HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: KSRAO@power.ee.ndsu.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Pakistan after 16 overs
Date: 17 Dec 1992 02:47:37 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Pakistan are 5 for 25 at the end of 16 overs


Miandad is out in the 11th over   caught by Murray off Simmons. They are 5 for
14

Pakistan are 4 for 14 at the end of 10 overs

  WI scored 214 for 9 in 50 overs.

Pakistan are 4 wickets for 9 in the sixth over.

Raja c Lara b Patterson   0
Mujtaba b Simmons   1
Sohail c Benjamin b Simmons   6
Malik ???  b Simmons  0
Miandad   batting
Inzamam    batting
   
Total 4 wickets for 9
From: bnataraj@uceng.uc.edu (Bhaskar Natarajan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: FINAL SCORE (SA/IND)
Date: 18 Dec 92 18:49:52 GMT
Organization: University of Cincinnati

In article <1gqnc3INNk9b@rave.larc.nasa.gov> vasanth@zephyr.larc.nasa.gov (Vasanth Tovinkere) writes:>
>           South Africa vs India, 6th D/N, Kingsmead, Durban, 17/12/92
>              South Africa                               India
>Hudson    c Sharma b Shastri  15 ( 29)  Prabhakar c Richard b Matthe  21 ( 48)
					^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
>Wessels   c Manjrek b Jadeja  78 (120)  Jadeja    c Richard b Pringl  12 ( 45)
					^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Kirsten   c Manjrek b Kapil   44 ( 68)  Manjrekar run out Hudson      10 ( 24)
					^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	This is where the whole goddamn trouble lies.
	What happened to Raman ?
	Jadeja is doing a shastri ;-)  ( to use Quayle's words)
	We need to play fast from the beginning. I think WC92 proved that.
	Just look at the batting order. There's nobody who can be really
	relied upon to bat with any decent consistency (Sachin included)

	Quite a messy scene. And doesn't look like its going to get 
	any better in the near future. Lots of socks gotta be pulled up.
	
	Regards
	Bhaskar
			
>Rhodes    c Kapil b Shastri   16 ( 25)  Azhar     c DVillie b Cronje  41 ( 73)
>Callaghan st Sharma b Kumble   8 ( 12)  Tendulkar c Cronje b Pringle  23 ( 26)
>Cronje    b Shastri           25 ( 29)  Kapil     c Richard b Donald  30 ( 35)
>Richardsn run out Sharma      12 ( 11)  Shastri   c Kirsten b Pringl   5 (  6)
>Pringle   run out Sharma       9 (  8)  Yadav     b Matthews           3 (  2)
>Matthews  not out              1 (  1)  Sharma    c Rhodes b DVillie  15 ( 12)
>Donald                                  Kumble    run out Donald       0 (  1)
>DVilliers                               Raju      not out              3 (  4)
>Extras (W: 0 N: 2 B: 2 LB: 4)  8        Extras (W: 1 N: 7 B: 0 LB: 6) 14
>Total  (Ov: 50.0 RR: 4.32)   216 / 8    Total  (Ov: 47.5 RR: 3.70)   177 / 10
From: nish@linus.umd.edu (Looking for Peace)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: India Vs Sa Schedule?
Date: 11 Dec 92 20:40:59 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

Can somebody post or send me mail for the rest of the 
schedule of India Vs SA series.

Thanks in advance
Nish.
.


Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: kopti@seas.gwu.edu (Juzer T. Kopti)
Subject: Re: test
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 05:29:23 GMT

 hear, hear

 Shastri...hai,hai,hai
   
		JUZER
From: KSRAO@power.ee.ndsu.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: score WI/Pak
Date: 17 Dec 1992 00:50:27 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


Apologies, the running score of the 5th ODI has disappeared.

SA beat India by eight wickets with 16 balls to spare. Hudson was 108 not out.



South Africa vs India, 4th D/N, Wanderers, Johannesburg, 13/12/92
SA win by 6 wickets with 10 balls remaining. Man of the match Jonty Rhodes.

Wessels won the toss, India batting.
Kapil has been injured slightly when batting. He is bowling from a
shortened run since his 7th over. He left the field after 9 overs.
Callaghan run out by the smallest margin ever. His bat was less than
an inch out when Jadeja broke the wickets with a direct throw

         South Africa                          India                 
Hudson c Azhar b Kumble     22 (56) | Jadeja    lbw Callaghan         18 (60)
Wessels c Jadeja b Srinath  45 (96) | Raman     b Donald               0 (16)
Kirsten lbw Srinath         21 (48) | Amre      lbw Donald             2 ( 9)
Rhodes                      42 (56) | Azhar     c Richardsn b Matthews 49 (84)
Callaghan run out Jadeja    12 (27) | Tendulkar c McMillan b Donald    21 (44)
Cronje                      11 ( 8) | Kapil     c Richardsn b Matthews 18 (25)
McMillan                            | Shastri   c McMillan b DeVillier 17 (32)
Richardson                          | Srinath   c Rhodes b McMillan     3 ( 5)
Matthews                            | More      run out Rhodes          2 ( 7)
Donald                              | Prabhakar not out                 5 ( 9)
DeVilliers                          | Kumble    not out                 7 (13)
Extras  N:1 W:2 B:  LB:9    12      | Extras    N:2  W:11 B:  LB:6     19
Total   W:3 RR:            156      | Total     W:9 RR:               161
Overs: 48.2                         | Overs:    50
              O  M  R Wi Nb Wd      |            O  M  R Wi Nb Wd
Kapil         9  0 23  0  0  0      | Donald     10 0 27  3  0  5
Prabhakar     8  0 24  0  0  1      | DeVilliers 10 2 24  1  0  1
Kumble        9  1 33  1  0  0      | Matthews   10 0 33  2  2  1
Srinath     9.2  1 39  2  1  1      | McMillan   10 0 39  1  0  4 
Tendulkar     3  1  4  0  0  0      | Cronje      5 0 15  0  0  0
Shastri      10  1 33  0  0  0      | Callaghan   5 0 17  1  0  0
From: x92karwa1@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: IND V SA TEST MATCHES
Date: 11 Dec 92 18:12:49 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

             IND V SA TEST MATCHES
 
Can somebody give me the dates for the remaining Test matches
between Ind and SA.
Hats of to Indian team for winning the 3rd OD,Raman played one
of his best innings.I hope India will pick from here, and give
SA a tough time.

Thanks in advance.

Sandeep Karwa
Dept.of Mech. Engg.
Wistern Michigan University.
Tel: (616) 387-5961
From: B536HIND@UTARLVM1.UTA.EDU (C. S. Sudarshana bhat)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory
Date: 12 Dec 1992 02:02:20 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Pakistan seems to have caught this bug from India lately!  A team which
scored 16 off the last over just the other day couldn't get less than
10 today.  THAT'S cricket.

Someone questioned Taylor's judgement in getting Waugh in instead of
(was it?) Reiffel.  It was the same Waugh - or has his bowling gone down
lately? - who held England (?) to less than 7 runs (my memory fails me
completely, but was this the World Cup Final in 1987?), wasn't it??
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: sanwar@watarts.uwaterloo.ca (Sajid Anwar)
Subject: Re: Using Dougie
Keywords: Dougie
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:25:22 GMT

After their crushing defeat at the hands of WI and Australia, Pakistani team
should be sent home. And all excessively patriotic fans should stop posting
articles with stupid titles like "Pakistan Murdered WA".
From: jawad@ecst.csuchico.edu (Jawad Ali)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Donald, Kapil and South Africa
Date: 17 Dec 92 02:33:02 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu

In article <92350.095309SXK129@psuvm.psu.edu> SXK129@psuvm.psu.edu (Spaceman Spiff) writes:
>In article <14DEC199222183778@utarlg.uta.edu>, d188sid@utarlg.uta.edu (S
>RAMACHANDRAN) says:
>>
>>Your Article Most Interesting...hope we get more stuff like this on R.S.C!
>>
>>In article <00965147.97A502A0@vms.csd.mu.edu>, 9063iyerm@vms.csd.mu.edu
>>writes...
>>>
>>>   [........INCLUDES WHOLE BLOODY ARTICLE.........]
>>>


0>did you have to include the whole goddam article for you one line comment?
1>seriously, netters, i've been complaining about this irritating habit for
2>ages now and its still happening.
3>if you have a comment to make in a follow-up include only the relevant lines.
4>is that too much to ask?

Considering the harsh language above, I think it is only fair to 
chide you for the five lines of message above, followed by nine lines
of self promotion bellow :-)

0>Stay cool,
1>Spaceman Spiff
2>
3>Cogito ergo potum                               I think therefore I drink
4>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
5>SXK129@PSUVM.PSU.EDU                                Penn State University
6>
7>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
8>-------------------------------------------------------------------------

j n a
SHO_NUFF
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com (Umesh Vaghela)
Subject: India are 118/3 after 36 overs
Keywords: So far so good.....
Reply-To: vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com (Umesh Vaghela)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 14:46:53 GMT


Prabhakar got a TV decision for run out. he was one long inch too short.
Azhar and Tendulkar are batting.

Azhar - 37no
Tendulkar - 14no

--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                            Umesh Vaghela                                |
|                Digital Equipment Corporation - Reading, Berks, UK       |
|                                                                         |
| 	Userid : vaghela@marvin.enet.dec.com				  |
|          	 vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com                               |
|          	 vaghela@wikkit.enet.dec.com                              |
|									  |
|All views & opinions expressed here are entirely my own and NOT digital's|
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: urajan@leland.Stanford.EDU (Uday Rajan)
Subject: Pak-Aus ODI; Pak 196/5, Aus 35/- after 12
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 04:58:42 GMT


Sorry, no further details available on Pak innings. It's a 47 over match.
Pak didn't hit a boundary between overs 10 and 40 or so. Akram and Inzamam
added tons of runs in the last few overs.
For Aus, Boon has 18 and Taylor 12.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: dv@welch.jhu.edu (Deepak Vaidya)
Subject: How to get the latest score for 5th ODI between SA and India
Reply-To: dv@welch.jhu.edu
Organization: Welch Medical Library, Johns Hopkins University
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 12:22:26 GMT

I am using dougie program provided by Pieter Vermeulen, to update my plan file.
Just use the finger command to get the latest scores in US.

My address is dv@welchgate.welch.jhu.edu

Enjoy
- Deepak


Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: pvr@argo.rice.edu (PVR Narasimha Rao)
Subject: Comments: Ind vs RSA: ODI-3
Organization: Rice University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 20:21:38 GMT


BATIING ORDER: Interestingly, Sachin was sent in at #3. Azhar went in
at #4, Amre at #5, Shastri at #6. I have no problems with Sachin batting
at #3 instead of #4. He can bat anywhere in the middle order (early or
late). He is one batsman in the Indian team, who can bat at any gear and
is extremely adaptive. But, the point is Amre will be better utilized if
he plays at #3. In an ODI eleven, Amre is an utter waste unless he comes
in with a lot of overs to go (which doesn't happen too often - and, if
it happens, anyway India will lose!). OTOH, Azza and Scahin don't need
too much time to settle down and they can slog as well as play clean
strokes. Amre, BTW, made 1 in this match coming in at a situation where
the run rate was to be increased a lot. He got out trying a big shot.

Sachin was apparently looking good when he was given out on 22. He was
seemingly unhappy with the decision and waited for a small while at the
crease. The umpire gave him out after consulting the other umpire (on
the field). Azhar made around 20 or so and was ok. Jadeja also made 20,
I think.

If it hadn't been for Shastri's 27 off 16, India would've lost the
match! Despite Raman's brilliant 113! Even in Aus, India lost several
matches (even after Srikkanth, Shastri, Azhar, Manjrekar or Sachin made
good scores and laid a good foundation) in the last 5-10 overs just
because it didn't have a #6 who could make 27 off 16! Shastri, BTW,
proved his worth in bowling also by taking a vital wicket.

IMHO, this will be the best batting orer:

Raman, Jadeja, Amre/Manjrekar, Sachin, Azza, Shastri, Kapil, More,
Prabhakar, Srinath, Kumble

Based on present form [I don't care for Amre's failure in this match
because I anyway didn't xepect him to make 27 off 16 like Shastri did.
He was bound to be a failure at that position (atleast until he learns
slogging)], I prefer Amre to Manjy. But, who knows - they may take
Manjy into the team in the place of Amre and he may do well (as he did
in Oz after being rested for a match)! Both of them have a wonderful
temperament for a #3. While Manjy picked up wild strokes in recent
years, Amnre still cannot play such strokes.

As I said after the first ODI, toss will matter a lot. Both the sides
are beter at chasing. RSA has an extremely impressive winning record
while chasing in their limited ODI record.

PVR
From: nish@linus.umd.edu (Looking for Peace)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: SA / India 5th ODI
Date: 15 Dec 92 14:14:00 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

After 28 overs India is 88 for 3

Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: karnik@cs.umn.edu (Neeran M. Karnik)
Subject: Re: I am confused
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 18:29:39 GMT

In <1glpglINNbfb@fido.asd.sgi.com> shankar@sgi.com (Shankar Unni) writes:

>C. S. Sudarshana Bhat (B536HIND@UTARLVM1.UTA.EDU) wrote:

>> The posts on the net say that India scored 207 for 4 and Azhar made 80-odd,
>> and Shastri 21 off 18 balls.  Then, there is the info in Dr. Rao's .plan
>> which says that India made 160-odd all out, with Azhar making 49 and Shastri
>> 17 off 32 balls.  Which one is correct?  Or are they both correct, and for
>> different matches (then I am *more* confused!!).

>Yeah: looks like neither Dr. Rao's nor Neeran Karnik's .plans are
>being updated as they claim. Dr. Rao's .plan is showing the results of
>the 4th ODI, while Mr. Karnik's .plan has nothing but his home address.

	That's right, but don't blame me! :-) What happened was, dougie 
somehow returned the scorecard for the FOURTH game, some time after the fifth
was over. This overwrote the .plan I had, containing the final score of the
fifth ODI. To avoid confusion, I just removed that scorecard.....

>Shankar Unni				E-Mail:	shankar@sgi.com



       +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
       | Neeran M. Karnik | #2 fan of Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar on r.s.c.  :-> |
       | Dept. of CompSci.| "Welcome to r.s.c.,                              |
       | U of Minnesota   |  where jingoism rules the netwaves" - McBean :-> |
       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: jawad@ecst.csuchico.edu (Jawad Ali)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Saeed Anwar
Date: 12 Dec 92 00:27:43 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu











Thank you Shamim for your reflectins of Saeed Anwar.  I asked the 
local cricket guru the same question and he said "lummay lummay panda eh"*
with the sound of limited yet bitter personal experience. :-) :-)


j n a


*- "he hits'em long" in Punjabi.
From: KSRAO@power.ee.ndsu.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: SL v NZ ODI NZ after 30 overs
Date: 13 Dec 1992 08:48:48 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

NZ v SL D/N game on Sunday in Colombo (in progress)

NZ are 129  for 4 at the end of 30 overs. 
Hatland c Wikramsingha b Gurusingha  14
Parore                 b Gurusingha 13
Jones   c Jayasoorya   b Kalpage     32
Rutherford     c  and  b Kalpage     30
Jusin Bourne  not  out               19
Harris        not out                 9 


 Only 49 overs were
bowled by NZ in the time allotted. SL scored 262 for 6.
Hatarasingha  5
Gurusingha  76
Mahanama  110
D'Dylva  20
Ranatunga  16
Jayasoorya  26
Kalpage  3
Extras   9

The commentary is on 9510 kHz.


Ind v SA  (postponed ODI - 4)
SA won the toss and sent India to bat. They are 9 for 1 at the end of over 5.
Raman is out for a duck
THis is the last score I know. Next SA/Ind update will be at 1:00pm EST
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: cctr123@csc.canterbury.ac.nz (Alan Murray, CSC Operations, Uni of Canty)
Subject: Re: World Champions???
Organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 03:26:46 GMT

In article <92352.165939U17868@uicvm.uic.edu>, <U17868@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
> The reason why Pakistan's performance is bad in ODI's is that they played 
> the ODI's mostly in Australia and England.

Oh bollocks - they won the bloody World Cup in Australia didn't they???

Alan
From: KSRAO@power.ee.ndsu.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: WI after 30 overs
Date: 11 Dec 1992 19:27:08 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

WI are 5 for 103 after 30 overs. Rich 45, Hooper 7, extras 21

WI are  5 for 87 after 25, Ric 36, Hooper 1, extras  20

Arthurton was caught by Inzamam when he tried to guide through second slip for
3 at 81



At the end of 20 overs: WI are 4 for 67; Rcd 22 and Arthurton  1

Lara was bound around his legs by Javid, the ball flattening the leg stump.
Lara scored 15, he was out at 56.

Logie was next to go, hitting the ball at Rameez's throat off Sohail's
spinners, (mid wicket), a bad shot

At the end of 15 overs; WI are 2 for 46; Ricson 12, Lara12
Richardson hits a six off Aaquib in the 15 th over
At the end of 10 overs WI are   29 for 2
Lara  on  8, Richie 0, extras 10

Haynes  b Wasim  6
Simmons c Sohail b Wasim  5


Haynes was bowled through the gate - a beautiful delivery from Akram which
flattened the middle stump in the 7th over.

In the 9th over, he got Wasim caught by Sohail off a ball moving away in the
second slip.

WI batting first: 10 for no loss; Haynes 4 Lara 1

They are after 5 overs   

3 wides in a row in Wasim's 3rd over (5th of the game)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao)
Subject: Re: S. Africa v. India ODI Averages.
Reply-To: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 20:45:12 GMT

rsp@ukc.ac.uk (R.S.Pickett) writes:
>Hi,
>  Here are the latest averages for the one day series between S. Africa
>and India. They are calculated from the first 4 one day internationals.
>India:

>Name        Innings   HS    Runs    Aves     50's   100's   Runs per 100 balls

>Raman          4     113     194    48.50     0       1           66.21
>Shastri        2      27*     44    44.00     0       0           91.67
                                                                   ^^^^^^

Hmmmmm... who has the highest strike rate among all the Indian
Batsmen?  What a wonder its RSC's favorite whipping boy, Ravi Shastri.
Today he scored 17/32 so while it will fall, he will probaly still be
highest.  As I (and a number of others) have been saying, he will do
very well if used PROPERLY.

>Jadeja         4      47      90    22.50     0       0           37.97
>Azharuddin     4      49      81    20.25     0       0           47.65

Azhars unbeaten 86 should help his lot.

>Name         Overs   Maidens   Runs   Wickets  Average   NB   W   R/O

>Srinath       38.2      4       142      4      35.50     5   2   3.70
>Kumble        39        2       122      3      40.67     0   0   3.13
>Prabhakar     34.3      3       121      2      60.50     7   2   3.51
>Tendulkar     20        2        63      1      63.00     0   0   3.15
>Shastri       17        2        69      1      69.00     0   0   4.06
>Kapil         33        4       104      1     104.00     0   2   3.15
>Jadeja        12.4      1        60      0        -       5   1   4.74

I must admit that I am surprised (and pleased) to see that Kumble is
bowling so economically.  However, with Kapil hurt maybe he should sit
-- if we lose this one, I think youwill seee wholesale changes; the 3
passengers so far (Chetan, Bannerjee, and Raju) deserve a look see,
and Yadav will probably don the gloves sometime soon.

Even though people are playing quite well, I think it is important for
team unity to give everyone a shot.  Also what if Kapil is unfit for
the Tests (shudder).

Hope India wins the 5th ODI.. at least keep the series interesting.

>Thanks.

>Rob.

Bharat
-- 
R. Bharat Rao                         E-mail: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu
AI Group, Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology
405 N. Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801   (217)-333-5978 (O), 337-6498(H)
Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: AERODYNAMICS OF THE CRICKET BALL  - scientific
From: shariq@charlie.usd.edu
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:14:21 GMT
Reply-To: shariq@charlie.usd.edu
Organization: The University of South Dakota Computer Science Dept.

In article <1992Dec11.061118.5360@news.clarkson.edu>, pdy@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Yapa,,,) writes:
>
> AERODYNAMICS OF THE CRICKET BALL  - scientific
>If this info has been discussed recently  - my apologies.
>
>any errors of interpretation and typing are mine.
>
>I am summarizing some  facts about the AERODYNAMICS OF THE CRICKET BALL
>based on a scientific article published in 1985 in a high standard journal
>
>Article : AERODYNAMICS OF SPORTS BALL by Rabindra D. Mehta in
>"Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics", 1985, p 151-189
>
>Swing - obtained by spinning the ball about an axis perpendicular to the
>        line of flight
>
>pressure difference between the two sides
>
>      zero      @ low Reynolds No. ( or U )
>   significant  @    U = 25 m/s
>   maximum      @    U = 29 m/s
>
>A two piece ball swings better than a four piece ball
>
>Swing properties deteriorate with the aging of the ball.
>
>The ball seam angle and spin rate affects the swing
>
>optimum seam angle for u=30 m/s is about 20 degrees
>
>at low speed ( < 15 m/s ) use a seam angle of 30 degrees.
>
>too much spin not good.
>
>It is widely believed that on damp days the ball swings more. However, the
>author says that there has been no scientific evidence of this. 
>The problem has been investigated by several researchers, but have found
>no significant change in pressures or forces when Rel. Humidity was changed
>upto 40 %.
>
>Yapa
>
>
>> 
I gues the ball will swing more on a damp day because the atmosphere is heavier
and and the linear motion is retarded, thus the lateral motion is enhanced. Try 
throwing a ball through water and you see how it moves. So I think there is
scientific evidence thatthe ball should move more on damper days. At least that
is what I think. What do you think?

Shariq


Hail Pakistan, the world champions of the greatest sport ever.
From: haider@tao.rice.edu (Haider Abbas Rizvi)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Using Dougie
Keywords: Dougie
Date: 17 Dec 92 06:31:19 GMT
Organization: Rice University, Houston, Texas

--
Well I was trying to get dougie to work. I got the executable present in
the /pub dir of ford.**.za and tried to run it with
dougie plains.nodak.edu 1725
as said in ksrao's plan. Can someone tell me if s/he is able to get dougie
to run as a slave only.
  
Thanks,
--
Haider