Topic: the stuart broad incident (Read 95925 times)

smilley792 · « **Reply #345 on:** September 21, 2014, 02:19:06 PM »

Thanks for the update.

How much will the adizero be?

Ayrtek Cricket · « **Reply #346 on:** September 21, 2014, 02:20:05 PM »

The AdiZero has an RRP of �224.99.

Vitas Cricket · « **Reply #347 on:** September 21, 2014, 02:29:49 PM »

Adizero is a seriously light lid. Tried on the prototype at the H4L game a few weeks back and then again at the Lords trade show again last week.

smilley792 · « **Reply #348 on:** September 21, 2014, 02:32:35 PM »

Quote from: Vitas Cricket on September 21, 2014, 02:29:49 PM

Adizero is a seriously light lid. Tried on the prototype at the H4L game a few weeks back and then again at the Lords trade show again last week.

It needs a pre order discount for me to get one seeing as I have 2 ayrteks already!

Six Sixes Cricket · « **Reply #349 on:** September 21, 2014, 02:52:12 PM »

Is there any difference between the "adizero" and the previous ayrtek carbon lid?

smilley792 · « **Reply #350 on:** September 21, 2014, 02:55:39 PM »

Quote from: d7bow on September 21, 2014, 02:52:12 PM

Is there any difference between the "adizero" and the previous ayrtek carbon lid?

No acis liner as far as I can tell, just adjustable pads.

Ayrtek Cricket · « **Reply #351 on:** September 21, 2014, 03:15:07 PM »

Correct, the RawTek will have the A.C.I.S liner in it whilst the AdiZero has the EPS liner in it making it a lighter option.

The prices will remain premium due to the carbon fibre shell being used in them both.

TangoWhiskey · « **Reply #352 on:** September 22, 2014, 12:33:52 PM »

Quote from: Ayrtek on September 21, 2014, 01:11:37 PM

It was a freak incident that Stuart accepts and if the top edge hadn't occurred it would have hit the grille. From our analysis the ball speed was between 80-85mph from a distance of 0.4-0.5m, which is above and beyond anything that would be tested for in a lab for the New BSI test (For reference the max speed for the New BSI is at 62.6mph or 28m/s that the helmets need to keep out).

We are confident that the shell is sound in both design and function as it did its job in reducing the force of the initial impact and reducing the severity of injury sustained by the player. Going forward at Elite/international level where ball speeds at in excess of 85mph we are looking to have players using the carbon fibre shells.

I disagree that this is a satisfactory answer. Without wanting to seem like I'm picking holes, it wasn't a freak accident. Most other related accident's you can youtube all feature a top edge which results in the ball penetrating the gap between the peak and the grille. My understanding is the marketing of this helmet mainly revolved about it stopping this type of instance occurring and that it was far safer than Masuri, Albion etc. To say that if he'd missed it, it would have hit his grille and he'd have been fine is irrelevant. The only time I've seen a grille fail is when Root got pinned in his GM and even then that involved a top edge too.

I have an old Masuri lid and I have it set so the ball shouldn't be able to get between the peak and the grill. As far as your answer gives me, if I to top edge one in the manner that Broad did under the same conditions, then my Masuri would probably offer me the same kind of protection as I would have whilst wearing an Aditek.

So what I'm asking is how is your lid safer than any other brand, which is what I'm lead to believe?

Ayrtek Cricket · « **Reply #353 on:** September 22, 2014, 12:48:26 PM »

With the preliminary testing that was carried out upon the helmets it showed that the helmets would keep at ball out at speeds of upto 75mph from a distance of 0.6m as per the new BSI standard.

What cannot be replicated in a lab in the rotation on a ball after a top edge or the exact shape and hardness of a particular ball at the point of impact. Our helmets design is to offer a more rigid peak structure that minimises flexion upon impact.

IMO from the resulting damage to the helmet this is shown to have functioned due to the fractures that occurred on either side of the helmet at the grille anchoring points. What older styles of helmet will still have to deal with is the flexion of the peak upon impact which could allow the ball to pass through even with a smaller gap being used.

The compromise between the gap being shrunk and still being able to see the ball needs to be balanced, with a 45mm gap set upon the helmets a junior sized ball was still kept out at 75mph and for peace of mind people may opt for this setting going forward.

tim2000s · « **Reply #354 on:** September 22, 2014, 01:00:51 PM »

Quote from: TangoWhiskey on September 22, 2014, 12:33:52 PM

I have an old Masuri lid and I have it set so the ball shouldn't be able to get between the peak and the grill. As far as your answer gives me, if I to top edge one in the manner that Broad did under the same conditions, then my Masuri would probably offer me the same kind of protection as I would have whilst wearing an Aditek.

Given how the Masuri peak flexes, don't underestimate how much energy was removed from the ball by the damage caused to the material of the peak. Had you been wearing the Masuri, the pace on the ball would have been a lot greater than that from the Ayrtek as it impacted your nose!

Percy · « **Reply #355 on:** September 22, 2014, 01:05:17 PM »

I think I agree with TangoWhiskey here. Yes it was an accident and if it wasn't a top edge then all would probably have been well, but the fact of the matter is that the helmet is there to protect against the freak accidents not the foreseen ones. If the helmet wasn't suitable for the type of cricket for which it was being used surely Adidas should have insisted that Broad used a more robust model.

I have tried over the last few years to get my son to use an Ayrtek as I believed they were the safest; he has always refused on the grounds that if a Masuri is good enough for X then its good enough for him, and he didn't want to look like a prat. Now he turns around and says "I told you they were rubbish"!. This may be the view of a 13 year old, but unfortunately I feel that it is something that Adidas/Ayrtek are going to take some time recover from. The members of this forum are a very small percentage of the cricket kit buying public and are more inclined to accept Tom's explanation however, Joe Public will not read this forum and without a more robust explanation of why the helmet failed then I fear for the brands future sales.

I hope I am wrong!

WalkingWicket37 · « **Reply #356 on:** September 22, 2014, 01:14:52 PM »

There's only one way we can settle this.
We need someone to edge an 85mph bouncer into their face at an angel so it replicates the Stuart Broad incident, do it wearing a variety of lids to see which saves you the most.

I propose we do the top edge test on each of the lids readily available. To make it a fair test, we'll need to do 3 "inpact" runs per helmet.
This will need to be done with an AdiTek, a new style Masuri, an old masuri, the different models of albion, and to keep Vic happy a Shrey! We could also test a few of the cheaper lids that are available too.

Once all these lids have been tested 3 times each, we can see on average what damage was caused, and from that draw a conclusion on the safest lid.

I'll operate the bowling machine, any volunteers to be the guinea pig??

Percy · « **Reply #357 on:** September 22, 2014, 01:19:21 PM »

Quote from: WalkingWicket37 on September 22, 2014, 01:14:52 PM

There's only one way we can settle this.
We need someone to edge an 85mph bouncer into their face at an angel so it replicates the Stuart Broad incident, do it wearing a variety of kids to see which saves you the most.

I propose we do the top edge test on each of the lids readily available. To make it a fair test, we'll need to do 3 "inpact" runs per helmet.
This will need to be done with an AdiTek, a new style Masuri, an old masuri, the different models of albion, and to keep Vic happy a Shrey! We could also test a few of the cheaper lids that are available too.

Once all these lids have been tested 3 times each, we can see on average what damage was caused, and from that draw a conclusion on the safest lid.

I'll operate the bowling machine, any volunteers to be the guinea pig??

I like the idea of using a "variety of kids" ;-)

tim2000s · « **Reply #358 on:** September 22, 2014, 01:20:03 PM »

It's typical isn't it. Stuart Broad got hit and walked away with limited damage. All the people wearing a Masuri and who haven't are instantly forgotten.

I would still rate the Ayrtek above the older style Masuri having used both.

Percy · « **Reply #359 on:** September 22, 2014, 01:26:51 PM »

Quote from: tim2000s on September 22, 2014, 01:20:03 PM

It's typical isn't it. Stuart Broad got hit and walked away with limited damage. All the people wearing a Masuri and who haven't are instantly forgotten.

I would still rate the Ayrtek above the older style Masuri having used both.

Yes, but Stuart B is more high profile. We shouldnt be comparing the helmet to an old Masuri as this didnt meet the new standards.

Joe Public will not hear about the accidents in county cricket as they don't get the coverage, they will hear about Stuart Broad wearing "one of those funky new helmets" and how he had to go to hospital. Result - little Johnny doesn't want one, and his parents don't want to buy him one!

Author Topic: the stuart broad incident (Read 95925 times)

smilley792

Re: the stuart broad incident

Ayrtek Cricket

Re: the stuart broad incident

Vitas Cricket

Re: the stuart broad incident

smilley792

Re: the stuart broad incident

Six Sixes Cricket

Re: the stuart broad incident

smilley792

Re: the stuart broad incident

Ayrtek Cricket

Re: the stuart broad incident

TangoWhiskey

Re: the stuart broad incident

Ayrtek Cricket

Re: the stuart broad incident

tim2000s

Re: the stuart broad incident

Percy

Re: the stuart broad incident

WalkingWicket37

Re: the stuart broad incident

Percy

Re: the stuart broad incident

tim2000s

Re: the stuart broad incident

Percy

Re: the stuart broad incident