murali "thick bat" versus "thin bat"

[blackcat]

I am probably incorrect but I read this statement figuratively, that is, to the lefty when Murali is bolwing an off-spinner, the batsman plays in the off stump corridor.

The doosra is more likely (than an over/top-spinner, arm ball) to bring the legs and stumps into play. Lehmann was bowled (twice?) behind his legs in SL for this argument.

Thus the analogy of playing with a "thin bat" protecting the pads and the stumps.

As I qualified, I may be wrong, but I want some better opinions than my own. Thanks

 

[dr nick]

huh?

 

[dilz]

huh?

exactly, what are you on about??!!!

 

[Ryan8024]

No, Murali's whinge was in regards to some of the Aussies using bats which are literally thicker than some other players. Alternatively, it could be said that some players aren't getting the most of their potential, because their bats are too thin.

Really, it was just a throw-away line which you've blown out of proportion. (Don't worry, you're not the only one on bigfooty to do it)

 

[dr nick]

i'm sure they are using bats that are within the laws of cricket

 

[BT]

Thin Skinned Murali methinks...

 

[dilz]

I think what Murali was trying to make a point saying if he isn't allowed to use his secret weapon, batsmen shouldn't be allowed to have the advantages over the bowlers, ie a larger bat. I don't think larger bats really matter, its more the type of batsmen they are. People like Hayden, Ponting, Tendulkar have a good solid build and large forearms to use these heavy bats. Other batsmen around the world use bats weight 2"6-2"10. Even if the bats a larger, they still have to be strong enough to use them. Bradman used a 2"4 bat in his career.

 

[Ted Pellitis]

My secret weapon is bowling from 17 yards... but they wont let me do that either.

excuse me whilst i go have a cry.