NEW DELHI: The double-faced bat one of the recent innovations in cricket has drawn varied comments from leading Indian cricketers.
The bat approved already by the Melbourne Cricket Club (MCC) has evoked a one-too-favorable response from the players who represented the country with distinction over the years when they spoke to PTI on the subject.
While many of them including some former captains refused to spare a thought till physical verification most of the cricketers held the opinion that the bat may not help bring any major change in the game but only make the sport more loaded in favor of the batsmen than it is now.
The point was emphatically stressed by president of the Board of Control for Cricket in India Mr Madhav Rao Scindia who saw the entire nature of the game being altered as the batsman can come up with a new range of strokes.
However one aspect most cricketers see unhindered is that the bat could facilitate application of ‘reverse sweep’ a rarely used shot that necessitates change in batting grip.
Cricketers of the older generation were of the opinion that the introduction of the bat could only push the balance of the game towards batsmen
Former captain Lala Amar Nath said: Already enough latitude is given to the batsman. What else needs to be done to kill cricket? This is not promotion but killing cricket.
Lala said the change of rules like covering of the wicket mowing the grass and trying to restrict the bouncers had already robbed the game of the charm.
It is time they take out all these and restore rules that produced players like Hobbs Stufeliffe Bradman Wolley and Trumper
He said it was not easy to score in older days as compared to the 700s and 800s being scored by them now.
Naren Tamhane former India wicketkeeper shared Lala’s view saying: I feel it is all unnatural. It’s not cricket we are missing real cricket with the modem heavy bats. Tamhane who is now chairman of the national selection committee thought there was no need to introduce the double faced bat.
Ajit Wadekar too was of the view that playing with the bat would rob cricket of some of its charm. The bowlers would be confused which side of the bat would the batsmen play with he said.
India’s formidable opener Sunil Gavaskar was ‘stumped’ and said he did not know how well the batsman could use the bats which have no curve.
The curve gives a bat the requisite balance and the modem bats are heavy with pronounced curves. Sol really do not know what the bats’ balance would be. Unless I take such 4 bat and hold it I really can’t say the most prolific run-getter in Test cricket said.
Holding views similar to that of Gavaskar M.L Narsimha said the bulge towards the bottom of the traditional bat provided this ‘meat’ for some strokes like the drives pulls and hooks.
The Hyderabad-based dashing batsman of the 1960s expressed his doubt if the bat will cause a revolution in the game.
He said the success of the bat may depend on the kind of names which recommend its use. One cricketer whose idea of the bat varied from others was G.S. Ramch and who said he did not see the bat causing any harm to the game but at the same time did not see it improving the game.
Dubbing the bat as a gimmick to cam some quick money Ramchand said there have been different bats over the years and there was no harm in trying the two-sided bat.
As long as it conforms to the rules of the game there is nothing wrong with using it he said.
Ramchand too was of the opinion that the bat gives the batsman an advantage. Since the edges would be thicker than normal instead of edging the ball batsmen would more often slice the ball? But they would have to initially get used to the bottom heaviness of these bats.
Article extracted from this publication >> June 28, 1991
