Topic: the stuart broad incident (Read 95986 times)

TangoWhiskey · « **Reply #210 on:** August 12, 2014, 02:42:43 PM »

Quote from: Tom on August 12, 2014, 02:39:43 PM

It also can't be easy being a protection/helmet manufacturer. You're only really ever going to get bad press, as people only highlight protection when/if it fails. And I suppose however safe something is, eventually it will fail to some degree. Like many have said, you can't create a 100% safe helmet.

I suppose this is why Masuri are jumping in trying to get some good coverage whilst they can.

I don't know, Ayrtek will probably get some decent pressed when Steyn/Johnson pins someone right on the scoop and it flies off for six leg byes!

Tom · « **Reply #211 on:** August 12, 2014, 02:45:25 PM »

Quote from: Gingerbusiness on August 12, 2014, 02:41:25 PM

Like bats, sponsors do not really care as long as their brand is plastered on it.

However, Masuri is a brand in itself. Adidas wanted the Ayrtek helmet as their 'brand' helmet, instead of innovating their own, hence the Adidas branding. As a brand, it stands to reason that Masuri will be paying international players to wear their lids, just like Gray Nic's will pay Capt Cook to use their equipment.

Masuri have never paid individual players as far as I'm aware.

fasteddie · « **Reply #212 on:** August 12, 2014, 02:50:17 PM »

Quote from: Tom on August 12, 2014, 02:36:13 PM

That's not true. Both Albion and Ayrtek tweeted links to their helmets/innovations, alongside explicit references to the Kieswetter injury and lines such as "Update your lid" in the days after Kieswetter's injury. Masuri have taken it a step further with a PR campaign, true - but I think some balance is needed.

I certainly don't blame Masuri for attempting to regain some lost ground/sales. But I hope they do bear in mind the reaction should another injury happen whilst wearing their updated helmets.

Well said.
It seems there could be an outbreak of balance occurring.
Masuri have done nothing wrong with their PR.

Some are missing the point that they are competitors and are striving to win market share. If I where at Masuri I'd have done exactly the same, probably will do more to communicate the benefits of the new features.

Gingerbusiness · « **Reply #213 on:** August 12, 2014, 02:52:39 PM »

Quote from: Tom on August 12, 2014, 02:45:25 PM

Masuri have never paid individual players as far as I'm aware.

I agree with you Tom, but I heard a rumour this changed recently with the introduction of the 'partnership' between Adidas and Ayrtek.

I will bow to others superior knowledge on this.

Tom · « **Reply #214 on:** August 12, 2014, 02:55:32 PM »

I'm only going on what Masuri have told me, and my brief experience 4+ years ago. It could well have changed, though the boastful claims do still sit in their marketing.

mp07 · « **Reply #215 on:** August 12, 2014, 03:14:11 PM »

Masuri does good amount of R&D, so you do have to give them credit for that

http://youtu.be/MAZYkKbQjGQ

procricket · « **Reply #216 on:** August 12, 2014, 03:42:41 PM »

As Harry Hill said

"FIGHT"

Helmet wars oh dear

Where is super tech when you need him

Six Sixes Cricket · « **Reply #217 on:** August 12, 2014, 04:42:56 PM »

From watching the ayrtek videos, the testing seems to be at head on, 50/50 with the grill and peak. Due to the angle of Broads top edge, the trajectory of the ball went underneath the peak, with the grill bending back and the ball forcing itself through.

@187no · « **Reply #218 on:** August 12, 2014, 05:44:40 PM »

�Accredited Test Houses are just coming online now to test helmets to the new standard. Masuri�s Vision Series was ready before the Test Houses � so we�re ahead of the curve! And you can see that most of the England team have already made up their minds.

http://bit.ly/1l0gvdc

So are masuri by way of stating in their press release that they tested their helmets in a non accredited Test House and gained the new standard ?

Btw, on the ayrtek blog it is also stated that the ball used for testing weighs 5.2 oz and not 5.5 oz which as we know is the correct weight of a senior cricket ball.

Tom · « **Reply #219 on:** August 12, 2014, 06:32:09 PM »

In other news though, looks like Ayrtek have signed a deal to supply/design liners for the military

Congrats guys

https://twitter.com/SFDGlobal/status/499203391193493505/photo/1

procricket · « **Reply #220 on:** August 12, 2014, 06:53:33 PM »

I may get a free one now!!!!!

wayward_hayward · « **Reply #221 on:** August 12, 2014, 08:31:37 PM »

The masuri press releases smacks of desperation to put one up on their competitors. I tried one of the new steel masuri's on today for the first time and I was amazed at the weight of the thing. As a masuri user for years, it does make me question whether to purchase another in the future.

ItsJustCricket · « **Reply #222 on:** August 13, 2014, 08:40:22 AM »

Masuri are more vocal than Albion, Shrey et al largely because their Vision Series was designed specifically with this kind of incident in mind. They have clearly invested a lot of time and money on addressing this specific issue on a helmet rather than just making it look good and feel comfortable and light, so I can understand why they are now trying to recoup some of that investment. Essentially the Broad incident justifies everything they have done with the Vision Series. They came under a lot of criticism for the looks of these helmets, but this incident proves that looks are of lesser importance, so why not shout about it?!

Buzz · « **Reply #223 on:** August 13, 2014, 08:45:57 AM »

Quote from: ItsJustCricket on August 13, 2014, 08:40:22 AM

Masuri are more vocal than Albion, Shrey et al largely because their Vision Series was designed specifically with this kind of incident in mind. They have clearly invested a lot of time and money on addressing this specific issue on a helmet rather than just making it look good and feel comfortable and light, so I can understand why they are now trying to recoup some of that investment. Essentially the Broad incident justifies everything they have done with the Vision Series. They came under a lot of criticism for the looks of these helmets, but this incident proves that looks are of lesser importance, so why not shout about it?!

All this is true - it will be interesting to see what happens when a similar incident happens with one of the new vision series helmets. with the way the ball was spinning and the speeds off the bat it will be a real challenge to the new design - and certainly one that hasn't been tested for - I say this because as far as I know (and I am happy to be corrected on this) the testing system doesn't put revolutions on the ball and isn't able to go above 70mph.

tim2000s · « **Reply #224 on:** August 13, 2014, 08:47:41 AM »

Quote from: ItsJustCricket on August 13, 2014, 08:40:22 AM

Masuri are more vocal than Albion, Shrey et al largely because their Vision Series was designed specifically with this kind of incident in mind. They have clearly invested a lot of time and money on addressing this specific issue on a helmet rather than just making it look good and feel comfortable and light, so I can understand why they are now trying to recoup some of that investment. Essentially the Broad incident justifies everything they have done with the Vision Series. They came under a lot of criticism for the looks of these helmets, but this incident proves that looks are of lesser importance, so why not shout about it?!

Except, the Masuri Vision series isn't quite designed to deal with this kind of incident either.

All the helmet manufacturers have designed mostly to deal with the impact of a ball directly face on to the wearer. This was unusual due to the angle the ball comes at the helmet and due to the spin on the ball caused by the top edge. They therefore have to be very careful about the noise they make as there is no guarantee that their helmet would have stood up to the incident.

Author Topic: the stuart broad incident (Read 95986 times)

TangoWhiskey

Re: the stuart broad incident

Tom

Re: the stuart broad incident

fasteddie

Re: the stuart broad incident

Gingerbusiness

Re: the stuart broad incident

Tom

Re: the stuart broad incident

mp07

Re: the stuart broad incident

procricket

Re: the stuart broad incident

Six Sixes Cricket

Re: the stuart broad incident

@187no

Re: the stuart broad incident

Tom

Re: the stuart broad incident

procricket

Re: the stuart broad incident

wayward_hayward

Re: the stuart broad incident

ItsJustCricket

Re: the stuart broad incident

Buzz

Re: the stuart broad incident

tim2000s

Re: the stuart broad incident