Just spotted some of our crickets with boots on. Ponting with pulses and hussey/martyn wearing legends. I always thought cricket boots were too big and I would love to wear these in a match. I will post pics when I get them.

Legends (Hussey)

Pulses (Ponting)

Whoa, i'd never have thought they'd wear soccer boots. It does make sense though i suppose, since it is an outdoor sport, played on grass.

They'd have to be wearing turfs/a3s/365s. No way youd be allowed on a cricket pitch with proper boots on.

u can see the legend soleplate though

yeh and ponting looked like he was wearing moulded

yea i can definatly see the studs on the legends

what the hell thats the first time that i have ever seen this...
does anyone know why they would do this?
Hussey would have been slightly screwed if he was asked to bowl his medium pace

Hmm this slightly strange,but does also make sense though I suppose. The only rule would be that the players wearing studs, would not be able to walk on/across the actual pitch (bowling urface)

no, they were proper boots. Obviously they couldn't walk on the pitch with them on though. The ground was very damp so that might be why they were wearing them, for extra traction

Yeh, ok. I posted while i was actually watching the game and couldnt see them very well. The pics are fairly conclusive though. I still dont think theyd be allowed anywhere near the pitch with them on. Notice none of the bowlers were wearing them.
I figured out the why though. I think its cause the telstra dome has a shit surface and they wanted extra grip in the field. After the game shaun pollock was talking about how the field was slippery. I guess it makes sense.

so it was a bit of local knowledge lol...Are the other games at the MCG? I suppose it means that we won't be seeing the boots again but if the trend continues and cricket is played under a closed roof more often we could maybe see a hybrid spike with football studs

they wore the boots because telstra dome is appallingly soft under foot. It makes sense because they noticed that they had better traction instead of sliding every where. I think both sides made a comment on that as well because Vettori said that he had never played on such a soft ground before. Never been on the surface myself but i guess a lack of sunshine in the place has caused the surface to become greasy

would you mind expanding on why the would not be allowed to walk on the pitch? Apart from umpires dont like people needlessly walking up and down the pitch why are soft bladed studs any different to the long bowlers cricket spikes? I find this comment very very unusal and wrong.

man i posted on this earlier but it never went through...
in todays game Clarke was wearing Asics Tigreors, Watson some Pumas, and Pietersen was wearing some Pulses...

are you alright???? of course they wouldn't be allowed to walk on the pitch with full soccer studs on. Think about it mate......

Yeh i saw pietersen had dragons, they were blaming them when he twisted his knee or whatevs. Are you sure watson had boots on? I saw him bowling in his normal puma cricket shoes, did he change them?

This reminded me of when i was at the gabba for the one dayer earlier this year and Matt Hayden was wearing puma king turfs while fielding. I thought it was kinda odd at the time but there you go.

ah no, please tell me why not? why is it obvious they could not walk on the pitch with them on? they would not do as much harm as full spikes so I dont get your point of view. Apart from the fact I saw ponting walking on the pitch last night.

they may slip if they bowl of something, but I cant see why they would not be 'allowed' to.

I know, I saw ponting walk on the pitch last night as well, but as you might not have noticed, the blades were only half length. Spikes aren't very think, they pierce the surface of the pitch doing not much damage. Blades however would not piece the suface, just scrape crap off the surface. That's why I think you wouldn't be able to walk on the pitch with full length blades. Common sense

bladed, like in pulses would have basically no chance of going going into the pitch. Thereore there is no difference between the two in terms of walking on the pitch.

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I never said they would go into the pitch, I'm saying they would scrape stuff off the surface

LOL fight of the moderators.

I am saying that would scrap as much as any other cricket spikes. The blades are made from plastic and would just slide off the turf. The spikes would offer a lot more friction. You said 'well its obvious you would not be allowed on the pitch with them'.

Your wrong. cricket spikes are thin, sharp and long. They don't affect the pitch very much. Blade like studs on football boots are long and thick which could leave devestating effects on the cricket pitch. THats why I think none of the bowlers/batsmen were wearing them.

when you drag spikes along the pitch they do make a mark, when people ask centre and drag the foot along why do you think the pitches get worse over a test match. Also boot studs would just slip off and that is why batters and bowlers dont wear them on the pitch. They would slip over, but the studs over grip on the wet ground. So I am not wrong and I know this for a fact.

I'm not disputing the fact that spikes leave marks on the pitch, nor that the bowlers would slip over wearing blades. However, I think that the blades would absolutely destroy a pitch if it was contunually walked on using blades. For example, if the edge of the blade caught on the pitch it would have disatarous results.

why do bowlers not use them on turf? they would slip. So that means that the boot would slip from the pitch not leaving a mark. If you didnt try and scuff it by rubbing your foot back and forward there would be no difference from a normal cricket spike.

Alright, I'll spell it out to you. They don't slip when using spikes because the spikes go deeper but will blades they will go into the pitch a minimal amount but then scrape along, taking the top layer of the pitch with it. If you scraped your foot back and forth with a soccer boot, there would be a considerable difference than if you did it with spikes. Common sense.

If you scrape something with your foot of course you will bring dirt out. But if you walk over a pitch in studs why would that effect the pitch anymore than spikes? have you actually worn spikes on a pitch to see? I have walked on a pitch with studs before and trust me they do nothing unless you try to dig something up.

stop the violence

I'm ending this now, I have my opinion, you have yours. Nothing will sway either of us


violence? me and roque are good friends, we have different opinions and we discuss them civilly. There is nothing wrong with that, a good debate is always good to read and to participate in. You've got the wrong end of the stick

It is a simple concept!

Spikes are good for a pitch. This is because pitches are hard and the spikes have a small surface area and are sharp. The harder a surface is, the more, the sharper and smaller studs need to be. Just like HG soccer boots have more smaller studs, because the ground is harder.

Large few studs are good for soft ground.

It is the opposite concept of those old tennis raquet looking snow shoes. People wore those shoes to increase the surface area that their weight is being distributed on. This makes them not sink.
With soccer boots, we need to do the opposite thing. The softer the ground, the more we decrease the surface area (fewer, thinner studs).

As far as damaging the pitch is concerned, think of a cake.
When you test to see if a cake is baked, you stick a thin rod in it, and it doesn't damage it much. Imagine if you stuck a pen in the cake. Now imagine if you stuck a pen and thin rod in a cake ten times. Will the damage to the cake be less or more with the pen?
Now substitute the pen with studs, the thin rod with spikes, and the cake with the pitch.

Make any more sense?

You could have said all that in 4 words: "I agree with scouser"

seriously though, nice analogy.

What kind of cake is it?

lol well that went off on one!
lol yeh after watson had finished his spell he definately had boots on; one of the pics on cricinfo shows it...
Im not going to comment on the whole damage to the pitch thing though; that went on tooooooo far!

cake thoery is ok, but the blades of the boots will not go through the surface. That is my point, the boot studs are not sharp enough to go through the pitch. Think of it as a cake, if the pen can not go through the cake it will make a small mark.

depends how hard the pitch is, but the blades dont have to go all the way in...think of if youve ever worn FG blades, they may not go all the way into the pitch, but they will go in about a quarter...
also why does it matter? youre not allowed to walk across the pitch anyway...

Yes, but the field is soft, so the pitch is also probably softer than usual, so the studs will go in a bit and leave an indentation.
And indentations make a big differance in a pitch.

I heard that after the game they showed the boots on sky and I think the soleplate had been slightly modified for the game of cricket

Arsenex, you are backpadelling now. The pitch is a normal pitch, it is a drop in.