Ethics dilemma: forehead sweat as a ball shiner?

[LongHopCassidy]

Context: I've been doing some solo tweaking in the nets to prepare for an actual game of cricket for the first time in a good half decade.

Problem/advantage: It turns out that after a good 20 straight overs, I start perspiring like a blind lesbian in a fish market.

I hate to see a good bodily fluid go to waste (token ) so I was wondering if it was permissible under the Laws of Cricket to put this sweat on the ball (which is much easier than spitting), which as you've guessed I CBF Googling.

Over to you.

 

[Hurricane]

You are supposed to put sweat on it is my understanding.

Some people have it down to a science - let me see if I can remember this right.

Sweat on the shiny side because it has salt in it and extracts moisture and makes the ball lighter on that side

Saliva on the rough side to weigh it down and make it heavier.

I think the only issues are if you have sun screen on your forehead as well as sweat.

 

[uvelocity]

I think the only issues are if you have sun screen on your forehead as well as sweat.

This. Also ball sweat is saltier, therefore works better.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I've been doing some solo tweaking.

 

[Howe_zat]

I rate this 5 stars.

 

[Ruckus]

I start perspiring like a blind lesbian in a fish market.

Quality analogy

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

My forehead doesn't reach that far.

 

[Daemon]

OP is just begging for sweaty ball jokes, of which a few have obliged to

 

[Redbacks]

I think the only issues are if you have sun screen on your forehead as well as sweat.

disaster waiting to happen once it gets into your eyes.

 

[Daemon]

I also find wearing skins is useful for this, a while into the game and your skins will absorbed a fair amount of sweat, just rubbing the ball over it is a lot easier, especially if you're someone who doesn't sweat as much.

 

[uvelocity]

OP is just begging for sweaty ball jokes, of which a few have obliged to

For real, no joke. FTR IMHO AWTA LOL x

 

[ganeshran]

I dont think its illegal

 

[Nigel Benjamin]

Some people have it down to a science - let me see if I can remember this right.
Sweat on the shiny side because it has salt in it and extracts moisture and makes the ball lighter on that side

Saliva on the rough side to weigh it down and make it heavier.

.

I thought the idea was to make sure, side A of the ball has a greater surface area than side B. According to the equation of continuity(assuming air is incompressible), the air particles travelling round side A have greater velocity than those travelling round side B.
Now, according to Bernoulli's principle, an overall increase in velocity results in a decrease in pressure, therefore air particles on side A are at a lower pressure than those on side B.
The ball therefore moves from the side with higher pressure to that with lower pressure, hence, the 'swing' we observe.
Not saying your theory is wrong, but why does one side have to be lighter than the other?

 

[ganeshran]

I dont think it has to do anything to do with the weight of the ball. more with the smoothness of one side and its contrast with the other rough side. Due to the differential air movement over the two sides , the ball moves in the air

 

[vic_orthdox]

Sweat is absolutely fine. In fact, when Australians go to the sub-continent, they are encouraged to use that, and told not to use saliva.

I did see a guy in England rubbing the ball under his armpit repeatedly. That was just weird.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

I thought the idea was to make sure, side A of the ball has a greater surface area than side B. According to the equation of continuity(assuming air is incompressible), the air particles travelling round side A have greater velocity than those travelling round side B.
Now, according to Bernoulli's principle, an overall increase in velocity results in a decrease in pressure, therefore air particles on side A are at a lower pressure than those on side B.
The ball therefore moves from the side with higher pressure to that with lower pressure, hence, the 'swing' we observe.
Not saying your theory is wrong, but why does one side have to be lighter than the other?

From what I understand, conventional swing is due to contrast in smoothness between the halves. Reverse swing is a contrast in weight.

 

[Daemon]

Magic imo

 

[Nigel Benjamin]

From what I understand, conventional swing is due to contrast in smoothness between the halves. Reverse swing is a contrast in weight.

My theory might explain reverse swing (if mass is directly proportional to area), but it however doesn't explain conventional swing when both sides of the ball have equal surface area, but shine is different.
Sorry, I'm turning this into a physics forum of some sort, but, can you explain conventional swing in scientific terms?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Rough side goes through the air slower, the shiny side goes through the air quicker, so the ball moves towards the rough side.

Few different theories with reverse swing, there's the "loading" of one side of the ball, where you put a heap of saliva into one side and it's due to the weight distribution that it goes towards the shiny side.

The other one is that the rough side gets so rough that there are little air pockets in that side, like a golf ball, so if you keep the other side smooth then the rough side goes through the air a bit quicker, so the ball goes towards the shiny side. This method is more effective, and maintains for longer, than loading up one side, but is more conditions reliant.

 

[SJS]

Sweat has always been permissible. Cricketers have always used it. It may sound weird (as someone has mentioned) but many of us, yours truly included, did rub the ball under the armpit since the shirt in that part was invariably drenched with sweat and the cloth helped to polish. The sweat from forehead (or armpit) was applied on the ball and then one rubbed the ball furiously on the thighs which, particularly if woolen, really helped to shine the ball well.

Both the bodily sweat as well as cricketers clothing are not termed by the cricket laws as 'artificial substance' and hence permitted.

A couple of years ago New Zealand were planning to start using 'micro shine' trousers which would have a patch that players could shine the ball on. The MCC was going to examine the matter. I do not know what happened to that.