The sound of cricket — from “pings” to “clunks”, what can the sound of bat-on-ball tell us about technique?

There is something special about the sound of a cricket bat on ball.

A couple of examples from last week brought this home to me, and set me wondering if there is more to this “sound of cricket” than the (very real) aesthetic pleasure of hearing a great shot.

Essex Women vs Hants — more “clunks” than “pings”

Last Thursday I went to Chelmsford to watch Essex Women play Hampshire.

Underway at Chelmsford. Essex Women Vs Hampshire. #cricket

[image or embed]

— Andrew Beaven (@theteesra.com) Sep 4, 2025 at 15:37

https://embed.bsky.app/static/embed.js

I have seen the new, professional Essex team once before this season, back in early June. In what went on to be a remarkably dry and warm summer, I sat on the top of the Tom Pearce stand under stormy clouds and with a chilling breeze blowing through, to see Essex beat Warwickshire “Bears” on DLS in a Blast fixture.

A rare victory for Essex Women, this season, but there is always hope, hence I was at Chelmsford again last week, with the added bonus of watching a coaching colleague, now a County professional, playing for Hampshire (Bex bowled well, could have ended with 4 wickets if she and a team-mate had held on to a couple of difficult chances in her final over; good post-match interview, too).

Again, I brought the weather — the game was much reduced, by rain in the morning and early afternoon, to 17 overs each, only 2 balls more than the “16+4”, in fact! Essex bowled & fielded well, restricting Hants to 101. But they were always behind the run rate, and ultimately failed to hit big in the closing overs — lots of effort, and powerful looking swings, but almost all “clunks” off the bat, no “pings”.

Chatting with a couple of colleagues from the Seniors (over 60s), we wondered then if it might be the bats hey were using (all of them?) or the ball (only 17 overs old, at the end of a rain reduced match), or that “the girls aren’t strong enough”. But Maia Bouchier (Hants & England) did “ping” one straight 6 in the first innings — minimal effort, full face, all the way into the ground floor of the Tom Pearce — so I was drawn to the conclusion that it is something to do with how the ball was being hit (or, perhaps more specifically, how the bat was being held).

More on this later.

On the Nursery Ground — a different sound, altogether

Then on Sunday, after a morning in the Indoor Cricket Centre at Lord’s, watching and listening to the Middx Men’s batters practicing on the Nursery Ground.

Plenty of “pings”, and “cracks” off the bat there. Even from checked push drives & blocks.

OK, this was against friendly “net” bowling and sidearm deliveries, no consequences, “just feel the bat on ball”-type sessions.

Are the Men just that much stronger than the Women? Are their bats better?

What was apparent from outside the nets was the (extremely) positive way the ball was played. Not with any exaggerated swing of the bat, not even with obvious “muscle”. Simply full face of the bat, accelerating through the contact point.

Hypothesis

Power & timing of cricket strokes is mediated as much (more?) by strength of hand grip, wrist & forearm as related to bat weight as by “upper body strength”. The presentation of the face of the bat at the point of contact is key, not (just) how fast the bat is swung.

I have seen plenty of online posts on the importance of a “strong grip”, or the “correct” grip for batters — this (YouTube link), from James Breese, at Cricket Matters, is very good — but all seem to be based on “experience” and tradition rather than any science. I don’t doubt the observation, but are there elements of the “grip” that really contribute to bat contact with the ball?

I also wonder if the modern game is really as top-hand dominant as the side-on, front-foot drive game of yesteryear?

One for the biomechanics to investigate