Print

[Nmcgee]

An interesting development.

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/icc-set-to-crack-down-on-bat-sizes-on-eve-of-world-cup-20150204-136a28.html

[KIPPERS]

Yes but if you read it they say they arnt going to do anything ...SO .......Not News

[WalkingWicket37]

To repeat what I said in the other thread bat size was mentioned:

Size of the bat is irrelevant. If they enforce a size restriction on bats the market for low density clefts will be reduced, and high density clefts will be more sought after.

A well pressed 3lb bat in Chris Gayle's hands will send a ball into orbit regardless of size.

Take two bats weighing the same, a big modern bat and a smaller traditional shape bat, both well pressed and the "middle" in the same place. It will be the same mass behind the ball and the same transfer of energy.

[jwebber86]

surely though a 3lb bat from a denser cleft is going to been the same as a 3lb from a lighter cleft. just being ridiculous

[procricket]

Your all looking into this too much.

So Cam are you talking weight or volume of wood because there is a big difference massive difference in fact.

But to be honest a good batsman could use anything the mental side of size is important to as mentioned previously

[smilley792]

The game has just become more aggressive in terms of shot choice since the invent of t20.

T20 style crept into odi's for the end if the innings, then the invent if powerplays(rules to encourage scoring!!) meant attacking cricket crept into the early part of the game.

Then with Warner, etc making it work in tests, it's creeping into the long format.


Let's face it, if a batsmen gives himself room and smashes it back at an umpire, a edge loss of 5mm isn't gonna suddenly give the umpire masses of reaction time is it.

[Nmcgee]

Yes but if you read it they say they arnt going to do anything ...SO .......Not News

"The MCC (World Cricket Committee), as law makers, and the ICC will be looking at giving perhaps some consideration to placing limitations on the depth of a bat in particular."

I would say that is an interesting development.

[Vitas Cricket]

A new ball at each end in ODI's is the key change in recent times for me.

It could be argued that Kookaburras balls going out of shape in test matches after a matter of minutes over the past 18 months (and ending up being replaced with a ball of 'similar' age but one that is presumably a bit harder as it hasn't gone out of shape) is having an impact too.

[CrickFreak]

I think its rubbish that the credit is given to big bats etc., especially by commentators/ex-cricketers and media. The batsmen of this generation and cricketers in general are more professional, innovative and physically more fit. They are full time cricketers, all they do is play cricket, learn newer and aggressive way of scoring and stay physically fit. Not long back, cricketers were in most nations were all part timers who had fulltime jobs and cricket was a bit more than a hobby. The professionalism has made lot of difference and created innovation.

[edge]

To repeat what I said in the other thread bat size was mentioned:

Definitely not true, don't know the magnitude of the effect but stiffness of cleft (which will increase with depth) clearly will have an effect on energy transmitted to a ball.

For me it's a collective conciousness thing, e.g. almost every top order player can routinely hit cover drives for 6 these days, hardly saw that at all even 5 years ago. Is that because of a huge improvement over 5ish years ago in batsmen or bats? Obviously not, just everyone now realises it's possible, so they try it, practice it and become able to hit those shots. The same with scoops and sweeps, in particular. Switch hits haven't got there yet, but give it time and they will.
Whereas bowling (in terms of pace/swing anyway) reached the limits of what is humanly possible a long time ago (noone these days bowls faster than Larwood/Trueman/Thompson etc or swings it better than Akram). This is an inevitable process, so maybe try improving the balls so that half the world doesn't use crap Kookaburras and improve pitches so that less cricket is played on easy paced featherbeds, rather than blaming bats for the recent progression in shotmaking.

[jwebber86]

i would like to see a modern big hitting batsmen be given an older style bat and see if it makes any difference

[WalkingWicket37]

Your all looking into this too much.

So Cam are you talking weight or volume of wood because there is a big difference massive difference in fact.

But to be honest a good batsman could use anything the mental side of size is important to as mentioned previously

Both (I think) mate, my explanation was poorly worded.
I was trying to say that two bats weighing the same will theoretical hit the ball the same distance, regardless of the dimensions of the bat. 3lb of willow is 3lb of willow, it doesn't matter if the edge is 20mm or 50mm

Does that make more sense? And ami getting weight and volume all wrong? Haha

[tejasapatel]

I think the game is unbalanced due to to new rules introduced in last 20 years that favor batsman over bowlers. Field restrictions, restrictions on bouncers, shorter boundaries in the name of entertainment. There is a little to do with bats but not much.

[procricket]

3lb of willow might not be 3lb of willow though thats the point.

Volume is linked to density and voulme inside a shape is the size.

Two bats the same weight could not be equal but 2 bats the same volume in the same area will.


Bats are bigger and inline with what has been mentioned strength and better wickets and smaller grounds have aided in hitting the ball harder and further.

For me the sub continent started this with there shapes they where naturally creating through overdriving.

Pro's want bigger lighter bats by and large 

[InternalTraining]

3lb of willow might not be 3lb of willow though thats the point.

What does that mean?

Volume is linked to density and voulme inside a shape is the size.

Alright, some high school physics...

Density = mass/volume; or mass = density * volume;

Two bats the same weight could not be equal but 2 bats the same volume in the same area will.

Weight = mass * gravity.

How can two bats of the same weight "not be equal"? Is gravity different? Or more importantly, weight of the handles, stickers and toe guard will make one bat (or rather blade) have less mass? Basically, are you implying one bat has more wood than the other?

"2 bats the same volume in the same area will" only be equal is the bats had the same mass  - same amount of wood. What am I missing here?

Bats are bigger and inline with what has been mentioned strength and better wickets and smaller grounds have aided in hitting the ball harder and further.

You mean heavier bats when you say "bigger"?

For me the sub continent started this with there shapes they where naturally creating through overdriving.

Pro's want bigger lighter bats by and large

What does bigger mean? More volume (bigger edges and spine) but weighing 2-7? Or more weight? Would a 2-7 bat with 38 mm + edges and 68mm+ spine hit a ball further than a 2-7 tooth pick used by Gary Sobers?