First, its single-tube design makes it impossible for the ball collector to collect more than one ball at a time.
Second, bending down is required to pick up a ball collector of this type when the ball collector is resting on the floor, as the ball collector cannot stand alone, and thus requires a
supporting wall, a column, or a flat surface to rest (lean or lie) against, thereby causing repeated physical stresses and strains onto the user every time the
user needs to bend lower his / her back to reach for the ball collector.
Also, the nature of not being able to stand alone, which is apparently caused by its lacking of sustainable center of activity to support its entire structure, also renders a ball collector of this type unsuitable to be a storage unit even though such a ball collector can collect and hold around 23 balls.
Third, when it comes to collecting balls scattered across a floor in a heavy usage environment, a ball collector of this or similar type can only picks up one ball at a time and requires proper aligning of its tube
nozzle over an aimed ball and applying a downward force or pressure to cause to the aimed ball to enter and be retained inside the
single tube.
Thus, the ball-collecting process is rather inefficient, slow, and requires a high level of steady hand eye coordination, which can be stressful for many users.
Fourth, when it comes to dispensing and emptying collected balls, a ball collector of this type only allows one ball at a time to exit one end of the
single tube, thereby rendering a dispensing or emptying process relatively unsmooth inefficient, and relatively slow.
Also, for sports like table-tennis or tennis, there is no convenient way for the user to reach the inside of the single-tube for a retained ball, thereby not being able to function as a “serve practice buddy” to facilitate the training of serving (which may be considered one of the most important area of sports like table-tennis or tennis).
Briefly, bending down is once again required to pick up a ball collector of this type when the ball collector is resting on the floor, as the ball collector cannot standalone due to its lacking of a
solid base.
The repeated motions of bending down inevitably causes stress and discomfort onto the user.
Due to this nature of not being able to stand alone by itself, a ball collector of this type is not suitable to be an effective storage unit.
Further, when it comes to collecting scattered balls, a good net-scooping motion and technique (with the long
handle which extends laterally away from the net) is required, lacking of which would often causes aimed balls being pushed away from the ball collector.
Also, when the net is close to two-thirds (⅔) of its capacity, continuous scooping motion used to collect more balls becomes less and less efficient as the scooping motion tends to send balls already in the net flying out.
These limitations render the ball-collecting process rather inefficient, slow and difficult for many users.
Also, repeated scooping can quickly
wear out the frame of the netting and compromise its
structural integrity, thus making the ball collector less durable.
Specifically, the emptying is usually achieved by first having one hand on the
handle and another hand pulling the bottom of the net to form a funnel-like shape and then inverting the “funnel”, which doe cause the collected balls to be emptied but in such a highly scattered or unorderly manner that a good portion of collected balls can miss the beneath container and fall and become scattered on the floor.
First, Bulatao's ball-collector apparatus uses an elongated bar handle that laterally extends away from the ball-collector frame. This causes Bulatao's apparatus to be not capable of standing alone with its elongated bar handle disposed and extended in its upright direction, since this elongated bar handle design, when paired with its away-situated ball-collector frame, simply lacks a center of gravity to support the elongated bar handle to stand in its upright direction. In fact, even if there is a wall or column which the elongated bar handle can lean against in its upright direction, the leaning is largely unreliable and unstable, causing the elongated bar handle to eventually fall from its upright direction to its natural generally lateral direction. As such, bending down is still mostly required to pick up Bulatao's ball-collector apparatus (as the ball-collector apparatus usually ends up resting on the floor in its natural lateral resting position with the ball-collector frame sitting on the floor and the elongated bar handle extending laterally away from the ball-collector frame). Such a bending down to pick up the ball-collector apparatus, when repeated times after times, can, as discussed above in connection with the ball collectors shown in FIGS. 1A and 1B, cause
physical stress, strains and discomfort onto the user.
Second, Bulatao's elongated bar handle design, when paired with its away-situated ball-collector frame, may present some safety challenges. Briefly, its elongated bar handle extending away from the ball-collector frame essentially causes the elongated bar handle to protrude across the floor at a relatively low height, which can easily cause a
passer-by (not aware of the handle situated beneath him / her) to be tripped when a Bulatao's apparatus is resting on the floor in its natural resting position of its ball-collector frame resting on the floor.
Third, when it comes to collecting balls scattered on the floor, Bulatao's elongated bar handle design, when paired with its away-situated ball-collector frame, requires an
excretion of additional force or pressure from the user via the elongated bar handle, when compared to a ball-collector apparatus with a same or similar bottom-level ball-collector frame but with a handle immediately and directly elevated above the ball-collector frame, due to apparent
physics principles, thereby making the capturing of scattered balls with its ball-collector frame more difficult and less efficient for a user. Also, the use of its elongated bar handle requires lowering of a user's hands, and therefore
body frame, which causes more stress and discomfort onto the user.
Fourth, when it comes to dispensing or emptying collected balls (contained in the ball-container receptacle above the elastic-members-based ball-collector frame), due to its tapered and relatively narrow dispensing end, a user has to squeeze on the dispensing end to make collected balls to be dispensed one ball at a time, especially causing the operation of getting the last few contained balls to become rather difficult and inconvenient. In addition, due to its tapered and relatively narrow dispensing end, it is also difficult for a user to reach a ball contained inside the ball-container receptacle, a characteristics which makes a Bulatao's apparatus unsuitable to be a serve practice buddy. Further, Bulatao's apparatus simply lacks a rather smooth and fast way of emptying collected balls (contained in the ball-container receptacle) into a container
lying beneath the apparatus.
First, Beavin's design still requires some transformation before the handle (for exerting downward force or pressure on the ball-collector frame) can be formed. As such, Beavin's apparatus is not a “pick-and-use” type of conveniently accessible ball-collector apparatus.
Second, Beavin's apparatus requires a relatively oversize design, since the apparatus is designed to transform a collector apparatus into a seat where an adult user of a reasonable weight can sit. As such, Beavin's apparatus most likely requires a
steel frame, and is inevitably relatively bigger and heavier (compared to a typical ball-collector apparatus), which is not convenient and optimal for a user to carry the apparatus as the user moves around to collect balls scattered on the floor, ground or field.
Third, the handle, when not used for exerting downward force or pressure on the ball-collector frame to collect scattered balls, is designed to be also used as two legs in the seating mode, which can weaken and
wear out the handle (formed of the two legs) over a relatively shorter passage of time (compared to a ball-collector apparatus which does not require such a dual use of the grabbing handle).
Fourth, when it comes to the process of emptying the collected balls into a container (typically
lying underneath its ball-container receptacle), Beavin's apparatus requires the user to go through a series of transformation steps, such as, e.g., retracting the two legs (which can be doubly used to form the grabbing handle for ball-collecting). Besides, there is no defined path way for the otherwise retained balls (retained in the ball-container receptacle) to exit the ball-container receptacle, and as a result, the retained balls may flow out of the receptacle scattered without order, which, similar to the emptying process of the net-scooper apparatus shown in FIG. 1B, may cause a few otherwise retained balls miss the beneath container and fall and become scattered on the floor or on the field.
Briefly, although Tucker's apparatus also employs an elastic-members-based ball-collector frame and a handle (for exerting downward force or pressure on the ball-collector frame) which may be held during a ball-collecting process without requiring a user to bend down, the handle of Tucker's apparatus nonetheless has no other meaningful use.
Thus, when it comes to the ball-dispensing and the ball-emptying processes, a user has to bend down to reach the ball-container receptacle immediately above the ball-collector frame, unzip a zip lock, and let the balls retained in the ball-container receptacle roll out, which renders either process inconvenient to carry out and which certainly renders Tucker's apparatus unsuitable to be a serve practice buddy.