MCC don't like Punter's Bat!

[Scallywag]

I can't help being amused by some of the articles which suggest this is an attempt to destabilise the Aussies with The Ashes coming up - like anyone would stoop as low as some of the Aussies.

I think some poms are so desperate they will try anything, but as usual they make a hash of it and end up with egg on their face again. Egg is a national dish I understand.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

I can't help being amused by some of the articles which suggest this is an attempt to destabilise the Aussies with The Ashes coming up - like anyone would stoop as low as some of the Aussies.

And England can do no wrong, being the scrappy, lovable underdogs?

Bodyline, anyone?

 

[deeps]

found an interesting article about corking bats in baseball. I'm guessing the same laws of physics would apply to a cricket bat.

here's a little extract:

Corking a bat, or illegally doctoring it by drilling a hole in the barrel and filling it with cork or pieces of rubber, is believed to help players hit the ball farther. Baseball lore says that hollowing out the wooden barrel and replacing it with lighter material allows the player to swing it faster and hit the ball harder. This alteration also supposedly makes the bat springier, catapulting the ball off the bat and sending it an extra 10-20 feet. In a game often decided by a fraction of an inch, this could mean the difference between a sacrifice fly and a three-run homer.

it then does some simple f=ma calculations

For example, take a basic scenario in which a batter swings a 35-ounce bat at 90 miles per hour:

Force = Mass x Acceleration
Force = 35 ounces x 90 mph/s
Force = 3150

Now suppose the batter corked the bat, reduced its weight by an ounce, and can now swing it faster…

Force = 34 ounces x 92 mph/s
Force = 3128

So corking can make the bat lighter, but the swing doesn’t gain force in the process. It’s a wash, at best. As Adair says, “A light bat doesn’t hit the ball quite as far for most people.�?

However this calculation is too simple, it doesn't take into account the extra "rebound" that they claim will be given by the cork and rubber combination.

anyway, it's an interesting read.


http://www.wood-tang.com/2003/06/the-physics-of-corking-a-bat/

 

[Sir Redman]

found an interesting article about corking bats in baseball. I'm guessing the same laws of physics would apply to a cricket bat.

here's a little extract:

Corking a bat, or illegally doctoring it by drilling a hole in the barrel and filling it with cork or pieces of rubber, is believed to help players hit the ball farther. Baseball lore says that hollowing out the wooden barrel and replacing it with lighter material allows the player to swing it faster and hit the ball harder. This alteration also supposedly makes the bat springier, catapulting the ball off the bat and sending it an extra 10-20 feet. In a game often decided by a fraction of an inch, this could mean the difference between a sacrifice fly and a three-run homer.

it then does some simple f=ma calculations

For example, take a basic scenario in which a batter swings a 35-ounce bat at 90 miles per hour:

Force = Mass x Acceleration
Force = 35 ounces x 90 mph/s
Force = 3150

Now suppose the batter corked the bat, reduced its weight by an ounce, and can now swing it faster…

Force = 34 ounces x 92 mph/s
Force = 3128

So corking can make the bat lighter, but the swing doesn’t gain force in the process. It’s a wash, at best. As Adair says, “A light bat doesn’t hit the ball quite as far for most people.�?

However this calculation is too simple, it doesn't take into account the extra "rebound" that they claim will be given by the cork and rubber combination.

anyway, it's an interesting read.


http://www.wood-tang.com/2003/06/the-physics-of-corking-a-bat/

As you say at the end that doesn't take into account that when the ball makes contact with the corked bat the cork/rubber depresses and thus there is a tension forcing the cork to expand back to its original position (Hooke's Law F=kx). Therefore when the cork/rubber expands it exerts a force back on the ball, so the total force on the ball is the force from the batter + the force from the expanding rubber.

I don't really think that this would apply to cricket though since graphite isn't exactly a springy substance.

 

[marc71178]

Bit of an over-reaction on the MCC's part...


Some people might even go as far as wanting to take it to court.

From what I've heard on the BBC website, the ICC asked the MCC to investigate it.

 

[luckyeddie]

MCC want Punter's bat banned!

What does everyone make of this?

IMHO, it's just a load of crap. How would graphite makes Ponting get so many runs? I would have thought the batsman, not the bat got runs!

EDIT: Link Fixed!

There's nothing like a bit of paranoia in the run-up to the Ashes, is there?

Whinging Poms or Cheating Convicts, you pays your money and you takes your choice

<quack> If you don't pay your money the Aussies'll steal it anyway, cheating at Two-up

Now then, DD. There's no call for that kind of attitude

 

[luckyeddie]

I think some poms are so desperate they will try anything, but as usual they make a hash of it and end up with egg on their face again. Egg is a national dish I understand.

Mmmmmmmm, poached egg on toast.

You know, toast.

Made from bread.

Loaf.

What you great great great grandfather stole to win a lifetime's holiday in Botany Bay

 

[luckyeddie]

And England can do no wrong, being the scrappy, lovable underdogs?

Bodyline, anyone?

Ultra-modern leg-theory, please

 

[social]

Mmmmmmmm, poached egg on toast.

You know, toast.

Made from bread.

Loaf.

What you great great great grandfather stole to win a lifetime's holiday in Botany Bay

Oi! Dont knock the "loaf!"

If it wasnt for such a "crime" being committed by one of my forebears, I'd still think that:

"summer" was a girl's name;

a "hard man" kicked people; and

Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.

 

[mike54]

Actually the bats appear to be standard retail Kookaburra models (maybe with some special fluoro stickers for Punter). The Kooka website explains it all - "graphite/fibreglass reinforcement matrix" etc etc. Not some sinister implement forged in the fires of Mordor or anywhere else.

 

[mike54]

As you say at the end that doesn't take into account that when the ball makes contact with the corked bat the cork/rubber depresses and thus there is a tension forcing the cork to expand back to its original position (Hooke's Law F=kx). Therefore when the cork/rubber expands it exerts a force back on the ball, so the total force on the ball is the force from the batter + the force from the expanding rubber.

I don't really think that this would apply to cricket though since graphite isn't exactly a springy substance.

It's a bit more complex than that. In a pure rebound (ie no damage or "work" done on bat or ball) the aim is to maximise the post-impact speed of the ball. During impact, both bat and ball deform elastically and absorb energy, which is then released in the rebound. Bat deformation will occur locally in the face as well as in the blade and spring. Optimum ball speed will occur when the rebounds of bat and ball closely coincide (more or less). Altering the properties of bat or ball will change the transfer of kinetic energy between them, increasing or decreasing the rebound speed for a given stroke.

 

[Sir Redman]

It's a bit more complex than that. In a pure rebound (ie no damage or "work" done on bat or ball) the aim is to maximise the post-impact speed of the ball. During impact, both bat and ball deform elastically and absorb energy, which is then released in the rebound. Bat deformation will occur locally in the face as well as in the blade and spring. Optimum ball speed will occur when the rebounds of bat and ball closely coincide (more or less). Altering the properties of bat or ball will change the transfer of kinetic energy between them, increasing or decreasing the rebound speed for a given stroke.

True. I never was that great on springs and things...