Are the modern bats getting too big?

Chris Gayle

I am pretty sure that this is not the first time anybody has said this, nor is it going to be the last. But, until the authorities do something about it, the debate is just going to go on and on. In case you are wondering what I am on about, it is nothing but the size of the modern-day bats. With every passing year, bats are just getting bigger and bigger. Much as I love to see a batsman smacking the ball to every corner of the ground, I am beginning to wonder as to whether the batsmen are getting an unfair advantage of these bats.

A few years ago, Matthew Hayden came up with the brilliantly named “Mongoose”, a bat that was designed to cater to his need of hitting the ball long and hard. At that time, a lot of fuss was made about how Hayden could get away with using a bat that had a handle longer than everyone else’s. There were even questions about whether that was in the spirit of the game.

For better or for worse, nothing came out of the “Mongoose”, and the bat subsequently went into the oblivion. But it was only a matter of time before some of the brighter minds caught hold of the idea and made bats similar to the current ones, but with bigger edges.

Right now, whether you are a hard-hitting opening batsman or a tail-ender, you are likely in possession of a bat whose edges are about two inches thick, almost double the size of what it was at the start of the new millennium. You might ask, so what if the edges got bigger?

The problem isn’t just the fact that the bats are getting bigger. It is that they are getting thicker at the edges, whilst still being light to pick up. If the weight increased along with the thickness of the edges, it might be fair. But, now, the likes of Chris Gayle and Glenn Maxwell are in possession of a bat that is not just meatier but weigh no more than the normal ones.

Doesn’t that strike you as a little unfair on the bowlers? With the advent of T20, bowlers are needed to constantly learn new tricks. But, now, they have to do so, whilst the batsman get bigger and bigger bats, which weigh just the same as the old ones. While the bowlers are constantly reinventing themselves, shouldn’t the batsman also do so, with a heavier bat or at least one that doesn’t look like a chunk of wood that has just been chopped from a tree?

Will the likes of AB de Villiers and Maxwell still go for a reverse sweep if they know that they might be caught at deep point? Fortunately or unfortunately, they don’t have to think about all that now, as even an edge is likely to go to the boundary. Such is the amount of wood on the edges that even an outside edge can go for a six.

A decade or two ago, there was something called a “sweet spot”, a small portion of the bat which needs to meet the ball to get the desired output. Nowadays, there is no such thing as a sweet spot, the bats have gotten so thick that the entire bat has become a sweet spot.

I have lost count of the number of times mishits have cleared the fence in this IPL. Cricket was supposed to be a game of technique. Mishits that would have been caught at mid-off now sail over the boundary. Why? Because of the sheer size and thickness of the modern bats. My guess is that it won’t be long before someone comes up with a bat that isn’t dissimilar to the ones being used in baseball.

Are we so interested in fours, sixes and big-hitting that we are willing to sacrifice good bowling in the process? Are we going to let cricket turn into a lop-sided affair in which the batsman hold all the cards? Shouldn’t somebody do something about it?

Much as it pains to me admit it, cricket (the shorter formats at least) is now a batsman’s game. One that is dominated by strong men in possession of monster bats. Unless the ICC places restrictions on how thick the edges should be and the extent of the protrusion you can have behind the face of the bat, not much is going to change.

Until then, all of us might have to make do with good balls being mishit for six and the bowlers not having much of a chance. But, hey, if that brings in the crowds and rakes in the revenue, what’s wrong, right?