HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jawad@ecst.csuchico.edu (Jawad Ali)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: AUS PAK exciting
Date: 14 Dec 92 19:26:54 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu

In article <farrell.724315118@coral> farrell@coral.cs.jcu.edu.au (John Farrell) writes:
>  Because some days I get really excited and put a huge effort in, which means
>logging in to the other machines regularly to update the score, and some days
>I am running around doing work and can only make the occasional report.

All this and no friends awards.
===============================
Asif Mujtaba  &  Friendless

Because friendly cricket and unfriendly cricket
are both marvellous and lagitimate sports in
their own accords.

enclosure:  PAD memo.
>
>Friendless
From: abdul@festival.ed.ac.uk (A Majothi)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Next World Cup
Date: 15 Dec 92 14:52:34 GMT

Anybody out there have an idea where and when the next World Cup is
being staged? Is the format the same as the last World Cup?

Thanks ... Abdul
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: hafeez@vxcrna.cern.ch (Syed Mohammad Ali)
Subject: Re: Gamesmanship
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 16:22:00 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.195404.7951@gn.ecn.purdue.edu>, ramakris@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Balaji Ramakrishnan) writes...
>I hope the cricket players soon get it in their minds that it is fair to get
>a batsman out if he is outside the crease when the ball is being delivered.
>I think it is a legitimate means, I sincerely hope it will be used many more
>times in cricket. It should onlymake the one day game more interesting my 
>making it more difficult for batsman to steal singles. I would urge Kapil to
>use it again if Kirsten is out of his crease when he bowls. I would urge 
>every other bowler irrespective of nationality do the same in the spirit of 
>the game.  As for the batsmen, I think they are responsible for protecting 
>their wicket.  I dont think any one needs to be warned. I dont think cricket
>will become boring in anyway.  Its just that the nonstriker has to pay a 
>little more attention.  As for Walsh, not getting Qadir out, maybe he made
>a name for himself but he didnt get Qadir out. I think it was stupid of him.

           It's not Walsh who's stupid, it's morons like you.
           If everyone starts playing cricket by the rule book
           it won't be a sport anymore.....it would rather become
           mechanical....something you would enjoy as much on a 
           Super Nintendo. But still it's the tradition which makes
           cricket different from other games. You might not like it
           but fortunately many people do.

>As I understand, a game is to be played by its rules, not by traditions.  I
>think cricket lovers should stop calling cricket a gentelmans game. I dont
>see anything different between cricket and any other support.  That you like
                                                      ^^^^^^^^

           How about taking a few English classes instead of
           wasting your time on this net.

>it more than other games is just a matter of preference.  
> 
>I would urge the bowlers all over the world to run a batsman out if he steps
>out of his crease and not bother about some stupid traditions.   
> 
>Balaji
> 
> 

regards,

Syed

Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com (Umesh Vaghela)
Subject: Scorecard from SA
Reply-To: vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com (Umesh Vaghela)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 18:33:13 GMT


outh Africa vs India, 5th D/N, Springbok Park, Bloemfontein, 15/12/92
              South Africa                               India
Hudson   * not out             46 ( 77) Jadeja     c McMilla b Donald  9 ( 25)
Wessels  - not out             37 ( 74) Raman      c McMilla b Matthe 16 ( 46)
Kirsten                                 Prabhakar  run out Callaghan  36 ( 57)
Rhodes                                  Azhar      not out            86 (106)
Callaghan                               Tendulkar  b DVilliers        32 ( 52)
Cronje                                  Shastri    not out            21 ( 18)
McMillan                                Kapil
Richardsn                               Amre
Matthews                                Yadav
Donald                                  Kumble
DVilliers                               Srinath
Extras  (W: 2 N: 3 B: 0 LB: 0)  5       Extras  (W: 1 N: 2 B: 0 LB: 4) 7
Total   (Ov: 24.4 RR: 3.57)    88 / 0   Total   (Ov: 50.0 RR: 4.14)  207 / 4
             O  M  R  Wi Wd Nb                        O  M  R  Wi Wd Nb
Callaghan    4  0  22  1  0  0           Prabhakar    5  0  16  0  1  0
Cronje       6  0  20  0  0  0           Tendulkar *  0  0   2  0  0  0
McMillan    10  0  59  0  0  0           Shastri      3  0  16  0  0  0
Matthews    10  1  37  1  0  1           Kapil        7  1  24  0  1  2
Donald      10  2  36  1  1  1           Kumble       5  0  13  0  0  0
DVilliers   10  1  29  1  0  0           Srinath   -  4  0  18  0  0  1
                              score is up to date


--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                            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: jogi@austin.ibm.com (Vijay Joglekar)
Subject: India should give up. Was: SA wins the 4th 
Originator: vijay@vijay.austin.ibm.com
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 14:25:11 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: vijay@wizards.austin.ibm.com
Organization: IBM (Aix Tools Development)


As I had said earlier India should give up playing cricket.  Should 
call back Gavaskar and Srikanth....

Our batting has been pretty fu**ed up.


-- 
**********************************************************************
               Vijay Joglekar - arbiter elagantiarum
 Disclaimer: These are my opinions and my opinions only. Has nothing
                      to do with where I work.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: "faraz rabbani" <faraz.rabbani@canrem.com>
Subject: re: "can we count the chi
Reply-To: "faraz rabbani" <faraz.rabbani@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: rec
Date: 19 Dec 92 19:42:41 EST

To: sl9z5@cc.usu.edu

 Sl> The trend is pretty clear. This is the way Pakistan have been
 Sl> succesful in every tournament in the past five years. First they lose
 Sl> matches(by a mile: the term no longer suitable for the Windies)
 Sl> by putting up the most shoddy performance ever possible(remember
 Sl> WI beat them in the WC by 10 wkts). Then they get a real slice of dame
 Sl> luck (vs Eng.in the WC and several other Sharjah cups). But you have
 Sl> got to give them the credit for capitalising on the one lucky break
 Sl> they get. They then put up the best show(lot of grit , I suppose).

Well...  the thing is that Pakistanis are entertaining.  If you win
from game one, you take the risk of losing interest of people back
home who have so many other distractions: weddings, weddings, politics
and gossip....  So they lose the first few games, get everyone mad and
then go out and win big... and every one is happy...

Seriously, though, Pakistan after Imran performs best under pressure
and when things are hopeless.  They are warriors.  In "neutral"
situations, this spirit translates itself into recklessness...

 Sl> Hmmm, coming to this tournament, only the first part has been
 Sl> clearly defined. Where is the slice of luck going to come for the
 Sl> Pakistan team to then come back into the game?

Who knows?  They got eaten by WI, and realistically have to win 2 of 3
games and hope that the Windies lose 2 games...

But they have done it before...

Faraz Rabbani

... That was Zen, this is Tao...
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.11
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: pieter@ford.ee.up.ac.za
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: India vs SA, 6th ODI, real-time scoring
Date: 17 Dec 1992 02:28:32 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

A new version of Dougie with a few bugs fixed is now available from
ford.ee.up.ac.za (137.215.102.101). The required run rate will now be
shown, as well as the fall of wickets. To see the fall of wickets, you
have to switch to another screen by pressing Tab.  Thanks to all those
that have reported bugs; please continue.  Known bugs now has to do
with the scoring of no-balls and the exit code.

We will score the 6th ODI and will also run a dougie on
dirac.ece.cmu.edu to which you can connect instead of ford.ee.up.ac.za
in case of bandwidth problems. Please finger pieter@dirac.ece.cmu.edu
and not pieter@ford.ee.up.ac.za to keep the wires open to South
Africa.

Thanks is due to Jacques de Villiers (jacques@ee.up.ac.za) for the
program and Johan Schalkwyk (schallas@ee.up.ac.za) for scoring the SA
innings. He'll also do most of todays scoring.

Pieter
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: john7552@mach1.wlu.ca (Niall Johnson u)
Subject: Re: Peter Roebuck's world rankings in the SMH
Organization: Wilfrid Laurier University
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 02:53:30 GMT

In article <6995@otc.otca.oz> brendan@otc.oz.au (Brendan Jones) writes:
>Many Oz netters, particularly those of sub-continental extraction, have waxed
>lyrical in the past about the intelligence and unusual insight shown by Peter
>Roebuck in his cricket columns in the Sydney Morning Herald.
>Well, he's now given his own One-day rankings for world teams - and it ain't
>a pretty sight for Pakistani and Indian supporters.  Hs rankings:
>	1.  England
>	2.  South Africa
>	3.  Australia
>	4.  West Indies
>	5.  Pakistan
>	6.  New Zealand
>	7.  Sri Lanka
>	8.  India
>	9.  Zimbabwe
>	10. Netherlands

Interesting. 

I'm sure we all have our own opinions about ranking of teams
but I'd be interested to know Roebuck's reasonings. Roebuck does tend to be
a little different at times, but I've always enjoyed reading him. Indeed
that's one thing I miss about Australian summer's - his column (and the late
great Bill O'Reilly's column) in the SMH were some of the best modern
cricket writing.


Ciao

Niall Johnson,
Dept. of Geography,
Wilfrid Laurier University.
     john7552@mach1.wlu.ca
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: ss733645@longs.lance.colostate.edu (Sohban Shahid)
Subject: Same posting again and again
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 06:45:11 GMT
Reply-To: ss733645@longs.LANCE.ColoState.Edu
Organization: Colorado State U. Civil Engineering

Dr. Rao,

I don't think that you are doing it purposefully,
but certainly there is a little problem.  Please
check your subject line,  I know you are the only
person who is going to provide us WI/Pak scores
and this subject line would be more appropriate then.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation and providing
these updates.

-- 
*********************************************************************

SOHBAN SHAHID                
Civil Engg. Dept.                (303) 491 7710/8204 (work)
Colorado State University        (303) 224 0397  (home)
Ft. Collins, CO-80523

*********************************************************************
From: shivanan@nyquist.usc.edu (Mr. Shivanan Bhajekar)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Comments: Ind vs RSA: ODI-3
Date: 12 Dec 1992 15:21:56 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: nyquist.usc.edu

In article <Bz5xw2.1yK@rice.edu> pvr@argo.rice.edu (PVR Narasimha Rao) writes:

	Stuff deleted!

>
>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,

	Trust Shastri to do something fantastic when he is about
	to be dropped (or after he has been dropped)!

	Shivanand bhajekar ( a Shastri fan nevertheless)

Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: axeman@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (Samir Chopra)
Subject: Re: Donald, Kapil and South Africa
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:05:52 GMT

In article <00965433.E34343E0@vms.csd.mu.edu> 9063iyerm@vms.csd.mu.edu writes:
>In article <92352.200130SXK129@psuvm.psu.edu>, Spaceman Spiff <SXK129@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>
>>my language wasn't harsh the first 3 or 4 times. the last 2 times i've really
>>got irritated. as far as my .sig goes, its at the end of the post and you
>>can skip it. if i included a 100 lines of someone's article and sprinkled
>
>BTW, both the one-line folow-ups you have reacted to -- quite sharply -- most
>recently, have been as a result of my original post. :--) 

Well, there's the problem for all to see! Maybe you should consider
writing shorter articles so that a full 100 lines wouldn't have to be
included....

>
>doing it? I know I spoke to a couple of friends/read help to learn how to
>reply, edit, etc. when I first began reading newsgroups. 

You actually spoke to people before you posted? How quaint! Delightfully
old fashioned, Murali !          

take care,

Samir

PS: Can anyone post the world record partneships for each wicket in test
cricket and ODIs? Thanks!

-- 
"You guys are gonna smoke in the other room, the smoke will come drifting in
here..it'll look like rose stems, but there's tiny nooses hanging from them.."
Support the Freedom of Choice Act | 11/3/92: Restoration of Democracy Day
From: sdas@paul.rutgers.edu (Souripriya Das)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: SA wins by 6 wickets
Keywords: from "finger pieter@ford....."
Date: 13 Dec 92 20:44:54 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

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
-- 
===============================================================================
_______					EMAIL:		sdas@paul.rutgers.edu
|                               o
|_____  ______  _      _  _ __  _	TELEPHONE:	908-878-1848 (home)
      | |    |  |      |  |/    |		  	908-932-0606 (office)
      | |    |  |      |  |     |			908-932-5172 (CoRE-516)
|_____| |____|  |______|  |     |	US MAIL ADDR:	BPO 29901, P.O.Box 1119
							Piscataway, NJ 08855.
							(Buell Apt# 326)
===============================================================================
From: KSRAO@power.ee.ndsu.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Pak after 25 overs
Date: 17 Dec 1992 03:27:33 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Pakistan are 7 for 35 in the 26 th over.Wasim  c Richardson b Benjamin  7  
(last ball of over)
Inzy  c Hooper b Benjamin  17  (first ball of the hisnext over)
Waqar faced a possible hat-trick, he blocked the ball

Pakistan are 5 for 29 in the 21 th over. Inzy and Wasim are batting.
Simmons' figure are:  10 overs - 8 maidens 3 runs and 4 wickets

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


Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: mikef@dph1.health.su.oz.au
Subject: Re: Junior Murray
Originator: mikef@dph1
Organization: Dept Public Health, Sydney University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:05:33 GMT

In article <1992Dec7.162430.10651@vax.oxford.ac.uk> mcbean@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>I gather Junior Murray has kept for the first two ODI.  Can somebody from Aus.
>tell me what they thought of his glove work.
>

As far as I know, Murray has kept for all of the ODers. I haven't seen that
much of his keeping in these games, but I did hear radio commentators noting
a marked improvement in his glovework compared with his performance in the
Aus.XI v WI match in Hobart, which I commented on earlier.

From my initial impressions of Murray and Williams, it appears that
Murray is in the Jeff Dujon mould, in the sense that he prefers to dive and
use acrobatics to take difficult deliveries, as opposed to relying on quick
footwork. Whereas Williams does appear to have superior footwork. For that
reason, I have been more impressed with Williams to date.  

I agree with the other post on this subject that the standard of keeping
has not been high this season, a seemingly increasing and unfortunate 
world trend.

-- 
__
Michael Fahey         | Internet: mikef@dph1.health.su.oz.au
Dept of Public Health | UUCP: uunet!munnari.oz.au!dph1.health.su!mikef
University of Sydney  | Bitnet: mikef%dph1.health.su.oz.au@cunyvm.bitnet
From: jawad@ecst.csuchico.edu (Jawad Ali)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: PAK Vs. WI
Date: 12 Dec 92 01:31:55 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu



Rain :-(

I got radio :-)

WI 119/5 :-)

j n a
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: shamim@bellcore.com (Shamim Naqvi)
Subject: Re: Peter Roebuck's world rankings in the SMH
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Morristown, NJ
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 23:56:50 GMT

In article <6995@otc.otca.oz>, brendan@otc.otca.oz (Brendan Jones) writes:
> 
> 	1.  England
> 	2.  South Africa
> 	3.  Australia
> 	4.  West Indies
> 	5.  Pakistan
> 	6.  New Zealand
> 	7.  Sri Lanka
> 	8.  India
> 	9.  Zimbabwe
> 	10. Netherlands
> 
> Does this now mean Peter Roebuck knows nothing about cricket?  :-)
> 

I can not say about Roebuck's cricket knowledge but he appears not to
be quite rational. For example

6. New Zealand
7. Sri Lanka
8. India

seems totally arbitrary or prejudiced (take your pick). NZ just
got clobbered in SL. Last time India and SL played, India beat them
comprehensively. 

Why is RSA #2 and above the WI? Didn't RSA lose the OD series in WI a
few months ago? 

No problem with England and Australia being at the top. 

It seems that we can arrange OD teams in a few clusters. 

1. England and Australia are the two best teams in OD cricket. 

2. WI, RSA and Pakistan. I am hopeful that the WSC, the tournament in
RSA, and the OD series in WI will sort out this cluster. 

3. India, NZ and Sri Lanka. This will remain messy for some time. 

Of course, Roebuck is going to have a lot of egg on his face if India
beats England! 

	--SAN
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: dld@cs.monash.edu.au (David L Dowe)
Subject: Graham Tolstoy, "Lambs to the slaughter"
Summary: Locating "Lambs to the slaughter"
Keywords: Tolstoy, literature, prize, Nobel, "Lambs to the slaughter"
Organization: Computer Science, Monash University, Australia
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 09:59:55 GMT

Does anyone know where I could locate a copy of "Lambs to the slaughter"?
I think it appeared circa 1979.      ISBN?

Thank you.    - David D.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: murali@chuck.polymer.uakron.edu (Murali Cotah)
Subject: Re: Donald, Kapil and South Africa
Organization: Institute of Polymer Science, University of Akron
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 04:21:34 GMT

Keywords: 

>>Kapil Dev for captain! 1993-94.

Mahesh.
>>
How about Kapil Dev for manager 1993-94. It is time his strike rate is "reviewed". Playing for 
records is good - but not at the expense of team rebuilding. I am an admirer of Kapil - but when time catches up - one has to go.
cotah
From: shafqat@neuro.duke.edu (Saad Shafqat)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Pakistan are missing Imran in ODI's
Date: 19 Dec 92 04:18:21 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <1992Dec18.090748.25787@gserv1.dl.ac.uk> atb@gserv1.dl.ac.uk writes:

>                      With Imran in the side Pak had a very good captain,
>batsman and most importantly FIFTH BOWLER to go with Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis,
>Aqib Javed and Mushtaq Ahmed. These 4 latter bowlers are a very potent bowling
>attack and they were probably the main reason why Pakistan beat England in this
>summers test series. In ODI's however you need an extra bowler and IMHO this is
>where pakistan have been falling down, their fifth bowler is never as good
>as Imran. 


Remember that Pakistan won the world cup without Waqar Younus, so Imran's
absence as a bolwer isn't all that significant now since it is being
more than offset by Waqar's presence.  I do agree that Imran's absence is
critical, but for his batting.  In both the semifinal and final of
the world cup Imran came in at no.3 at the fall of an early wicket and
stubbornly defended his wicket at all cost, on both occasions
playing crucial (though underrated) knocks.  This stabilised the
innings, prevented a middle order collapse, and set the stage for
the stroke players' charge in the last 15 overs.  Except for Miandad -
and he is past his best - the current Pakistan side has no disciplined
batsman.  Pakistan's mediocre batting will keep the current team
from becoming genuinely great (I have said this before).  


Saad.


-- 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: aamir@cs.sfu.ca (Aamir Husain)
Subject: PAK vs WI WSC
Keywords: pak 138/3 after 32 ovs, need 40 in 10 ovs
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 06:35:17 GMT

miandad is 9 no
inzamam is 7 no


source finger to ksrao

Aamir