I can back up what langerrox said and can say that it is indeed a graphite reinforced bat.andrew_nixon said:I'll have to repeat myself yet again.
Kookabura replaced the bats with ones of the EXACT same design to all sponsered players who wanted to carry on using them. It may look the same, but it doesn't have the graphite strip on.
sohummisra said:I presume you get more 'punch' out of the same bat. Hence, you don't really need to put as much effort into your shots to give the same energy to the ball upon hitting it.
andrew_nixon said:I'll have to repeat myself yet again.
Kookabura replaced the bats with ones of the EXACT same design to all sponsered players who wanted to carry on using them. It may look the same, but it doesn't have the graphite strip on.
Scmods said:I can back up what langerrox said and can say that it is indeed a graphite reinforced bat.
What I'm saying is that I saw the report on Fox Sports active, it is indeed a graphite reinforced bat.andrew_nixon said:How do you know? All you've got is a picture. Remember that Kookabura replaced the bats with ones of the EXACT same design to all sponsered players who wanted to carry on using them.
genghis_khan said:how would you know?
Scmods said:What I'm saying is that I saw the report on Fox Sports active, it is indeed a graphite reinforced bat.
http://sport.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=435632006andrew_nixon said:http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/237489.html
So you can't confirm that it is the illegal bat then. You've seen a report on TV.
So you're backing away from your statement that the bat wasn't graphite?andrew_nixon said:So the bat was checked for legality, and he was allowed to continue using it. Doesn't that tell you something?
And remember that Kookaburra sent out replacement bats to all sponsered players using them.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story eh?
Scmods said:So you're backing away from your statement that the bat wasn't graphite?