What are the thoughts on the new Mikasa foam rubber ball? Will it be adopted into college water polo along with the new USAwp rules?
No clue, did they use them at the world aquatics?
Based on the marketing at the Mikasa site, the primary advantages are improved consistency and better grip. I have no idea what they mean by improved consistency. Perhaps these are not inflatable, so no variation in whatever the equivalent of inflation pressure is? That would be a plus if so. Since inflation pressures were dropped, none of us has a good sense for what the proper inflation is without a gauge, which most sites don’t have. As for better grip, that’s a change, but I’m not it will result in a better game. Advantage to big power shooters, disadvantage to the goalies, ?maybe? an advantage to strong centers. Probably de-emphasizes picks, drives and other movement to create shooting opportunities for non-centers closer to the goal. Not sure the current ball is under-grippable.
They have been using these at all the recent World Aquatics championships. The players like the feel of the ball but I wouldn’t say it’s a major difference from a new Kap7 ball.
I wouldn’t expect major changes to the Kap7 deals that are out there with college and high schools in the USA.
Malmsten is a company that has made big moves with their goals now dominating the market.
I’ve used the ball and hate it. I’ve also already seen 4 bobbled penalty shots this olympics. I don’t remember seeing 1 in any past oly. I think there were 2 bobbles in Japan Serbia
1 Like
Ryan is right. There have dozens of several mis-grips with the slippery ball, including penalty shots. Basketball and soccer also had international situations in the past where manufacturers tried to alter something that was working well (like the previous international Mikasa with better grip). They returned to the original product. Hopefully the same thing happens here, instead of trying to market a new line of inferior rubberized balls as an ‘upgrade.’
1 Like