dynamics of the game even without any official changes to the rules. I am sure some sort of normalcy will return in due course.
At club cricket, I think like some others have mentioned, umpires should step in an warn the bowler and ban them if it persists. Some people in my view at least seem do seem get a kick out of roughing batsmen up (and I don't mean as part of a strategy to get him out but rather with some intent to hurt), and someone could be hurt seriously. That sort of thing needs to be stopped. Its meant to be a bit of fun on the weekend, but people can certainly take it very seriously at times.
With regards to helmet protection, I think no matter what you do, there is always likely going to be some risk. For example in motor racing, deaths and serious injury still occur, and that is the nature of the beast regardless of how advanced the safety features have become these days. But compared say 20 years ago even the difference is amazing.
Similarly there is always the chance that a 90mph ball sneaks thorough some gap somewhere and causes a serious injury. But I am sure the risks will continue to decline as people look at improving safety further.
-
Tony Grieg used the "motorcycle helmet" decades ago. Why shouldn't we reinvestigate it?
-
As a consumer, I see a need for a cricket batting helmet that will protect the lower part of the back of my head like a baseball helmet. I would like to see the helmet manufacturers react to this market need to and design a product that will actually provide more comprehensive protection rather then a cute Kevlar covered cap with a grill.
For next season, I will investigate different options like using a baseball helmet for cricket.
-
Top edge to the teeth, stray throw from the outfield, beamer, ball flies off a length or some other strange occurance you never know what can happen!
Might seem ridiculous for 99% of the time but better safe than sorry!
You could get hit a tile falling from a roof while out walking the dog. Why not just wear one 24/7?
-
You could get hit a tile falling from a roof while out walking the dog. Why not just wear one 24/7?
Healthy debate is a good sign; sarcasm is not. You must make you're own decision but respect others. I for one where a helmet first and foremost for top edges, unintentional beamers and over-zealous throw-ins rather than bouncers. It's my belief the less your ability/ grade the more likely an injury, albeit not from a bouncer. Just my 10 penneth/ cents-worth.
-
Club cricket was played for hundreds of years before helmets were invented. I don't remember my grandfather telling me how dangerous playing cricket was in his day.
-
Additionally, I believe the helmet 'skirt/ apron' idea might work, or an inflatable collar affair as previously suggested; not saying I'd be an early adopter however. Akin to the what the postmen wear on the motorcycle helmets in Australia. It would have to be made of something like what George at strettonfox uses.
-
Club cricket was played for hundreds of years before helmets were invented. I don't remember my grandfather telling me how dangerous playing cricket was in his day.
In general I think cricket is not for the most part, which is part of the reason why this comes as such a shock.
But there is always the potential for serious injury. Another example is Raman Lamba who was hit fatally while fielding without a helmet in 1998 at short leg. So it is not the first time someone has died on the cricket pitch. The video posted a few posts before by tugga is an example where the fielder was pretty lucky nothing happened. Lamba was not so lucky.
-
Club cricket was played for hundreds of years before helmets were invented. I don't remember my grandfather telling me how dangerous playing cricket was in his day.
You could say that for lots of other sports too - baseball, motorsport, ice hockey, grid iron, etc, etc. We learn over time and as technology advances we try our best to come up with solutions where we increase safety without over compromising on enjoyment for the sport. Just because we didn't know something was dangerous doesn't mean it wasn't dangerous...
I don't think banning bouncers in junior cricket is the answer either. How else could you prepare yourself for bouncers in the senior ranks if you don't get exposed to them prior to that?
-
Grown men wearing helmets in 5th XI cricket looks ridiculous.
Sorry no. As someone who's opened at "5th XI" level and at slightly higher levels I've usually felt far more vulnerable in the former. Ok so the bowlers may be a few mph slower but some of the council rec pitches are downright dangerous, many a time You're having to deal with balls flying off a length. And most of the quicker bowlers at that level have no idea where they're putting it which adds to the danger. 2 of the 3 times I've been hit on the head in my life were from big top edges against long hops, you can't legislate for that.
-
Not sure if helmet designs can incorporate the area where Hughes was hit, it was not on the head but on the neck.
Perhaps a separate protective equipment "neck guard" is the need made from a material which is flexible and would still provide enough protection from direct impact.
-
You could get hit a tile falling from a roof while out walking the dog. Why not just wear one 24/7?
Because tiles don't get intentionally bowled at people up to 600 times every game?
-
Before this incident I only ever wore my helmet in the nets, however, thinking about this tragic incident and what people have written on here I have decided from next season I will wear a helmet regardless.
-
This debate is highlighting one very important thing. How poor most people's perception of risk really is. The likelihood of sustaining an injury like the one that Phil Hughes sustained is roughly 1 in 10 million. Yes, that's on a par with winning the lottery. It's really that low.
The likelihood of actually sustaining serious damage playing cricket is also extremely low, and you participate knowing that you are having a cricket ball chucked at you, hit in your direction and generally that there is an element of getting injured possible. When you participate in any sport that either involves physical contact or throwing things at each other you know there is always a possibility that you will get hurt. It's actually a part of what makes it attractive to many people.
When I was 20, the fellow opening bowler on my team bounced a guy who didn't play it well. It hit his ear. He collapsed and was taken off in an ambulance. He was in hospital for 2 months and died of a brain haemorrhage. He wasn't wearing a lid and it would have saved his life. He was 18. I have bounced people and caused broken noses because they haven't played it well enough, and weren't wearing helmets. In playing cricket for 25 years I have damaged people like this three times. I have bowled a lot of bouncers. I have never seen anyone else hit in the head and die from their injuries. These things happen in amateur cricket too.
The reality is that in test matches, ODIs and T20s, the bouncer won't disappear. The crowd will react slightly differently, treating the bowler as a pantomime villain, but they want to see fast, aggressive bowling. It's part of what brings people to the game. Much like motorsport, where there are crashes and deaths, but they are what everyone watches over and over on YouTube. People go to watch something vaguely dangerous because that's what they want to see. In many respects it's like watching roman gladiators.
This will have next to no impact on the types of delivery bowled by bowlers - they are already limited by the rules as to how frequently they can intimidate the batsman. It will just add a little bit more of a reminder into the batsman that maybe swaying is better than playing.
-
This debate is highlighting one very important thing. How poor most people's perception of risk really is. The likelihood of sustaining an injury like the one that Phil Hughes sustained is roughly 1 in 10 million. Yes, that's on a par with winning the lottery. It's really that low.
The likelihood of actually sustaining serious damage playing cricket is also extremely low, and you participate knowing that you are having a cricket ball chucked at you, hit in your direction and generally that there is an element of getting injured possible. When you participate in any sport that either involves physical contact or throwing things at each other you know there is always a possibility that you will get hurt. It's actually a part of what makes it attractive to many people.
When I was 20, the fellow opening bowler on my team bounced a guy who didn't play it well. It hit his ear. He collapsed and was taken off in an ambulance. He was in hospital for 2 months and died of a brain haemorrhage. He wasn't wearing a lid and it would have saved his life. He was 18. I have bounced people and caused broken noses because they haven't played it well enough, and weren't wearing helmets. In playing cricket for 25 years I have damaged people like this three times. I have bowled a lot of bouncers. I have never seen anyone else hit in the head and die from their injuries. These things happen in amateur cricket too.
The reality is that in test matches, ODIs and T20s, the bouncer won't disappear. The crowd will react slightly differently, treating the bowler as a pantomime villain, but they want to see fast, aggressive bowling. It's part of what brings people to the game. Much like motorsport, where there are crashes and deaths, but they are what everyone watches over and over on YouTube. People go to watch something vaguely dangerous because that's what they want to see. In many respects it's like watching roman gladiators.
This will have next to no impact on the types of delivery bowled by bowlers - they are already limited by the rules as to how frequently they can intimidate the batsman. It will just add a little bit more of a reminder into the batsman that maybe swaying is better than playing.
And yet people do play the lottery - because the potential result is worth the investment - the same is true of helmets in my opinion. It's not a matter of 'poor' perception of risk, it is a measure of how risk averse one person is compared to another. The numbers don't change, only your evaluation of them does, and there is no right or wrong way to perceive them, only a personal response to what is acceptable or not to you.
This tragic incident is thankfully very very rare. By your own admission you've seen 3 people hit off your bowling. It's unlikely you've bowled millions of balls. Those on the receiving end may have wished they had helmets, and when an individual is the 1 in a million (or 1 in 10 million) person, he wouldn't turn around and say it only affected him 1/1,000,000th; it will have affected him 100% and for him the stats will be a lot less than 1 in a million - assuming there are not too many people who have faced millions of balls.
I'm not saying you have to stop bowling bouncers, that's your choice, and I doubt anybody will walk out to the crease expecting bouncers to stop either.
-
Because tiles don't get intentionally bowled at people up to 600 times every game?
Nor do cricket balls. They get bowled at the stumps. Or at least they ought to.
-
@eukaryote76 I think perception of risk is the critical issue. There has been a lot of discussion about making people wear helmets, stopping delivery types, etc. These are classic examples of misunderstanding risk and over reliance on authority to step in where personal responsibility should play its part. Personally I wear a helmet because I am much happier without the concern that I am going to be hit in the face. Off any bowler.
On the topic of risk, how good is any of us? The likelihood of dying from a cricket ball impact is negligible. The impact of dying from the impact of a cricket ball is extreme. Is that a very high, high, medium, or low risk? How can I mitigate what happens to make the risk lower. Do I mitigate the likelihood of being hit or of the impact?
Back to wearing the helmet. In my view the impact is too high to not wear a helmet, even though I've never had a ball hit me in the head in 25 years of playing. I still prefer to get out of the way than try and hook though.
On the topic specifically, the future will be little changed and while we may see some shape changes to try and address these issues, I don't expect to see a huge amount differ.
-
I wonder if somehow the large manufacturers (particularly the helmet companies like masuri, Ayrtek etc) could collaborate to investigate options on how protection might be improved. Like many in here have said I don't know what the solution is but having the skills and expertise working together Youd think would start to help. There is enough money in this game to fund such an exercise
-
one thing that has only been mentioned briefly in this debate, and it's good that it's all discussed in the light of the sad events this week-is the standard of pitches we play on
I don't know about you guys but unless we have a lovely Sunday fixture, we are playing on very average uneven bounce Council prepared tracks in Middlesex.the bounce is not even
2 years back our ones played against Theo Modest on a poor wicket in Harrow and we were lucky not have any injuries....
Maybe most of this forum play on good decks but i'm sure there are Middlesex league players on here.
So the chances are you will get hit from an uneven bounce are far greater than an acutual bouncer
-
@eukaryote76 I think perception of risk is the critical issue. There has been a lot of discussion about making people wear helmets, stopping delivery types, etc. These are classic examples of misunderstanding risk and over reliance on authority to step in where personal responsibility should play its part. Personally I wear a helmet because I am much happier without the concern that I am going to be hit in the face. Off any bowler.
On the topic of risk, how good is any of us? The likelihood of dying from a cricket ball impact is negligible. The impact of dying from the impact of a cricket ball is extreme. Is that a very high, high, medium, or low risk? How can I mitigate what happens to make the risk lower. Do I mitigate the likelihood of being hit or of the impact?
Back to wearing the helmet. In my view the impact is too high to not wear a helmet, even though I've never had a ball hit me in the head in 25 years of playing. I still prefer to get out of the way than try and hook though.
On the topic specifically, the future will be little changed and while we may see some shape changes to try and address these issues, I don't expect to see a huge amount differ.
I do agree with most of what you're saying
-
There are high potential injury risks in cricket not only for batsmen. With the kind of powerful shots being played these days, I fear for the umpires and the bowlers on the follow through as they wear no protection.
-
IF helmets were to be made compulsory, then the ecb should investigate a way to produce a top quality helmet for a reasonable price. The costs of helmets are stupid now, and I can see the makers just charging more and cashing in.. Instead, if we want everyone to wear it you make it cheap enough that it's easy to buy.. Yes, £50 isn't cheap either..
-
one thing that has only been mentioned briefly in this debate, and it's good that it's all discussed in the light of the sad events this week-is the standard of pitches we play on
I don't know about you guys but unless we have a lovely Sunday fixture, we are playing on very average uneven bounce Council prepared tracks in Middlesex.the bounce is not even
2 years back our ones played against Theo Modest on a poor wicket in Harrow and we were lucky not have any injuries....
Maybe most of this forum play on good decks but i'm sure there are Middlesex league players on here.
So the chances are you will get hit from an uneven bounce are far greater than an acutual bouncer
Agree re the standards of pitches. I play in the lower echelons of the Kent league and some tracks I've played on over the last couple of years have been an accident waiting to happen
-
IF helmets were to be made compulsory, then the ecb should investigate a way to produce a top quality helmet for a reasonable price. The costs of helmets are stupid now, and I can see the makers just charging more and cashing in.. Instead, if we want everyone to wear it you make it cheap enough that it's easy to buy.. Yes, £50 isn't cheap either..
What value does a person put on ones health and wellbeing?
-
What value does a person put on ones health and wellbeing?
For those that can afford better protection, most will buy. But not everyone that plays the wonderful game can afford top of the line.
Imagine a single mum 3 kids who struggles to make ends meet. All 3 kids want to play cricket but she can only afford 1 £75 helmet. Which son does she choose to let play?
So in that I believe procricket1982 makes a valid point and a ecb/government subsidised lid should be on the market for around 20-25 quid mark.
-
one thing that has only been mentioned briefly in this debate, and it's good that it's all discussed in the light of the sad events this week-is the standard of pitches we play on
I fully agree, this is an area the ECB need to review and invest in at all amateur levels.
-
The events that have happened over the last few days have been tragic and possibly the worst the cricket community has ever had to face but I really do feel that regarding safety and helmets and banning bouncers people are going completely over the top.
Cricket has been played for hundreds of years the majority of those very years were played on very sporting wickets, not wearing helmets and with pretty ropey protection of the rest of the body. During this time yes, there has been injuries, some quite severe but nobody has ever died. During the same period have many have died playing football, rugby or horse riding?
Indeed it could be said that helmets in some ways have made the situation worse. Children are now coached and protected from a young age and never get to learn that a cricket ball hurts when it hits you. This coaching and protection breeds players that don't look at the ball when there playing pull and hooks and don't ever consider ducking or weaving out of the way.
Don't get me wrong I don't think kids, amateurs or professionals should ever be playing or practising without helmets I just think we need to put things in perspective and think about what really matters, which is that a young guy has lost his life playing the game he and we love.
-
The ECB / BBC did a scheme were clubs could get 2 or 3 junior helmets for free i think. this was a few years back before helmet technology and safety standards took off like thye have recently. Im sure something simialr could be done again.
-
Luckily the worse the pitch generally the lower the bounce. As PPCCopener said earlier the council pitches in Middlesex are shocking. And that's because the council have sub contracted it all out so they no longer have the knowledge base to know when the contractor is not doing what is on the bill of works. The pitches hadn't been rolled for three years because the contractors roller was broken, The council are still paying them to roll. When they did get it fixed they rolled the wicket twice in a year on both occasions during a hot dry period without watering the wicket. Frankly having the same effect as rolling a digestive biscuit. The pitches haven't had fertilizer or worming, both of which is on their bill of works and charged to the council. I have told the council this and they couldn't give a ****** blaming the state of the pitches on a lack of finance. Which is rubbish. They just don't check that what they (we) pay for is actually done.
-
I've never worn a helmet and never been hit but have started this year. Why? because we have started practicing with a sidearm pro.
-
I've never worn a helmet and never been hit but have started this year. Why? because we have started practicing with a sidearm pro.
I hate those things!!
Quicker than the guy can bowl, less accurate and a total lottery as to which muppet picks it up!
We've got a new ish (built 3 years ago) net that has a lip between grippy Astro for the bowlers run up and synthetic grass wickety bit. Great when you're bowling, with the sidearm balls will either take off or skid at ankle height of you hit this lip.
So you can get either a Yorker, a Beamer, a vicious bouncer or a grubber at any given time! It's just like playing on a council pitch actually! :D
-
The ECB / BBC did a scheme were clubs could get 2 or 3 junior helmets for free i think. this was a few years back before helmet technology and safety standards took off like thye have recently. Im sure something simialr could be done again.
Wasn't there a Lord's Taverners thing not long ago where you'd get a couple of full sets for the junior team kit bag(bats, pads, gloves and helmets)?
-
For those that can afford better protection, most will buy. But not everyone that plays the wonderful game can afford top of the line.
Imagine a single mum 3 kids who struggles to make ends meet. All 3 kids want to play cricket but she can only afford 1 £75 helmet. Which son does she choose to let play?
So in that I believe procricket1982 makes a valid point and a ecb/government subsidised lid should be on the market for around 20-25 quid mark.
Or 3 Albions for £75
http://uzisports.com/index.php?route=product/category&path=68 (http://uzisports.com/index.php?route=product/category&path=68)
-
I've banned everyone except the qualified coaches using a sidearm now. They can be dangerous.
-
Do ECB coaching courses actually cover the use of a sidearm?
-
Don't think so but hopefully they are more responsible than most. I make sure they all put the things in the kit bags so the kids cant pick them up. Great coaching aids but v dangerous in the wrong hands
-
Problem I find in England is kids are molly coddled, used to covered flat tracks and not exposed to hostile bowling early enough.
i think side arms are great and I use them from 15 -18 yards!!
Its not hard to hit a full toss or get out the way of a beamer if you are used to hostile bowling.
KIDS SHOULD RIGHTLY BE FORCED TO WEAR HELMETS AT ALL TIMES WHEN BATTING
-
I think more lower level cricket should be played on artificial pitches. Council pitches are terrible.
-
I think more lower level cricket should be played on artificial pitches. Council pitches are terrible.
really??? so the ball is even more likely to be chest high plus??? not very sensible.. plus it'd be crap to play on astro all the time.. biffers would win
-
really??? so the ball is even more likely to be chest high plus??? not very sensible.. plus it'd be crap to play on astro all the time.. biffers would win
It's crap to play on crap pitches.
-
Hate artificial pitches, worst are the indoor nets though. Not a clue how high it's going to pop up to and so unrealistic compared to a standard pitch.
-
Hate artificial pitches, worst are the indoor nets though. Not a clue how high it's going to pop up to and so unrealistic compared to a standard pitch.
agreed, indoor nets are terrible. they also get the stupidly high bounce ones, where any idiot can get a really good bouncer in and everyone does. Astro's are also as bad where again, any idiot can bowl short
-
I was under the impression artificial pitches had improved. I read an excellent article by Mike Selvey on them.
-
I was under the impression artificial pitches had improved. I read an excellent article by Mike Selvey on them.
I'd imagine you are correct if you have real top of the range ones.. I also suspect only pro teams have them, not amateur clubs who have to get the cheap stuff
-
In general I think cricket is not for the most part, which is part of the reason why this comes as such a shock.
But there is always the potential for serious injury. Another example is Raman Lamba who was hit fatally while fielding without a helmet in 1998 at short leg. So it is not the first time someone has died on the cricket pitch. The video posted a few posts before by tugga is an example where the fielder was pretty lucky nothing happened. Lamba was not so lucky.
Fantastic point right there. and I say with personal experience that I had to indeed learn the hard way.
I spent a week in hospital after my jaw was crushed whilst fielding at short leg. Me being the young macho tough man refused to even entertain the thought of wearing a helmet. But a short ball from our leggie, followed by a beautifully timed pull shot into my face changed all that. But I was actually indeed lucky. The surgeon had said I could have been killed if the impact was slightly higher.
When I got out of hospital with titanium screws holding my jaw together, the first notable thing I did was go and buy a helmet. Now, I never bat of field in close without it. You see, sometimes it takes an accident to learn and understand that some things are more important than macho pride!
This also equates to have the latest helmet design and wearing current models which in theory should be the safest.
-
Is is not altogether different if someone dies as a result of an act that has the sole intended purpose of physical intimidation?
-
Some interesting articles in the media currently that provide some insight into things...
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/nov/28/phillip-hughes-tragedy-improved-neck-protection?CMP=twt_gu (http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/nov/28/phillip-hughes-tragedy-improved-neck-protection?CMP=twt_gu)
-
Some interesting articles in the media currently that provide some insight into things...
[url]http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/nov/28/phillip-hughes-tragedy-improved-neck-protection?CMP=twt_gu[/url] ([url]http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/nov/28/phillip-hughes-tragedy-improved-neck-protection?CMP=twt_gu[/url])
could you guys potentially change the new 2015 designs in light of this?
-
Any amendments that are made will take time to process and need to be documented with the BSI if we make any changes to a design.
In light of the terrible incident the media spotlight has fallen on the cricket helmet market and if they are currently doing enough to protect the players wearing them. I think there will need to be a meeting on the BSI/ICC committee to discuss this and provide guidance as to if the safety standard that has just been published needs further review which will drive designs forward.
-
Some very good points raised in a thoughtful piece on why current helmets could be failing cricketers because designs aren't keeping up with the modern game:
This has been the most tragic week for the game in my cricketing lifetime.
The passing of Philip Hughes has shocked and stunned both the International Cricket community and affected even those who do not consider themselves followers of the game.
The outpouring of support, emotion and tribute that followed the awful news has been incredible. The #putoutyourbatsout tribute to Philip has spread around the world. I have been in tears on viewing each one that is posted on Twitter or Facebook. It demonstrates that we are involved in an amazing game, played by fantastic people from all corners of the world.
Some pupils at Millfield School led their own spontaneous tributes last Saturday morning. Each of the boys and girls who laid their bats on the picket fence outside of the Wilson Pavilion were emotionally connected with a person that they had never met.
Today it's time to talk about the wider implications.
Continues:
http://www.pitchvision.com/philip-hughes (http://www.pitchvision.com/philip-hughes)