Print

[MD2812]

The changes won't make a big impact on the game.

Cricket bats is a competitive market, every brand is trying something to create a better performing bat.

We've had carbon backs, handles, laminates. All improved bats and were banned but the 6s are still being smashed. Any changes they make won't stop bat makers finding a way to make their bat outperform the competition.

[uknsaunders]

To put it into the laws of the game it has to be simple. Giving the physical dimensions of a bat or the maximum weight can be written easily. Most other things can't but they did go into detail when they changed the bat handle law.

[tim2000s]

To put it into the laws of the game it has to be simple. Giving the physical dimensions of a bat or the maximum weight can be written easily. Most other things can't but they did go into detail when they changed the bat handle law.

Stating maximum distance for the boundary rope from the edge of the available field isn't exactly hard though...

[fasteddie]

Just because they are talking about it, doesn't make a change imminent.

These committees need an endless supply of tripe upon which to feed to ensure they justify their existence.

They are just a bunch of ex-players who enjoy a junket a couple of times a year.

That's one view.

The other side say's they carry out valuable examination of the trends and changes to the game to ensure the rules and laws of the game are both relevant and fair.
Is it about sides?

Personally, the depth of the bat is irrelevant. When you consider most top players use 2lb 9 bats. There is a finite amount of wood you can incorporate into a bat which is useful.

[tim2000s]

There is a finite amount of wood you can incorporate into a bat which is useful.

Which in your case is around 3lb+!!!

[Number4]

love it, let's ask several batsman about the change. No bias there! Ask a bowler whose been smashed all over the shop and you'll get a different reaction.

The problem is it's becoming the norm, not the exception, for fast scoring to occur. Players are stronger, boundaries shorter yes but bat sizes enable modest players to achieve what we once considered exceptional performances. I can see the benefit of getting less value for off-centre shots by reducing the edge size. However, I still think the weight needs to be looked at, to avoid just using no concaved massive spine bats. Maybe even adding weight into the handle as a penalty for using heavier weights? Whether they can simply revise the law with any changes is a different matter.

It's funny that this has come up. I had a fielder come up to me on Saturday while I was batting and said "it's good to see someone using a traditional shaped and size bat and still hit the ball as hard and far as these big edged bats"

At club level in the 25+ years I have played cricket I haven't noticed any massive difference in performance of bats...

Watching international cricket however is a different story.. Balls seem to come off bats at an alarming rate and hit the boundary fences before you can blink.

[tim2000s]

It's funny that this has come up. I had a fielder come up to me on Saturday while I was batting and said "it's good to see someone using a traditional shaped and size bat and still hit the ball as hard and far as these big edged bats"

At club level in the 25+ years I have played cricket I haven't noticed any massive difference in performance of bats...

Watching international cricket however is a different story.. Balls seem to come off bats at an alarming rate and hit the boundary fences before you can blink.

Which really tells you one of two things.

The first, and least likely, is that International Players use bats made differently to regular amateur players.

The second, and far more likely is that Pro Cricketers employ far more practice, sports science and strength improvement and have thus enabled themselves to hit the ball harder and with better timing than ever before, whilst using the same tools as the amateur player...

[Number4]

Which really tells you one of two things.

The first, and least likely, is that International Players use bats made differently to regular amateur players.

The second, and far more likely is that Pro Cricketers employ far more practice, sports science and strength improvement and have thus enabled themselves to hit the ball harder and with better timing than ever before, whilst using the same tools as the amateur player...

While I agree in part are batsmen better now than in the past? If so have we really seen a jump in averages to prove this?

And also have you noticed similar Tim or is it just my opinion?

[tushar sehgal]

Rather than investigating edge size, shouldn't the MCC think about pushing the boundary rope back to the edge of the field?

agreed but if you notice a lot of sixes end up in the stands anyway so not sure it would help. I think it might make hitting 4 a bit more difficult as hopefully fielders would have a chance to get around and batsman would most likely run more 2's & 3's (Unless you are Indian) which would in turn tire them out and maybe impact big hitting that way...

[fasteddie]

Which in your case is around 3lb+!!!

So long as I'm happy wearing the occasional snorter!

[tim2000s]

While I agree in part are batsmen better now than in the past? If so have we really seen a jump in averages to prove this?

And also have you noticed similar Tim or is it just my opinion?

I started properly playing cricket in the early nineties and I don't think we see anymore sixes being hit. There are some grounds with small boundaries that have always had loads, but for the most part, on "average" grounds, as a bowler, I am not hit for more now than I was 20 years ago.

[ajmw89]

agreed but if you notice a lot of sixes end up in the stands anyway so not sure it would help. I think it might make hitting 4 a bit more difficult as hopefully fielders would have a chance to get around and batsman would most likely run more 2's & 3's (Unless you are Indian) which would in turn tire them out and maybe impact big hitting that way...

The ones that only just clear the short boundaries wouldn't go, so it'd reduce the number.  You'd also get more spectacular catches in the deep.

[fasteddie]

I started in the early/mid 80's.

Bats where thinner, much thinner, and a lot harder pressed. Even going to Warsop and having them custom made back then you got less wood (read that how you wish!).

Hitting a six was rarer then, but we where coached very differently. Proper cricket (as GB would say).

[tushar sehgal]

The ones that only just clear the short boundaries wouldn't go, so it'd reduce the number.  You'd also get more spectacular catches in the deep.

I agree, I am in favour of bigger boundaries...especially because I am a bowler

[uknsaunders]

I started in the early/mid 80's.

Bats where thinner, much thinner, and a lot harder pressed. Even going to Warsop and having them custom made back then you got less wood (read that how you wish!).

Hitting a six was rarer then, but we where coached very differently. Proper cricket (as GB would say).

started the same time and agree.