Durham face being docked 16 points becos 1 of their
overseas stars Maddinson came to the wicket in their
last match against Derbys with an oversize bat.

Apparently the umpire took the bat off him and it
wouldnt go through his gauge. 1 of derbys players
had already been found out doing the same thing
earlier in the season [did they get 16 points docked?]

The thing is in all the time i've watched or played
cricket i've never seen an umpire measure a bat. I
remember lillee throwing his alum bat to the boundary
when brearley objected cos it wasnt wood. Sounds
like the ECB have told umpires to look out for illegal
size bats. But why would a bat manufacture make
a bat which exceeds regulations? or did maddy make
it himself secretly in his toolshed?

mike

On Mon, 12 Sep 2022 14:40:26 -0700 (PDT), mike <dmike204@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

>Durham face being docked 16 points becos 1 of their
>overseas stars Maddinson came to the wicket in their
>last match against Derbys with an oversize bat.
>
>Apparently the umpire took the bat off him and it
>wouldnt go through his gauge. 1 of derbys players
>had already been found out doing the same thing
>earlier in the season [did they get 16 points docked?]
>
>The thing is in all the time i've watched or played
>cricket i've never seen an umpire measure a bat. I
>remember lillee throwing his alum bat to the boundary
>when brearley objected cos it wasnt wood. Sounds
>like the ECB have told umpires to look out for illegal
>size bats. But why would a bat manufacture make
>a bat which exceeds regulations? or did maddy make
>it himself secretly in his toolshed?
>
>mike

I think there could be a Fats Waller cover version in there; bats
instead of feet.

max.it

On Mon, 12 Sep 2022 14:40:26 -0700 (PDT), mike <dmike204@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> But why would a bat manufacture make
>a bat which exceeds regulations? or did maddy make
>it himself secretly in his toolshed?

He didn't make it himself, but it was probably made to his personal
specification. His batmaker may have made an error.

Cheers,

Mike

On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 9:21:54 AM UTC+10, Mike Holmans wrote:
> He didn't make it himself, but it was probably made to his personal
> specification. His batmaker may have made an error.

He might have asked his bat maker to make an oversized bat in the hope he didn't get caught.

In message <361da2e2-e62a-47fd-be34-a6ea75983c5cn@googlegroups.com>,
mike <dmike204@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>Durham face being docked 16 points becos 1 of their
>overseas stars Maddinson came to the wicket in their
>last match against Derbys with an oversize bat.
>
>Apparently the umpire took the bat off him and it
>wouldnt go through his gauge. 1 of derbys players
>had already been found out doing the same thing
>earlier in the season [did they get 16 points docked?]
>
>The thing is in all the time i've watched or played
>cricket i've never seen an umpire measure a bat. I
>remember lillee throwing his alum bat to the boundary
>when brearley objected cos it wasnt wood. Sounds
>like the ECB have told umpires to look out for illegal
>size bats. But why would a bat manufacture make
>a bat which exceeds regulations? or did maddy make
>it himself secretly in his toolshed?
>
>mike

I assume that whichever company manufactured the bat must have
blundered. Maybe they were unaware that there was a maximum width,
though that's hard to believe, or maybe they made a mistake in
converting inches to centimetres. You could hardly expect players to
measure every bat they receive to check its legality (though maybe in
future they will have to), so assuming it's an innocent mistake it would
seem very harsh to dock Durham all their points from the match.

You may be right in the ECB telling umpires to check on bats, or maybe
it was so oversize that they spotted it. There's a precedent:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_White_(cricketer,_born_c._1740)
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:22:22 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
> You could hardly expect players to
> measure every bat they receive to check its legality

I *absolutely* expect that of a professional cricketer.

In message <060a24d0-7c04-43f0-8b30-ff3cc7ad1695n@googlegroups.com>,
jack fredricks <jzfredricks@gmail.com> writes
>On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:22:22 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
>> You could hardly expect players to
>> measure every bat they receive to check its legality
>
>I *absolutely* expect that of a professional cricketer.

Really!? I'd imagine that very few - if any - do so.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:59:34 +0100, John Hall
<john_nospam@jhall.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <060a24d0-7c04-43f0-8b30-ff3cc7ad1695n@googlegroups.com>,
>jack fredricks <jzfredricks@gmail.com> writes
>>On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:22:22 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
>>> You could hardly expect players to
>>> measure every bat they receive to check its legality
>>
>>I *absolutely* expect that of a professional cricketer.
>
>Really!? I'd imagine that very few - if any - do so.

I wonder when anyone gets to actually play the game in jzf's world,
what with all the reviews and the endless checking of everything.
There's such a thing as excessive accuracy, and its pursuit ruins just
about any sport as an activity anyone might enjoy participating in.

Cheers,

Mike

On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 11:10:35 +0100, Mike Holmans <spam@jackalope.uk>
wrote:

>On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:59:34 +0100, John Hall
><john_nospam@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <060a24d0-7c04-43f0-8b30-ff3cc7ad1695n@googlegroups.com>,
>>jack fredricks <jzfredricks@gmail.com> writes
>>>On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:22:22 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
>>>> You could hardly expect players to
>>>> measure every bat they receive to check its legality
>>>
>>>I *absolutely* expect that of a professional cricketer.
>>
>>Really!? I'd imagine that very few - if any - do so.
>
>I wonder when anyone gets to actually play the game in jzf's world,
>what with all the reviews and the endless checking of everything.
>There's such a thing as excessive accuracy, and its pursuit ruins just
>about any sport as an activity anyone might enjoy participating in.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Mike

It must have been the size of the edges or middle. Bats before 2017
didn't have an official depth or edge size,now edges have to be less
than 40mm and the depth no more than 67mm the width has been 4" for a
long time.

max.it

On 13/09/2022 10:20, John Hall wrote:
> You may be right in the ECB telling umpires to check on bats,

Note that bat sizes have changed recently [I would check more
carefully, but MCC have managed to make the Laws virtually unreadable
(at least by Firefox on Linux) and unsearchable], and "old" bats are
now quite likely to fail with a "new" gauge. I would expect all
professionals to be aware, and to check -- and county clubs to ensure
that the checks have been carried out. It's not as though the gauge
is expensive or difficult to use.

> or maybe it was so oversize that they spotted it.

Or perhaps a favourite and legal bat was wound round with tape
thereby becoming illegal?

> There's a precedent:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_White_(cricketer,_born_c._1740)

Yes, I thought of White too! But it's not really a "precedent";
what White did was "not cricket", but it wasn't against any Law. AFAIK,
it's not recorded how he got on with his very wide bat -- I imagine it
would have been rather unwieldy.

--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Strauss

On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 13:10:48 +0100, max.it <max@tea.time> wrote:

>On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 11:10:35 +0100, Mike Holmans <spam@jackalope.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:59:34 +0100, John Hall
>><john_nospam@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>In message <060a24d0-7c04-43f0-8b30-ff3cc7ad1695n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>jack fredricks <jzfredricks@gmail.com> writes
>>>>On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:22:22 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
>>>>> You could hardly expect players to
>>>>> measure every bat they receive to check its legality
>>>>
>>>>I *absolutely* expect that of a professional cricketer.
>>>
>>>Really!? I'd imagine that very few - if any - do so.
>>
>>I wonder when anyone gets to actually play the game in jzf's world,
>>what with all the reviews and the endless checking of everything.
>>There's such a thing as excessive accuracy, and its pursuit ruins just
>>about any sport as an activity anyone might enjoy participating in.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Mike
>
>It must have been the size of the edges or middle. Bats before 2017
>didn't have an official depth or edge size,now edges have to be less
>than 40mm and the depth no more than 67mm the width has been 4" for a
>long time.

Good point. The Laws were changed specifically to put a stop to
ridiculously unpressed bats which fall apart after three innings but
send the ball miles.

Cheers,

Mike

On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 8:10:38 PM UTC+10, Mike Holmans wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:59:34 +0100, John Hall
> <john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >In message <060a24d0-7c04-43f0...@googlegroups.com>,
> >jack fredricks <jzfre...@gmail.com> writes
> >>On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:22:22 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
> >>> You could hardly expect players to
> >>> measure every bat they receive to check its legality
> >>
> >>I *absolutely* expect that of a professional cricketer.
> >
> >Really!? I'd imagine that very few - if any - do so.
> I wonder when anyone gets to actually play the game in jzf's world,
> what with all the reviews and the endless checking of everything.
> There's such a thing as excessive accuracy, and its pursuit ruins just
> about any sport as an activity anyone might enjoy participating in.

Using a bat gauge that all teams have is hardly "excessive accuracy".

Get a new bat. Check it. Might happen 15 times a season.
The MCC has explicit Laws on bat sizes, as well as ECB/ICC regulations, so it's not too much to expect clubs/players follow those Laws.

Here's what The Cricket Discipline Commission (CDC) said when McKiernan got caught a month or so ago;

A CDC statement explained that the panel's chair, Ricky Needham, "decided that the offence, while committed unintentionally, must be dealt with on a strict liability basis, in that it is entirely the responsibility of a cricketer to ensure that the equipment being used conforms to the laws of the game".

On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 1:10:52 PM UTC+1, max.it wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 11:10:35 +0100, Mike Holmans <sp...@jackalope.uk>
> wrote:
> >On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:59:34 +0100, John Hall
> ><john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>In message <060a24d0-7c04-43f0...@googlegroups.com>,
> >>jack fredricks <jzfre...@gmail.com> writes
> >>>On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:22:22 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
> >>>> You could hardly expect players to
> >>>> measure every bat they receive to check its legality
> >>>
> >>>I *absolutely* expect that of a professional cricketer.
> >>
> >>Really!? I'd imagine that very few - if any - do so.
> >
> >I wonder when anyone gets to actually play the game in jzf's world,
> >what with all the reviews and the endless checking of everything.
> >There's such a thing as excessive accuracy, and its pursuit ruins just
> >about any sport as an activity anyone might enjoy participating in.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Mike
> It must have been the size of the edges or middle. Bats before 2017
> didn't have an official depth or edge size,now edges have to be less
> than 40mm and the depth no more than 67mm the width has been 4" for a
> long time.
>

i remember when i played that some used bats where the edges at the top
near the handle had been shaved or cut off and the extra added to the
back of the bat with the promise of more drive power. i thought it was unfair
cos if i bowled a bouncer it couldnt take a top edge cos there wasnt one.
i practiced with 1 once but found it rather heavy. Isnt there a maximum for
weight as well? I cant imagine how the 18th cent Mr white would swing
his giant bat without hitting himself.

mike

On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 14:54:46 -0700 (PDT), mike <dmike204@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 1:10:52 PM UTC+1, max.it wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 11:10:35 +0100, Mike Holmans <sp...@jackalope.uk>
>> wrote:
>> >On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 10:59:34 +0100, John Hall
>> ><john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >>In message <060a24d0-7c04-43f0...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >>jack fredricks <jzfre...@gmail.com> writes
>> >>>On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:22:22 PM UTC+10, John Hall wrote:
>> >>>> You could hardly expect players to
>> >>>> measure every bat they receive to check its legality
>> >>>
>> >>>I *absolutely* expect that of a professional cricketer.
>> >>
>> >>Really!? I'd imagine that very few - if any - do so.
>> >
>> >I wonder when anyone gets to actually play the game in jzf's world,
>> >what with all the reviews and the endless checking of everything.
>> >There's such a thing as excessive accuracy, and its pursuit ruins just
>> >about any sport as an activity anyone might enjoy participating in.
>> >
>> >Cheers,
>> >
>> >Mike
>> It must have been the size of the edges or middle. Bats before 2017
>> didn't have an official depth or edge size,now edges have to be less
>> than 40mm and the depth no more than 67mm the width has been 4" for a
>> long time.
>>
>
>i remember when i played that some used bats where the edges at the top
>near the handle had been shaved or cut off and the extra added to the
>back of the bat with the promise of more drive power. i thought it was unfair
>cos if i bowled a bouncer it couldnt take a top edge cos there wasnt one.
>i practiced with 1 once but found it rather heavy. Isnt there a maximum for
>weight as well? I cant imagine how the 18th cent Mr white would swing
>his giant bat without hitting himself.
>
>mike

My Son still has one with the carbon fibre circular spring in the
handle. They were banned but allowed for their lifetime in our league
cricket. I think the bat might be a puma brand. Decent bat from
memory.
At the end of the day what determines the outcome of a match has more
to do with the operation with the bat rather than it's shape or size.
The MCC brought in the new bat law to stem the flow of 'giant balsa
wood' bats that could ping a ball for miles and it was suggested that
they could avoid the snicko too.

max.it

On 12/09/2022 22:40, mike wrote:
> Durham face being docked 16 points becos 1 of their
> overseas stars Maddinson came to the wicket in their
> last match against Derbys with an oversize bat.
>
> Apparently the umpire took the bat off him and it
> wouldnt go through his gauge. 1 of derbys players
> had already been found out doing the same thing
> earlier in the season [did they get 16 points docked?]

That was in a one-day match, which they lost. They were docked 2 points,
so got -2 from the match.

--
David North