Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
Advertise on CBF

Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons  (Read 7728 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Buzz

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12725
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Clear your mind, stay still and watch the ball
Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« on: April 10, 2012, 09:00:20 AM »

This is in the Telegraph today - although it doesn't say how the legislation would take place due to a lack of understanding about the bat making process - but I suspect it may have to be something to do with bat pressing...

I am really keen to hear the views of those who make bats on this topic:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/twenty20/ipl/9194371/Danger-ahead-as-batsmen-cut-loose-with-lethal-weapons.html
Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons

It is time to legislate. Before someone is seriously injured, not afterwards. The cricket ball is being hit ever harder, by increasingly powerful batsmen with increasingly powerful bats, and somebody soon will be on the receiving end, perhaps fatally.
It could be the umpire. “We’ve been talking about how to protect yourself,” Rob Bailey said, “especially when you are standing up to the stumps for a spinner.” John Steele, another county stalwart turned first-class umpire, says he wears a box – for umpiring.
It could be the bowler who gets badly hurt, especially if he drops his head after delivery. Mark Robinson, Sussex’s coach, was hit flush on the head when bowling for Northamptonshire and Glamorgan’s Matthew Maynard came down the pitch, reducing Robinson’s reaction time.
In the Indian Premier League yesterday, Johan Botha was bowling his off-spin for Rajasthan Royals and Manoj Tiwary was batting for Kolkata Knight Riders. It wasn’t a particularly strong straight-drive – it did not go for four, let alone six – but Botha just ducked and put his hands up in self-defence.
Botha is fairly fit, not like some of the IPL pensioners. A South African, he has just been appointed captain of South Australia, so he is no has-been. And if he hasn’t time to react, what chance does a senior umpire have to leap out of the ball’s path?
But one of the worst injuries caused so far by a batsman was to a non-striker. Jos Buttler was batting for Somerset in the Champions League T20 last autumn in India when he launched a ball from James Franklin straight at his partner, Craig Kieswetter, backing up. The non-striker was struck decidedly hard.
Kieswetter takes up the story. “It hit me on the
forearm and was about two inches from shattering my elbow. I had a bruise for a month and felt it throughout the England one-day series [against India that followed] — and I stopped the ball going for four.”
Kieswetter distinguishes between various forms of backing up and therefore the degree of risk in being hit by a return drive. “We needed about 26 off three overs and had decided to run for everything except byes to the keeper.” Obviously on a slow day in a championship game, the non-striker does not back up so far.
As you cannot stop batsmen doing weights in the gym all winter, the way to reduce the danger is to legislate and reduce the bat’s power.
It was in 1771 that the width of the bat was limited to 4¼in. In 1835 the length of the bat was limited to 38in. MCC would have made it a nice and sensible progression if in the 1900s they had legislated on the bat’s thickness. But their lawmakers were dormant, although the eminent former cricket correspondent of The Times, John Woodcock, lobbied hard when he was an MCC committee man.
The bat’s traditional thickness was between the size of a fingernail and a thumbnail. Anything thicker and a bat would become too heavy and unwieldy.
Bats now can be thicker than 1½in at the edge, and up to 2½in thick in the middle. Yet very few of today’s bats weigh as much as 3lb. There is so much wood in them, and they can break more easily, but they are barely heavier than the traditional blade.
It would be good for the aesthetics of the game – as well as the health of umpire, non-striker and bowler – if the bat’s thickness were limited to one inch.
It gets boring in Twenty20 when every other ball disappears; and it is wrong for a batsman to get four runs for a forward push, without any follow-through. Variety is being lost as the drive, including the thick edge for six, becomes too prevalent, while the late cut has disappeared.
On motorways we are told to keep two chevrons apart. When a batman comes down the pitch and hits the ball back faster than 70mph, in a T20 game under dodgy lights, he is less than a chevron away. It’s time for legislators to react, to give others time to react.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2012, 09:02:38 AM by Buzz »
Logged
"Bradman didn't used to have any trigger movements or anything like that. He turned batting into a subconscious act" Tony Shillinglaw.

PedalsMcgrew

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2154
  • Trade Count: (+4)
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2012, 09:11:47 AM »

hmmmm interesting!

If they were to limit the thickness of bats then surely batmakers would just find other ways of increasing performance though? I guess we'd all end up using scoops......! 

Logged
Lisa: How's my Rabbit?
Bart: He's dead and dad buried him in the garden, although not in that order..

Buzz

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12725
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Clear your mind, stay still and watch the ball
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2012, 09:14:23 AM »

I think there will have to be a moisture content reading level or some form of pressing restrictions - I am not sure a size measure will work.
Logged
"Bradman didn't used to have any trigger movements or anything like that. He turned batting into a subconscious act" Tony Shillinglaw.

roco

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6991
  • Trade Count: (+16)
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2012, 09:17:24 AM »

It won't happen as too much money invested in making bats bigger for less weight

I agree with Luke bat makers will find another way of increasing performance as if the limit edge size spine heights could be fun
Logged
The first cricket box was used in 1874.  The first cricket helmet was introduced in 1974. So, it took 100 years for men to twig that their brains were also worth protecting.

langer17

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2002
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2012, 09:18:46 AM »

Weight also plays a part in how far the ball goes. Also, making bats have smaller edges, and presumably lighter, would mean the batsmen could swing harder and the ball would come off the same, if not faster.

I disagree with the ball going for 4 with a push, as that is just excellent timing in most cases.

I do agree with what they are saying to a certain extent, as edging a ball that goes for 6 is no good.

« Last Edit: April 10, 2012, 09:23:54 AM by langer17 »
Logged

mdl_1979

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 796
  • Trade Count: (+5)
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2012, 09:20:28 AM »

I have less of a problem with the size of the bats than I do with the size of the boundaries.  As soon as a limited overs game (whether 50 overs or 20 overs) takes place at a ground they immediately bring the boundaries in 10m.  Mishits should not be going for 6.  It should take a well-placed and extremely well struck shot to go for 6.

One also has to factor in the amount of time players spend on strength and conditioning these days.  Your average pro is stronger now than their counterpart 20+ years ago.
Logged

tim2000s

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10678
  • Trade Count: (+21)
  • If I only could bat....
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2012, 09:28:53 AM »

Have to agree with mdl. Boundaries for t20 should be the same as county championship, ie the largest the ground will accommodate. This does affect the fact that spectators want to see sixes though...
Logged

Canners

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5085
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • go hard or go home
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #7 on: April 10, 2012, 09:46:47 AM »

If its the damage that the ball can cause is the problem, then surely they should look at redesigning the cricket ball ? And leave our glorious bats alone
Logged
I don't know how to put this, but, I'm kind of a big deal.

Buzz

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12725
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Clear your mind, stay still and watch the ball
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #8 on: April 10, 2012, 09:53:43 AM »

or make those mean bowlers wear lots of protection to stop them bowling anything other than 65mph half vollies and long hops??!!
Logged
"Bradman didn't used to have any trigger movements or anything like that. He turned batting into a subconscious act" Tony Shillinglaw.

roco

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6991
  • Trade Count: (+16)
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #9 on: April 10, 2012, 09:55:54 AM »

Maybe bowl in helmets? No searing bouncers then

Umps wear hockey goal keeper kits all good then
Logged
The first cricket box was used in 1874.  The first cricket helmet was introduced in 1974. So, it took 100 years for men to twig that their brains were also worth protecting.

Canners

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5085
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • go hard or go home
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2012, 10:02:49 AM »

I think they should make the bowlers bowl underarm, the bowlers are obviously generating to much speed in the first place
Logged
I don't know how to put this, but, I'm kind of a big deal.

Kulli

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5450
  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Herr Kaleun
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #11 on: April 10, 2012, 10:05:32 AM »

If its the damage that the ball can cause is the problem, then surely they should look at redesigning the cricket ball ? And leave our glorious bats alone
Or do away with the umpires!
Logged
They won't catch us this time! Not this time! They haven't spotted us! No, they're all snoring in their bunks! Or, you know what? They're drinking at the bar, celebrating our sinking! Not yet, my friends. Not yet!

Tom

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5614
  • Trade Count: (+33)
    • www.cricketinsight.co.uk
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #12 on: April 10, 2012, 10:19:20 AM »

The only way to do this properly is to put a performance level restriction on the bats. The MCC looked at doing this in 2008 and opted not to, instead making the change to handle make up.

The game hasn't changed much since then. In fact run rates have decreased.
Logged

Canners

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5085
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • go hard or go home
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2012, 10:24:26 AM »

Wasn't t20 cricket introduced to give cricket a sexier new image of faster more brutal cricket? By reducing the performance of bats won't this have a detrimental affect on cricket as a whole?

Maybe they will make everyone use Kashmir planks?
Logged
I don't know how to put this, but, I'm kind of a big deal.

tim2000s

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10678
  • Trade Count: (+21)
  • If I only could bat....
Re: Danger ahead as batsmen cut loose with lethal weapons
« Reply #14 on: April 10, 2012, 10:26:20 AM »

The only way to do this properly is to put a performance level restriction on the bats. The MCC looked at doing this in 2008 and opted not to, instead making the change to handle make up.
How would they go about measuring it?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3
 

Advertise on CBF