Custom Bats Cricket Forum
Equipment => Bats => Topic started by: Neon Cricket on June 04, 2016, 09:13:28 AM
-
http://www.skysports.com/cricket/news/12123/10302977/icc-calls-for-restrictions-on-size-of-cricket-bats (http://www.skysports.com/cricket/news/12123/10302977/icc-calls-for-restrictions-on-size-of-cricket-bats)
And discuss...
Would be interesting to get a few batmakers' views on this!
I for one think they're off their rocker - cricketers are now athletes, of course they'll hit the ball further than 100 years ago!!
-
Kind of like saying bowlers can't bowl bouncers/slower balls/cutters
Doesn't matter how big the bat is if he can't hit the ball. We've always seen bowling trends follow batsman scoring runs. Slow bouncer, Yorkers and now cutters seem to be the in thing.
Outthink the batsman, don't handicap them.
-
i dont think this will make any difference. i think its about how the sport has changed.
they are more professional then ever now practice more and are willing to take more risks and play the bigger shots.
-
They could of course take away the silly fielding restrictions and maybe put a bigger seam on the ball so it's a contest and more risky playing those 'bigger' shots
-
Nearly a hundred every game is ridiculous though isn't it? Great entertainment but a contest between the world's best batsmen and the world's best bowler shouldn't have anomolies like that!
-
This is the study they're referencing:
https://www.lords.org/assets/Agenda-item-11.3-size-of-cricket-bats.pdf (https://www.lords.org/assets/Agenda-item-11.3-size-of-cricket-bats.pdf)
-
Whether players are fitter/stronger is a debate for another day, but reducing the depth of cricket bats will sort out the men from the boys. You see in modern cricket every Tom/Dick/Harry pounding the ball over the fence. Mishits that in years gone by would be simple catches are now disappearing 20-30 yards over the fence. That's not properly batsmanship.
Reducing the bat sizes wouldn't effect the elite players(AB, Kohli, Smith, Warner, Root etc) it will show up the lesser players like the Maxwell's/Miller's/Buttler's of the modern game.
-
Top trolling of Jos there.
Hahahaha
That article/paper is most odd and forgets about force = mass x acceleration.
The most basic thing.
Put the boundaries back, use softer balls etc all will have more of an impact.
-
ICC and cricket commentators (tv) are wrong about bat "depth". They should first tackle the insanely small boundaries and ridiculous field restrictions and that will separate "men from boys". Then, if they are still left alive and in business by the mob, they should create practical rules about bat volume v/s weight. Warner's edge is not his huge bat but that huge light bat that he flashes in a match. Instead of a 2-12, let's give Warner a 2-14 or 2-15 bat and see how he fares. :D
-
Guys who hit big sixes are the ones who use big bats (most of the times). And they hit long. I doubt making boundaries bigger will effect them. Most of the sixes are over 80+ meters. No boundary is big enough for them. this would rather hurt the average batters.
I think the bowlers need to step up and build new skills with more consistency. I feel bowling has not evolved as much as batting has in last few years.
Bowling team can be given 3 balls - one brand new, one semi old and one old and the bowler can choose which one to use anytime during the inning, just like how batsmen change their bat in the middle of the inning.
-
Top trolling of Jos there.
Hahahaha
That article/paper is most odd and forgets about force = mass x acceleration.
The most basic thing.
Put the boundaries back, use softer balls etc all will have more of an impact.
Hardly Philip...batsmen are batsmen, sloggers are sloggers. Buttler is the latter.
-
You should watch him play more rather than cast aspersions.
-
Definitely a thread for David Bacon.
-
I have to say reading the paper it does seem like they are slightly biased. There are variables in the paper that haven't been discussed or accounted for and some of the points they claim don't seem to have any real scientific reasoning.
Even if big bats were helping batsmen (which I am still to believe it is) the real issue in my opinion is definitely the boundary ropes, fielding restrictions and bowling restrictions. It's easy to see that people want to see big scores and big chases. None of the casual fans want to see one team defending 130 in an ODI (even though for me they are the best matches).
The blame is being pushed onto the batmakers when all they are really doing is using their craft to achieve the most they can. The ICC need to look at their own decisions first
-
Also quick extra point. I have to defend butter here as a batsmen. I've always loved watching the sangakarra type of batsmen, who just has pure elegance in his batting style. But I think it's harsh to label quite a few players as sloggers. It's a fact that the role of the batsmen has changed over time. Buttler has a talent to clear the ropes. He knows how to play aggressive and play well. Just because he isn't the orthodox batsmen that doesn't make him a slogger. The situation nowadays means that batsmen need to be able to play like buttler. Even if he is a slogger, he's one of the best out there and that's hard coming from a Pakistani fan lol.
My best example would be Miandad. Anyone who watches him would have agreed that he wasn't the most elegant, but he accumulated runs. There is no denying he was one of the greatest batsmen for Pakistan if not overall during his time.
-
My best example would be Miandad. Anyone who watches him would have agreed that he wasn't the most elegant, but he accumulated runs. There is no denying he was one of the greatest batsmen for Pakistan if not overall during his time.
Agreed Rocky, name of the game is to score runs, not to look good doing it. People forget that sometimes. Labelling someone a "Slogger" just shows how you wish you were half as good as they are. By all means, make your pretty 10 off 20, but I'm buying a pint for the guy who made the ugly 100 of 50.
-
International players are now playing a lot more games on overseas pitches and getting used to them so they arent the bogey men they once were. The Indians and English arent as worried about the bouncy decks in Australia and South Africa as in the 80's. (I wish I could say the same about the Aussies on English, Indian or UAE pitches... :( ) That said, the pitches in Aus for the World Cup were pretty flat and hard.
You want a more even competition, bigger seam on the balls, unlimited bouncers and push the boundaries out. Problem solvered.
-
Agreed Rocky, name of the game is to score runs, not to look good doing it. People forget that sometimes. Labelling someone a "Slogger" just shows how you wish you were half as good as they are. By all means, make your pretty 10 off 20, but I'm buying a pint for the guy who made the ugly 100 of 50.
Gets my vote, but cricket is only slowly changing that mind set. There is still the subtle distinction. One player gets acclaimed by the word 'shot', another gets a 'well hit.'
-
How many mm edge limit should be set?
40/45 max???
What u guys think?
-
Trying to regulate bat sizes is nonsense.
-
Not necessarily
They're doing just fine regulating bat width for example.
Just another dimension.
-
Not necessarily
They're doing just fine regulating bat width for example.
Just another dimension.
Would spine height be next?
Our Saturday skipper uses a very desheverld V500 as even in 10 years the profile difference to a modern day bat is quite remarkable
-
Don't see the point in regulating the bat sizes. Technology and batmaking has improved. If batmakers can make bigger bats then let them. Restrictions just slow the game down. Don't restrict batsmen, bowlers, fielders or the ground. Just let them play and enjoy the game :D
-
Just on bats past and present in regards sizes,
A young lad who opens for our 3rds did use last season a Aldred bat but it's rather heavy for him as he's not a big hitter
More of a nurdler batsman, so now uses a Gunn and Moore autograph I think from at least the late 80s early 90s
And due to its size its width and other dimensions. He is now progressing as a good young batsman.
I am using 2 bats depending on the cricket I'm playing either regular Saturday Sunday matches or midweek Lms games.
A 1 stripe b3 it'd about twice the edge size of the gunn and weighs a touch more. But not a lot.
My other is an ihsan x3 I got on here, again big edges high spine profile,
I would love to see more old school bats getting a modern look but staying as they were when out first time around,
Kook ridgeback, grays millennium or sabre,
-
I can honestly say bat sizes make bugger all difference at my level. Until now ive always used a 2'8 and this season ive been using a 2'12 and made no difference to how far i hit the ball. Covered pitches change the game.
-
I can honestly say bat sizes make bugger all difference at my level. Until not ive always used a 2'8 and this season ive been using a 2'12 this year and made no difference to how far i hit the ball. Covered pitches change the game.
Size refers to volume. A modern day 2'8 is bigger than an old 2'8 etc. Whether it hits the ball further because of its size is debatable.
-
Apologies for my english, my 2'8 is a salix 2005. It is nothing like the bats people post on here. 20mil edges, give or take a mil. Has a fantastic middle
-
Apologies for my english, my 2'8 is a salix 2005. It is nothing like the bats people post on here. 20mil edges, give or take a mil. Has a fantastic middle
I'm on your side, mate! People get a little irrate when I mention f = ma. But, that.
-
V=ma? No it doesn't ;)
A larger volume bat, all else being equal, will be better. Not better enough that it will make the slightest bit of practical difference to the game if bat sizes are restricted though. Don't see boundary sizes changing as the international cricket grounds of the world aren't going to get rebuilt any time soon. Sort the balls out instead, it's time for Dukes to replace Kookaburras worldwide. The best bowlers are fighting back anyway, didn't see Mustafizur getting hit for many at the t20wc for example. Bit more assistance and for the rest of them to catch up and the balance will be just fine.
-
Actually, force = mass x acceleration. Not velocity. My bad.
But I disagree the bigger bat will necessarily hit the ball further/ harder. The better bat will. I don't believe that size is the key variable in all of this.
-
I should add I did not invent this doubt! I am simply someone who has been convinced by reading and listening to intelligent discussion. And, for all the Sky hyperbole, I actually see more pros with what appear to be ordinarily sized bats.
-
I've two bats that I use regularly. One is a B3 low density cleft. The other a B3 butterfly willow cleft. They both weigh about the same, however, the Butterfly cleft makes a smaller bat as its density is higher than that of the Low Density bat. As an amateur, I hit straight sixes with both, about equally regularly, with similar amounts of effort. More importantly, in this experiment of n=1, I have gained muscle mass in the last two years and now hit the boundary far more regularly than I used to through getting fitter. The only time in the past I used to hit sixes fairly regularly was when I was using a 3lb+ bat.
What point does that prove? Only that the bigger volume bat isn't hitting the ball further, the bigger volume me is.
But lets look further at this, as streaky has done in the past: http://www.cricketbatblog.com/2015/10/14/the-cricketer-article/ (http://www.cricketbatblog.com/2015/10/14/the-cricketer-article/)
Boundaries are definitely smaller and, perhaps most tellingly, pitches make all the difference. You only have to look at the county championship this season with the change in rules relating to who gets to bat first. Pitches are much more benign as a result.
You want to redress the balance between bat and ball? Don't look at the bat. Look at the pitch, the boundaries, the fielding restrictions and the ball. Address these, and if we are still seeing an outlandish number of runs, then maybe you can say "It's the bat".
-
yeah I think at the top end the wickets are far to batter friendly
-
This simple experiment videoo may help illustrate the mass vs bat speed. Willow density is irrelevant. This has been discussed over and over, but sometimes seeing it helps.
https://youtu.be/0YVWJ9CqNJA