Cricket Bats and being caught & bowled

[Stuart]

I'm not entirely sure how you could do this analysis, but I wonder whether there has been a drop-off in successful caught and bowled dismissals since cricket bats started turning into tree trunks.

In baseball, the major league players must use a bat made of wood rather than aluminum. There are concerns that metal bats hit the ball harder (and therefore faster) and that there is a serious risk of pitchers being either injured or killed by a ball.

Similarly, I wonder if bowlers are now less likely to succeed in catching a straight hit off their bowling, simply because modern bats hit the ball harder than in the past, and therefore get to the bowler faster.

Edit: Please excuse my non-technical use of words such as 'faster' and 'harder'. I recognise that they are probably not accurate in terms of physics. So sue me.

[pappubahry]

Here is the percentage of wickets that are caught and bowled by decade. The dots are at the start of the decade and include the 1870-79, 1880-89, ..., 2000-09.



There hasn't been much change recently. It is possible that hard-hit shots are harder to catch, but the bowlers get more opportunities. I don't know.

[Gabe]

Trend's a bit clearer for all FC cricket (ignore blob at the end - that's a bin starting 8 days ago...)

[deathspank]

Improved batting techniques are a bigger factor than bats.

[fletch]

Bat technology has improved significantly. Would never have received the injury below attempting to stop a youth's off drive with my boot off my own bowling in the nets(clearly I missed ) The ball comes off the bat much sweeter, faster and more consistently than even 10 years ago.


http://www.cricketfansforum.net/atta...0&d=1271001277

[NYCO]

Originally Posted by Gabe

Trend's a bit clearer for all FC cricket (ignore blob at the end - that's a bin starting 8 days ago...)

I'm not sure you can diagnose from this without seeing what type of dismissal commensurately rose.

[Stuart]

Thanks to Pappu and Gabe for the graphs.

The part of the analysis that is so hard (which I didn't articulate well in the first post) is whether there are more 'dropped' chances by the bowler because the ball is simply going back faster than they can react. I was wondering whether we were seeing a reduction in successful 'caught and bowleds' due to this factor, but there is no way (that I know of) to get that sort of data (i.e. the number of dropped catches by the bowler per match has increased).

I've been thinking about the above graphs for a day or two, but am still not sure of precisely what they tell us. There is a clear downward trend (in Gabe's anyway), but as GB points out, the reasons for this could be anything from changing pitch conditions, differing techniques, increased fielding aptitude, bats etc. The length of the fall in Gabe's graph would tend to indicate that it is not a recent trend, and would therefore counter the concept that it is related to the improvements in bats. As NYCO says, it would be interesting to see if another type of dismissal has seen an equivalent rise.

Another thought for Pappu and Gabe (who can do the dirty work for me ) - has there been a change over time with respect to the concept that are players more likely to be dismissed 'caught and bowled' on a higher score than caught in other positions? I am wondering here is whether 'C & B' is something than usually happens later in the innings (e.g. when the batsman is trying to increase his scoring rate), regardless of the era.

[paddyr]

But hasn't Zaheer made a career from c&b dismissals?

[Fine Leg]

Like NYCO states, I really don't think the improvement in bats has anything to do with the stats on C&B dismissals as most are from leading edges or from the batsman playing the drive too early and hence not hitting the middle of the bat. This is from my own experience anyway. If you are dismissed C&B playing a full blooded drive then you are just damn unlucky.

Hello

I am new here, welcome folks .

[The Little Dasher]

Welcome. Now get on your knees and suck one of these ones

[paddyr]

Originally Posted by Immiplet

Hello

I am new here, welcome folks .

Welcome. Start posting away, and don't give a damn about anyone else on this site. Especially GMUZ, Affers, and TLD.

[Affers]

why not paddy i thought we were friends?

[Hammond]

Can I just say that I have a monster of a cricket bat and in my last season I only ever got caught on the boundary- even leading edges nearly went for four. The good bats these days make a huge difference to your survivability at the crease, and I'm sure that that goes for caught and bowled as well. It's just so easy to time the ball with the weight of the bat and the bat speed with the balance..

[Hammond]

By the way this is the very type of bat that I use.. I wouldn't recommend anyone buy one because although they are wonderful only an idiot would pay so much. An idiot like me..

[Stuart]

Nice - have had a quick play in the nets with one of them before. Great balance. What weight is it?

[Hammond]

Originally Posted by Stuart

Nice - have had a quick play in the nets with one of them before. Great balance. What weight is it?

2'10 with a regular to high middle. 12 super straight grains.

And I hated it when I first used it, only started using it regularly this year- I had always used the other bat that this bat package comes with.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Hammond

2'10 with a regular to high middle. 12 super straight grains

Funny thing - I read somewhere recently that the best willow has LESS grains not more (which I agree is completely contrary to what we look for in a blade). Can't remember where though.

Dunno if you remember when Wessels stained the front of his bat so that the grain showed up really clearly, but I thought it looked cool

[Hammond]

Originally Posted by Stuart

Funny thing - I read somewhere recently that the best willow has LESS grains not more (which I agree is completely contrary to what we look for in a blade). Can't remember where though.

Dunno if you remember when Wessels stained the front of his bat so that the grain showed up really clearly, but I thought it looked cool

From what I know, the more grains, the older the tree, and the further the ball will travel off the face as soon as you purchase it. Less grains, younger tree, will take longer to play in but will last longer.

Very rare to find an old tree that will supply bats of 15 grains plus.. but the wood will be softer and it will play like a gun from the start..

[fletch]

You really are quite mad. That is obscene quite frankly. Can you lend us a tenner btw....


http://www.quantumcricket.com/laver.html

[Hammond]

The missus went to Scotland to see her folks- she asked me if I wanted to come but I couldn't get away from work there was a big thing on so I said it would cheaper all round if she just gave me $2K AUS so I could buy a cricket bat.

She agreed. Hence my possession of a Laver & Wood Signature Howitzer

[fletch]

You're still quite mad.

[Hammond]

Originally Posted by fletch

You're still quite mad.

I know. But nice things cost money (Schindlers list) and you know where the money went when you see the ball actually accelerate after it pierces the field, or the confidence you feel when you pick one up outside off stump and watch it bounce once before hitting the mid wicket fence.

The bat is fucking incredible. I didn't like it at first but that is because I am a moron.

An example of the bats amazing power..

http://mycricket.cricket.com.au/comm...atchID=1138811

[fletch]

What you do with your dosh is your business, but I really can't see how it would be significantly better than, for instance a 200 quid newbery or equivalent, particularly for a club player. Pretty sure even the big boys don't use bats priced over 600 squids. Your bat package is more expensive than my shitty car. Whatever floats your boat though.

[Hammond]

Originally Posted by fletch

What you do with your dosh is your business, but I really can't see how it would be significantly better than, for instance a 200 quid newbery or equivalent, particularly for a club player. Pretty sure even the big boys don't use bats priced over 600 squids. Your bat package is more expensive than my shitty car. Whatever floats your boat though.

Umm. I have a $700 Professional grade Millichamp and it only travels maybe two thirds of the way with the same shot as that Laver.

Honestly the thing is ridiculous. I pity the bowlers (a bit)..

I do love Salix though. I can assure you that the signature bat is not a gimmick. It's true test quality.