Custom Bats Cricket Forum

Equipment => Bats => Topic started by: langer17 on November 27, 2015, 09:25:50 AM

Title: Then vs. Now
Post by: langer17 on November 27, 2015, 09:25:50 AM
Saw this and thought it was ridiculous and funny (http://i1109.photobucket.com/albums/h440/butsy1723/FB_IMG_1448609571287_zpsu20mpskr.jpg) (http://s1109.photobucket.com/user/butsy1723/media/FB_IMG_1448609571287_zpsu20mpskr.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: roco on November 27, 2015, 09:29:55 AM
imagine Clive Llyod Viv or Barry Richards with one of them
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: edge on November 27, 2015, 09:34:59 AM
Clever photography works wonders doesn't it. Spot the problem with this photo.
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: roco on November 27, 2015, 09:37:48 AM
warners bat is much closer to the camera?
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: Thesmiff on November 27, 2015, 09:40:55 AM
It's Lou Carpenter from Neighbours!
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: tim2000s on November 27, 2015, 09:43:17 AM
Clever photography works wonders doesn't it. Spot the problem with this photo.
Yup, spotted the couple of tricks in there too. Slightly annoying!
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: ppccopener on November 27, 2015, 09:44:02 AM
funny thing is the presumption is the massive bat-I cant believe it is actually that big thou- would be better to score runs with

But it wouldn't of mattered to Barry Richards. He was that good.
And Viv of course

 :)
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: edge on November 27, 2015, 09:45:22 AM
warners bat is much closer to the camera?
Yep, as I'm guessing Barry Richards didn't use a size 5! There seems a concerted campaign from former players against modern bats lately, strange given that zero current cricketers see any problems with them.
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: northernboy1987 on November 27, 2015, 09:47:19 AM
Although it is clever photography there's still no doubting the massive difference between the two!
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: Buzz on November 27, 2015, 10:07:44 AM
well Barry Richards used a 2lbs 5-6 bat and Warners is 2lbs12-13.

6-7oz of willow is a massive amount of timber.
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: langer17 on November 27, 2015, 10:33:09 AM
Even with the bigger bat being in the foreground, it does not make that much of a difference in the edge and spine size, more so with the length, it looks longer is all
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: edge on November 27, 2015, 10:38:29 AM
Even with the bigger bat being in the foreground, it does not make that much of a difference in the edge and spine size, more so with the length, it looks longer is all
You're right, dimensions only work in one direction... d'oh.
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: ppccopener on November 27, 2015, 10:45:08 AM
this is a bit anal but aren't the powers that be about the bring out a regulation on 'depth' ?
or did I mis read that......
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: langer17 on November 27, 2015, 10:50:44 AM
Also, the distance that the arms can hold are small, so makes no difference in my eyes
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: Beachcricket on November 27, 2015, 10:55:32 AM
this is a bit anal but aren't the powers that be about the bring out a regulation on 'depth' ?
or did I mis read that......

They were discussing it but then decided against it based on a study conducted for the MCC by ICL. They made the right decision but it was based on poor evidence and a lack of understanding of what makes a cricket bat perform.

They're painting themselves into a corner slowly but surely.
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: tim2000s on November 27, 2015, 11:12:07 AM
Even with the bigger bat being in the foreground, it does not make that much of a difference in the edge and spine size, more so with the length, it looks longer is all
Well you say that, but if the correct lens is selected, it can also make a difference.
Title: Re: Then vs. Now
Post by: Wickets-then-runs on November 27, 2015, 11:16:28 AM
Actually, after a few scotches, they now look identical in size...  :-[