Possible restrictions on bats being looked at

[Daemon]

On another note, I think the "banning bigger bats" isn't much of a solution to the issue, because the power and dominance of modern bats is not just about the size, if at all. The bats are just a lot more powerful pound-for-pound and, to be frank, if someone is strong enough to use a 3 pound+ bat effectively despite the additional weight, then good on them IMO.

I remember reading very clearly that the problem isn't the weight of these bats - clive lloyd used a bat heavier than what pretty much anyone uses today. It's that the sweet spot is significantly larger in todays bats and even on the edges and toes very little energy is lost. The design and sizes are really everything.

 

[Daemon]

Even in that second picture it's excruciatingly obvious that Warner's bat is being held significantly closer to the camera.

Which is fine, it helps prove the point that is being made, but not surprising that it's misleading people.

you're just baiting me now aren't you

 

[NotMcKenzie]

I wouldn't say that there hasn't been changes in weight though; Bradman writing in the 1950s states that, for a (presumably) full-sized bat, 'a serviceable weight is 2 lb. 4 oz.,' whereas I'd reckon it difficult to find bats (in store) weighing less than 2 lb. 9 oz. (maybe 8 oz.); so bats would generally be both larger and heavier today. I also reckon that (although there are already laws about this), modern bats are often slightly wider than they used to be, perhaps because one needs not exercise as much restraint in weight distribution in modern designs.

 

[Daemon]

I wouldn't say that there hasn't been changes in weight though; Bradman writing in the 1950s states that, for a (presumably) full-sized bat, 'a serviceable weight is 2 lb. 4 oz.,' whereas I'd reckon it difficult to find bats (in store) weighing less than 2 lb. 9 oz. (maybe 8 oz.); so bats would generally be both larger and heavier today. I also reckon that (although there are already laws about this), modern bats are often slightly wider than they used to be, perhaps because one needs not exercise as much restraint in weight distribution in modern designs.

Yeah, I'm not saying there haven't been any changes in weight of course, but upping the weight isn't that much of a problem as the dimensions, because eventually it becomes a trade off between hitting the ball harder and bringing your bat down quicker.

 

[TheJediBrah]

you're just baiting me now aren't you

Not entirely. It's also a very effective way to get my point across while appearing sufficiently arrogant and dismissive to other posters.

 

[Prince EWS]

you're just baiting me now aren't you

Obviously.

 

[mr_mister]

I swear top edges for six aren't as common everyone is making it seem

 

[TheJediBrah]

I swear top edges for six aren't as common everyone is making it seem

Nah they are ridiculously common these days, even compared to 10 years ago

Watching McCullum lately bat I swear it feels sometimes like 80% of his runs come from sixes over the keeper's head

 

[Top_Cat]

Bit of both, from my perspective. Bat technology means you can take bigger risks so you try shots you wouldn't have contemplated in the 90s. Wonder how blokes like DeVilliers and Maxwell would have batted in the days of Hookesy's twin scoop.

 

[Daemon]

I swear top edges for six aren't as common everyone is making it seem

It's less top edges going for six and more dance down the track get beaten in flight but still club it over midwicket with the toe of the bat

 

[Prince EWS]

It's less top edges going for six and more dance down the track get beaten in flight but still club it over midwicket with the toe of the bat

"Dance down the track, try to go over vacant long on, get a leading edge and clear waiting long off instead" annoys me the most, I think.

I blame the ropes more than I blame modern bat technology though.

 

[G.I.Joe]

"Dance down the track, try to go over vacant long on, get a leading edge and clear waiting long off instead" annoys me the most, I think.

Damn right

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3wyg95

01:10 onwards

 

[OverratedSanity]

Richards smashed 350-odd on the fastest pitch in the world against an attack with three ATGs using that toothpick, something Warner's never achieved with his tree trunk and modern training.

No wonder they banned the ****.

Bleh...the boundaries were 40 metres that day. A detail which is always conveniently forgotten.

 

[StephenZA]

Bleh...the boundaries were 40 metres that day. A detail which is always conveniently forgotten.

But only for Richards apparently...
Western Australia v South Australia at Perth, Nov 20-23, 1970 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Oh and apparently he only hit 1 six in the innings.

 

[91Jmay]

Who are the 3 ATGs?

 

[OverratedSanity]

But only for Richards apparently...
Western Australia v South Australia at Perth, Nov 20-23, 1970 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Oh and apparently he only hit 1 six in the innings.

Oh, yeah, I never said everyone else plundered runs like he did. Obviously it must've been an epic innings. Those straight drives off Lillee where he destroys them down the ground while barely moving his feet are brutal.

I've just found the quote where Barry Richards says the boundaries were 30-40 m has to be either a little inaccurate or totally false. The boundaries look way,way longer in the video. If they actually were short boundaries, then it deserves to be mentioned as a little footnote to the innings though, imo.

Edit: Ok, I just spotted the square boundary on the off side in the video. It's pulled way in. Definitely a tiny square boundary.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Some of those pull shots too... jesus.

 

[Top_Cat]

Bleh...the boundaries were 40 metres that day. A detail which is always conveniently forgotten.

For ****'s sake, learn sarcasm.

 

[OverratedSanity]

No, this is rather serious business

 

[vic_orthdox]

The general slowing of wickets has stopped as many sixes being hit behind the wicket off edges - used to see it regularly at the WACA for example.

Most of those have nothing to do with bat sizes - they are more about bat speed, which is why McCullum and Gilchrist scored them so regularly.