Print

[Sitonit]

A picture says a thousand words.
We have all seen this photo



So,
Has the ball size been significantly changed since the 70's?
Has the ball shape been significantly changed since the 70'?
Has the ball weight been significantly changed since the 70?

The answer is, NO! NO! and NO!, conclusively.

What HAS been changed though?

Field restrictions
Bouncer per over restrictions
Free hit rule
Shorter boundaries

Do any of these implementations create a bias in favor of the batsman?
The answer is, YES! YES! YES! and YES!

Now comes the bat size.

Luckily we have Barry Richards' bat saved in its original shape as posted above.

And as the ICC is looking into putting a clamp on tree trunks (and hopefully not a mild slap on the wrist), I would encourage ICC to implement a bat restriction rule where no bat should be bigger in size by any dimension than the Barry Richards' bat.

IMO, This will not only bring some much needed balance between ball n the bat but also separate boys from men, and save from yawning at sixes.

[Calzehbhoy]

There is ballance between bat and ball, if there wasn't you wouldn't get so many results in test matches.

T20 is there for the ball to be hit miles, it's kind of the idea of entertaining the crowd, however even in this format of people bowl well they still get rewarded (There was a 5-for in BBL this week).

[sarg]

The issue has already been covered by the World Cricket Council and changes are coming.

I like variations in bats and it will be interesting what new innovations swing the balance back in the batsman's favour in the future after these restrictions are in place. Everyone loves a excuse to purchase a new bat on here.

[Sitonit]

There is ballance between bat and ball, if there wasn't you wouldn't get so many results in test matches.

Stopped reading after that.
You seem too novice to understand cricket if you think test cricket is all about producing a result without knowing that a "draw" is also a result - and without the understanding that test cricket is about displaying the quality of your skills at various fronts.

[Sitonit]

The issue has already been covered by the World Cricket Council and changes are coming.

I like variations in bats and it will be interesting what new innovations swing the balance back in the batsman's favour in the future after these restrictions are in place. Everyone loves a excuse to purchase a new bat on here.

If ICC is serious enough to put an iron clamp on the bat regulations then they should use the same stick that they use to implement the regulations on the ball. 5 decades and no change no innovation no hanky panky in cricket ball.

[sarg]

I'm sorry is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour? 

I can live with the 60/40 compromise. I'd like to see the impact before any further restrictions are made. There are so many other factors that have changed the nature of the game like training techniques and fitness that it will never go back to where it was.

In the meantime stockpile your Warner Player Editions and 50 Plus bats now, because in five years they will become classics like the stupid look on Barry Richard's face.

[Jaffa]

Sitonit, say you're totally right, 100%. What are you going to do about it?

[Calzehbhoy]

Stopped reading after that.
You seem too novice to understand cricket if you think test cricket is all about producing a result without knowing that a "draw" is also a result - and without the understanding that test cricket is about displaying the quality of your skills at various fronts.

As anybody who 'understands cricket' knows that when talking about a pitch a result pitch is a reference to a pitch you get a win/lose on.

You think a bigger bat stops somebody needing to be skilful? See Hales, Duckett, Ballance they had big bats and still failed because they weren't talented enough. The size of bat makes little difference.

Cue dismissive and condescending response.....

[thegowerwaft]

Could it be a visual ambiguity and both bats are the same size... he's just got a very long left arm?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GFTgkibl7DU

[Sitonit]

Could it be a visual ambiguity and both bats are the same size... he's just got a very long left arm?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GFTgkibl7DU

There could possibly be a minor bias in the display, I agree.

If you, his left looks farther away from his tummy than his right hand, making Warner's bat closer to the camera and thus looks even more bigger than it actually is.

[Sitonit]

I'm sorry is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour? 

I can live with the 60/40 compromise. I'd like to see the impact before any further restrictions are made. There are so many other factors that have changed the nature of the game like training techniques and fitness that it will never go back to where it was.

In the meantime stockpile your Warner Player Editions and 50 Plus bats now, because in five years they will become classics like the stupid look on Barry Richard's face.

I am all for training techniques and fitness routines. You work hard, you put an effort and you take the benefit. But using these tree trunks is not something that is acquired by the batsman's own efforts.

Equipment can be, and should be upgraded when it pertains to safety and protection of the players. But equipment to boost performance should very cautiously allowed to make sure it does not bring a bias behind the humanistic effort of opponents.

How are we expect to have fair fight if one soldier is given a small knife and the other is give an AK47?

[joeljonno]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/wi/content/records/282910.html

So, if big bats are making it easier, how come averages aren't getting bigger?

[Sitonit]

Sitonit, say you're totally right, 100%. What are you going to do about it?

True, there isn't much I can do. But sitting idle isn't the option I am choosing either.
I can write to ICC/MCC and all cricket boards. And I will.
I can try raising my opinion on forums to raise awareness
I can be vocal in my local cricket get togethers etc.
I can make comments in cricinfo's comment sessions and commentary.

I love this game, and would like to try something to preserve is pureness and dignity.

[Sitonit]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/wi/content/records/282910.html

So, if big bats are making it easier, how come averages aren't getting bigger?

Because the quality has gone to the crappers - did you do search on number of sixes that are being in an ODI n TEST today compared to 1980?

150 used to be a good score in a 60 over ODI innings. These days, 300 is OK

If big bats are not a factor then why doesn't Warner play a few games with Barry's size bat?

They can't stay long enough on the wicket. Hit sixes, get out, take the big pay check, wait for the next game. That's the mindset of many players these days.

Do you remember the last three times you saw a batsman carrying his bat? No offense intended but if you are a novice, do you even know what does carrying a bat mean?

There was a time when fans would erupt out of their seats in passion and joy (like you see behind the goalkeeper when a goal is scored in soccer) when a six was hit - these days, people yawn when you watch this crappy IPL where every other balls is hit for a six in 60 meter boundary.
You can't scare them with the same alligator for too long.
A fake form of attraction was created to make more money - cheer leaders and fire works - but it's all dimming down. The spirit of cricket has been stolen but yes, a few greedy boards made A LOT of money.

[Loc1215]

I don't understand how the extreme regulations proposed above is going to change the modern mindset of accelerating the game .The fact that there are very few draws is due to this mindset rather than the bat size.I also believe that development in equipment is part and parcel of sport .However I do believe with the point that the game is run by a few greedy boards ,if you don't believe this watch ' the death of a gentleman ' on Netflix.