Alastair Cook strides out to bat at Chelmsford wearing his old helmet

While I understand the superstition aspect of not wanting to wear a new helmet, I'm not sure if its going to.make much difference performance wise though is it?

The helmet would have made as safe as possible to play in, aswell as to protect the player aswell so apart from the superstition, why else would a player not want to change?

As was discussed up thread by Mail and I, form is very much dependent upon being comfortable at the crease. The main reason Cook was reluctant to switch over to the new style of helmet was not due to superstition, but because he was uncomfortable with the new design.

I am not sure how much cricket you have played through the years or your familiarity with the newer style helmets, but the old style helmets had grilles that were designed more for preventing blows to the mouth. As such, the grilles were much lower down and did not impede the eye-line of the batsman.

The grilles on these newer helmets are fixed rather than adjustable and have a narrower gap between the top of the grille and the peak - designed to prevent the ball from squeezing through and causing similar injuries suffered recently by Broad and McClenaghan - as such, the grille does get in your line of sight and can not only be distracting, but also make it harder to track the ball.

From my own personal experience, it took me a number of hours in the nets before I was comfortable using my first helmet. I felt very uncomfortable and took time to adjust to the grille impinging on my vision. Even then, I still preferred batting without a helmet whenever possible. Comfort and being able to see the cricket ball also plays a large role in being safe at the crease. A point that was well argued by Mark Nicholas in his recent column for ESPN.

I've played cricket in the local leagues, but nowhere near as high of a standard as you I'm guessing, so in that respect I'll take on board your knowledge.

With that being the case then, surely lessons can be learned from this, and on a new design of helmet, then surely they should get the thoughts and opinions of the players that are going to be wearing it, but I would have assumed they'd have done that already, or is that not the case?

It is my understanding that the players were not consulted. It is the manufacturers job to make the safest possible helmets. Unfortunately, safety, comfort and style don't always go hand in hand. MLB players have been very reluctant to switch over to the newer style safer helmets. The same goes for cricketers in Australia as this article explains :

In case you didn't get a chance to read it, Mark Nicholas' opposing view on helmets and player safety is well worth a read.

It might be your understanding that they didn't get asked their opinions, but do you think they should have been? Personally I don't see the point of a manufacturer being asked to make the safest possible helmet, if no player wants to wear it or as even had a say in how its been made.

Also how would they even know how much safer the new design is, if it hadn't been tested by people who play cricket in the first place? Maybe they didn't ask the players their thoughts and opinions, but in future then it might be something for them to think about.

If you read the entire Mark Nicholas article I linked to in my previous post, you will find some of your answers there. In short, in order for helmets to prevent the ball from squeezing through the grille, the gap between the peak of the helmet and the grille has to be 50-millimetres. Any gap larger than that would not prevent the ball from squeezing through. As such, there was nothing to consult the players over. There is no other way to prevent this.

We should not overlook the fact that Cook and Johnathan Trott are the only two players that were reluctant to make the change - I believe all other players have done so willingly, Rather interestingly, since making the switch to the new helmets, Cook has a fifty and century to his name and Trott plundered a double century against Middlesex. 

If you are interested in learning more, it might be a good idea for you to go into your local cricket shop and try one of the Masuri Vision Series Elite helmets, then you can see for yourself and have a better understanding of how the new grilles impact your line of sight.

You may also find this article published last year by All Out Cricket that takes an inside look at the rigorous testing the helmets undergo. Everything is tested by machinery. You wouldn't test the helmets under live conditions with some poor chap taking 90mph fastballs off the dome hoping the helmets will protect them LOL. It is all done in a controlled environment, much like vehicle crash testing.

www.alloutcricket.com/cricket/features/l...the-lid-on-lid-tests

Seeing as I asked what your opinion was on the matter though, would I find that in the article that you linked, or in the local cricket shop aswell? All I wanted to know was if you personally thought the manufacturer should have consulted with the players to stop something like this from cropping up.