HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sougata@cc.gatech.edu (Sougata Mukherjea)
Subject: SAARC Cricket
Reply-To: sougata@cc.gatech.edu (Sougata Mukherjea)
Organization: College of Computing
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:30:46 GMT

Saw these news items which have not been reported on r.s.c yet:

INDIA TO TAKE PART IN SAARC CRICKET
BANGALORE- India will participate in the SAARC Cricket Tournament at
Bangladesh from Dec 3 to 12.
Mr. C.Nagaraj, Secretary, Board of Control of Cricket in India (BCCI) told
PTI that other teams in the fray are Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and hosts
Bangladesh. All the matches in the tournaments will be one-day games.
The team was finalised on Sunday night.
Manindar Singh(Delhi-Captain), Navjot Sidhu(Punjab- Vice-Captain),
S. Sugwekar(Maharashtra), Surendra Bhave (Maharashtra), Vinod Kambli(Bombay),
K.P.Bhaskar(Delhi), Saurav Ganguly(Bengal), Ajay Sharma(Delhi),
Nayan Mongia(Baroda), Rajesh Chauhan(MP), Prashant Vaidya(Vidarbha),
Winston Zaidi(UP), Salil Ankola(Bombay) and Abhey Kuruvilla(Bombay).
Russi Jeejeebhoy (Bengal) and Sharif Ahmed (MP) will accompany the team
as officials.

This is more or less the 2nd XI.  Can someone tell me more about Sugwekar?


==============================================================================	
  Sougata Mukherjea (sougata@cc.gatech.edu)
  Graphics Visualization and Usability Center
  College of Computing
  Georgia Institute of Technology 
=============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: nadeem@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu (Mohammed Nadeem  ISE-GRAD)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Trivia for the Weekend
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:02:48 GMT
Organization: College of Engg. & Tech., Ohio University, Athens, Ohio


>Hi guys ,
>It's friday afternoon and a little bit boring So I thought I could post some trivia reagrding
>Cricket.
>
>1. When did India win it's first test , where
>and against whom?
>
>2. Who was the first person to retire hurt in
>a test match?
>
>3. Who is the only cricketer in the world to
>score century in both innings of  a test match
>thrice? What are these instances?

  Sunil Manohar Gavaskar

	1.  vs WI '70-71, 220 and 116 at Port of Spain
	2.  vs PAK '78 ,  113(?) and 137(?) at Karachi
	3.  vs WI  '78-79 *** and 182(?) at Bangalore(?)
>
>4. Who was the first Indian Batsman who scored
>another century after a century in his debut.?

	G.R. Vishwanath
>
>5. How many Indian bowlers have taken a hat-trick
>in Test Cricket? and in One-dayers?

	Chetan Sharma against N.Z. in World Cup '87
>
>O.K. guys see ya on Monday.
>
>       *********************************
>       *	N.Ramasubramanian      *    	    
>       * 	                       *    
>       *	Dept. of Mech. Engg.   *    
>       *	Marquette University   *    
>       *********************************
>
>
-- 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   Mohammed Nadeem	  e-mail: nadeem@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu
			        : aldstf20@ouaccvmb.ucls.ohiou.edu
	"TREAT OTHERS THE WAY YOU WANT THEM TO TREAT YOU"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: eb139@cs.city.ac.uk (MAHMOOD Z)
Subject: Re: Waqar
Organization: City University
Date:  9 Nov 92 20:06:50 GMT

In <1992Nov6.231304.2386@walter.bellcore.com> shamim@bellcore.com (Shamim Naqvi,MRE-2E342,829-4711,,21273) writes:

>In article 25984@vela.acs.oakland.edu,  mamohamm@vela.acs.oakland.edu (SKEPTICAL) writes:
>>	Does anybody out there know for how long has Waqar Younus
>>	has played for Surrey?

Seeing as we are talking about Waqar does anyone know when he made his
International Debut (both for one days and tests). I first heard his name when
he took teh Sharjah tournament by storm a few years back....
From: ckhan@bbn.com (Chico Kahn (Room # 20/317 B))
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: WI-WA (Hooper as a bowler)
Date: 12 Nov 1992 14:56:45 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Reply-To: ckhan@BBN.COM (Chico Kahn (Room # 20/317 B))
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <1992Nov11.112807.10046@vax.oxford.ac.uk> mcbean@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>In article <lfvkmhINNfrl@news.bbn.com>, ckhan@bbn.com (Chico Kahn (Room # 20/317 B)) writes:

>> Just don't blame my guy Hooper, he's there as a bowler, remember? :-)
>
>The papers here were all tripping over themselves how he flighted the ball
>beautifully into the breeze.  I know that for quite some time now various
>people have been trying to get him to flight the ball instead of the flat
>containing delivery now popular with off spinners.

>Any bets on your boy Jimmy Adams making the first test?  Rumour has it if
>Simmons keeps failing he may open.

I had hoped that he would, but I'm not sure who he can replace.  Hooper,
not spectacular with the bat, has been doing enough to keep his place, Lara
is of course undroppable(w?) and Arthurton's ton in the last game may be
enough to keep him in the side.  Where does that leave Logie?  I don't know.
I hope they don't ask Adams to open.  Even though I think Lara would do 
better in the middle order in the Tests, I'd rather see him open and Adams
moved down the order if Simmons is dropped.  I still think it would have 
been better to take another opener (either Samuels, Wallace or Lambert would
have been good - but you know who my first choice would be!) and if they
MUST have Simmons there, then use him in the ODIs (or as water boy or
baggage handler for all I care).

Anyway, if the entire batting order collapses, we can always rely on Williams
to save the side - I noticed he scored 59 in the last game! Many :-). 

How about Murray?  Any rumours on his replacing Williams for the first Test?

My team would be:

Haynes
Lara
Richardson
Adams
Hooper
Logie (???  maybe Arthurton)
Murray
Bishop
Ambrose
Walsh
Patterson

>McBean

Chico.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hasmatallie A. Khan          |      |                  InterNet: ckhan@bbn.com
Bolt, Beranek and Newman     |___.  |___.  .___.     SneakerNet: 20/317 B
150 CambridgePark Drive      |   |  |   |  |   |       AT&T Net: 617-873-6119
Cambridge, MA 02140          |___!  |___!  |   |     CompuServe: 72770,1507
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mhiri01@mik.uky.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: hi,
Date: 9 Nov 1992 09:24:10 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

             this is just a test.
manju
From: sajja@gradient.cis.upenn.edu (Rajeev  Sajja)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: India vs. SA pres. XI, end of 1st day
Date: 7 Nov 92 19:04:31 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <0096335F.EBB648A0@vms.csd.mu.edu> 5912ramasubr@vms.csd.mu.edu writes:
>In article <colin.26@physci.uct.ac.za>, colin@physci.uct.ac.za (COLIN HENDERSON) writes:
>>At stumps, the Presidant XI were 268 all out.
>
>>Prabhakar was getting great swing, and ended with 3/38 off 17.  Bannerjee 
>>looked fairly innocuous with 1/26 off 13.  Raju: 2/57 off 19,  
>                                            ------------------
>
>"Pathetic".

Cut this crap out. Give that young guy a chance alright. Dont try to
create a opinion in this newsgroup bout Raju being pathetic. Look at
the chances he has got to perform. Look at the statistics. After the
great spin attack india had, there hasn't been a spinner of test
calibre that has displayed consistency. Now dont tell me that Maninder
should have been given a chance instead of Raju, the stats show that
he has been a better performer at the first class level, It is time
for the people to realize that the way the Indian team has been going
of late, just on the fact that they are good on paper(or going by past
reputation has got them to where they are right now.) Give guys who 
have shown talent  a chance instead of saying take maninder in because
he has been so good in the past. 

FORGET ABOUT THE PAST, Today Raju is a more consistent bowler than
Maninder. Besides taht guy maninder has an attitude problem!! ( this
is my personal opinion) although i definitely think he is a much
better fielder than Raju is. 


GO E-A-G-L-E-S...
Watch out Raiders, Our backup QB is going to bury you.


-Rajeev
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Thursday, 12 Nov 1992 23:04:23 CST
From: <U58582@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: 199, 299, 499 !

199 - I think Mudassar (vs India) and Azhar (vs SL) (i don't know if
anyone scored 199 after Azhar did.
299 - Sir DOn had one, (other than his 4 300s), I am not sure if he was
not out
499 - Hanif Mohammed in first class match (he I think was definitely n.o.)

I don't know of anyone who scored 199 and 299 in test cricket, unless someone
did it in the last couple of years (I don't think so).  When Azhar was out
for 199, he was only the second player to do that.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: osm8502@summa.tamu.edu (Omezee-SaMe Still)
Subject: SA v/s India
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 01:53:00 GMT



EOFirst day's play:
SA 231/7
From: 9063iyerm@vms.csd.mu.edu (Murali Iyer)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: In the defense (was Re: Vinod Kambli
Date: 12 Nov 92 14:35:37 GMT
Reply-To: 9063iyerm@vms.csd.mu.edu
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services
NNTP-Posting-Host: vmsd.csd.mu.edu

In article <karnik.721513066@atto>, karnik@atto.cs.umn.edu (Neeran M. Karnik) writes:

       <a lot of stuff about which I have no dispute, deleted>

>>	Rather than bias for Bombay players, there is often a bias against
>>them ! This isn't because of any great conspiracy, but simply because of
>>the quota system - there has to be someone from every zone, and not an
>>overwhelming number from any one zone. Why was Kambli dropped from the
>>Australian tour, and then personally called by the Chairman of BCCI ?

>
>	Absolutely! This has happened so often in the past, that when for once
>Gavaskar managed to bully the selectors into taking more than the quota of
>Bombay players along to England, there was a big hue and cry!

Now, now, Neeran. Not even Gavaskar could defend his team with a straight face
in this particular instance. I can remember the commentators wondering why some
of the players(yes, from Bombay) were in the team. Whether as batsmen or
bowlers or just passengers? I agree there was a big hue and cry, but very
little of it was unjustified. If they were the cream of Indian players, why did
they not retain their places after that tour? Gavaskar was still captain after
that tour, wasn't he? 

Ofcourse, Vishy came to the team's defense and appealed to the press to leave
the team alone, now that they were all definitely going to England. No point in
hitting the lows in morale, to add to the worries of an already weak team that
was selected. :--) 

>
>>Kambli possesses more talent. I just think that our selection process has
>>long been screwed up, at all levels of the game - a lot of it having to do
>>with the quota system. And I believe Bombay cricketers have suffered rather
>>than benefited because of it. 
>
>	At the very least, IMHO it is not fair to say that Bombay cricketers
>have benefited from the selection process.

I totally agree with the view that the best team must be selected. Period. 

>
>>>
>>	It did seem like it at the time. But, just after the Australian
>>tour, it seemed like Vivvy was wrong on all three counts :-) :-) 
>
>
>	Heyyyyy, whaddya mean all three counts ? Manjrekar sure has made it
>big since then!

I guess Sadiq meant if anybody had looked at that comment *immediately after
the aussie tour*, then they would have wondered about Viv's judgment ........
Manjrekar did not exactly cover himself with glory on the tour. But I am not
trigger happy, I am all for giving a talented man more chances. I was terribly
disappointed when Sandeep Patil was dropped. There, was a man of undoubted
talent, wasted, partly by himself and more so by the system. He is really a 
laid-back character, and did not try hard enough. 

>
>>	Sadiq [ lead soldier - Bombay Bombing Brigade :-) ] Yusuf
>
>	Neeran [another Bombay bomber :-)] Karnik

        Murali [from Bangalore, but cricket first] Iyer :--) 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: shamim@bellcore.com (Shamim Naqvi,MRE-2E342,829-4711,,21273)
Subject: Re: 199, 299, 499 !
Reply-To: shamim@bellcore.com
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Morristown, NJ
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 14:46:17 GMT

In article 230423U58582@uicvm.uic.edu,  <U58582@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>199 - I think Mudassar (vs India) and Azhar (vs SL) (i don't know if
>anyone scored 199 after Azhar did.
>299 - Sir DOn had one, (other than his 4 300s), I am not sure if he was
>not out
>499 - Hanif Mohammed in first class match (he I think was definitely n.o.)
>
Hanif made 499 playing for Karachi against Bahawalpur in 1958-59 in a 
Quaid-e-Azam Tropy match at the National Stadium Ground. He was run out. 

	--SAN
From: KSRAO@power.ee.ndsu.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: SA v Ind T1 D1 Tea
Date: 13 Nov 1992 06:50:44 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

SA are 96 for 1 with Wessels at 62 and Kirsten at 13. The new score is at 12:45
GMT.   The latest score is:  138 for 3 at tea. Kirsten was out for 13. Wessela
is not out with 84 and Jonty Rhodes with 18. The third wicket fell at 101.

Earlier Cook was out for 0 and Hudson for 14.
From: tripunit@algol.cs.psu.edu (Mahesh V Tripunitara)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Ball Tampering
Date: 6 Nov 92 22:00:26 GMT
Organization: Penn State Computer Science

In article <EeyTfJK00WBNE9W2h6@andrew.cmu.edu> Abid Aziz <aa2x+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>Controversy over Pakistani bowlers doctoring the ball did not start in
>the WORLD CUP; this is because Pakistan was unsuccessful until the later
>stages.  If Pakistan are losing, not even the Hot-Headed English players
>and media raise the question.  It is only when the Pakistani bowlers are

But Waqar & Akram did not bowl side-by-side in the World Cup. So your
argument is rather weak...

Mahesh.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: gds@casper.cs.uct.ac.za (Riel Smit)
Subject: Re: SA Side for 1st test
Reply-To: gds@cs.uct.ac.za
Organization: Computer Science Department, University of Cape Town
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 07:51:05 GMT

fkhan@daisy.ee.und.ac.ZA (Feroz Khan) writes:

>Just announced was the SA side to take on India on Friday in the 1st test
>at Kingsmeasd. The side is:
>Hudson, Cood, Wessels, Kirsten, Rhodes, McMillan, Richardson, Henry,
         ^^^^Cook (I'm sure it was just a typo :-)
>Pringle, Donald, Schultz, 12th man : Cronje.

>On stand by is Steven Jack for Alan Donald who is injured. If Donald does
>not recover for the test, then Jack will take his place.

Donald was declared fit this (Friday) morning.  (Or more correctly, I heard 
on the news this morning that he was declared fit :-)
-- 
Riel Smit,  Computer Science                              gds@cs.uct.ac.za
University of Cape Town                      gds%cs.uct.ac.za@rain.psg.com
From: d188sid@utarlg.uta.edu (S RAMACHANDRAN)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Vinod Kambli
Date: 11 Nov 92 06:43:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: utarlg.11NOV199200433205
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


In article <711@wavefront.wti.com>, ravi@wti.com (Ravi Raj) writes...

>In article <5NOV199221285893@utarlg.uta.edu> d188sid@utarlg.uta.edu (S RAMACHANDRAN) writes:
>>I think had W.V.Raman been a Bombayite he would have got a better deal 
>>from the selectors. He was dropped after making 83 on debut in Madras
>>against W.I and Winston Davis, Patterson and Walsh. Believe me if a 
>>Bombay player made 83 on debut all hell would break loose if he were 
>>dropped the next match. Raman made a couple of good 50's in NZ ..and since 
>>then he was given a proper deal. Bombay cricketers like Kambli,Bahutule,
>>Kuruvilla get fantastic press and support from D.B.Veng,S.M.G,etc etc...
>>but T.N players don't have someone w/ enormous clout saying good things abt
>>them. I am not saying Bombay players are being " pushed" unfairly b'cos
>>you sometimes need all the help you can get but T.N players often don't
>>have this advantage. Despite that Raman has shown tremendous promise and
>>some of the players have commented thus:

>Ever heard of a guy called K. Srikkanth? He was given more chances
>than Richard Nixon! He is from TN, and he was selected despite
>repeated failures. Much as I hate to defend the brain dead Indian
>selectors, I have to disagree with you here. W.V. Raman IMO has got
>more than his fair share of chances. 

SURE SRIKKANT WAS GIVEN  CHANCES! Till the start of the Indian tour 
to Pak he was one of our dashing batsmen. It was a strategic ploy
just to have him open the innings...he subsequently failed. But there
is no doubt Srikkant was a really fine player. 


>If there are more Bombayites on the Indian team, it's because they
>are better players. If the best 16 players in the country are all
>from Bombay, I say go ahead and select all of them. Only in India
>do we have this whacko regional quotas and stuff.
> 
I agree w/ you - there are more Bombay players b'cos they are better
players.

>I am not saying that you are suggesting regional quotas, but I don't
>honestly think the selectors discriminate against players from a
>certain region. In fact, I think it is the exact opposite. With their
>passion for regional quotas and what not, they sometimes end up
>selecting players the likes of `Pathetic' Raju, B. Arun, T.A. Sekhar,
>etc. etc.
>-- 
>--
>Ravi N. Raj                                   ravi@wti.com

YOU suggest no regional biases and quotas ..but for 
every B.Arun and T.A.Sekhar you come up w/, I can come up w/ a Dhiraj Parsana,
a Suru Nayak and a Ghulam Parkar...and these guys got in not only b'cos of 
the "Godfather Syndrome" but b'cos they probably played squash w/
Sunny Gavaskar in Bombay Gymkhana.

Sidd.R.
From: shafqat@neuro.duke.edu (Saad Shafqat)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: SA World Cup shock
Date: 13 Nov 92 01:11:59 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <1992Nov12.152613.13842@walter.bellcore.com> shamim@bellcore.com writes:
>

>Sometime later this year England and Australia are slated to lose their veto power 
>in ICC. A majority then will be able to pass a motion.


There you are, Tom.  The English-Australian veto in the ICC.  Unjustified,
anachronistic.  If anyone's being paranoid, its England and Australia for
hanging on to the despicable veto well into 1992.  I reiterate my nausea.


Saad.



--
From: sagrawal@cco.caltech.edu (Sanjay Kumar Agrawal)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: IND vs PRES XI
Date: 8 Nov 1992 18:10:05 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: alumni.caltech.edu

Chasing 305 to win, India were 9 for no loss at the end of the
penultimate day. Earlier, the Presidnt's XI lost their last
7 wickets for 70 odd runs. Srinath took 4 and Shastri 3 wickets.

Sanjay Agrawal
Oracle Corporation
From: abdul@castle.ed.ac.uk (A Majothi)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Testing
Summary: This is a test please ingnore.
Keywords: Testing
Date: 12 Nov 92 12:07:59 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Edinburgh University

This is a test .. please ignore.
From: fkhan@daisy.ee.und.ac.za (Feroz Khan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: SA Tours
Date: 6 Nov 92 06:03:20 GMT
Organization: Dept. Elec. Eng., Univ. Natal, Durban, S. Africa
NNTP-Posting-Host: daisy.ee.und.ac.za

Hi there Netters,

It was announced that South Africa would be involved in two more full lenght
tours, one home and one away by the end of the 1995-96 season. This crowded
programme and the need to continue was the main reason for withdrawing the
World Cup bid (see article SA World Cup shock).

The programme is:

November-December 1992: India in SA (4 tests)
February 1992 : Triangular tournament in SA with Pakistan and WI (ODI only)
August-September 1993 : SA in Sri Lanka (3 tests)
November 1992 : Six nation limited overs series in India.
December 1993 - January 1994 : SA in Australia (3 tests)
February-March 1994 : Australia in SA (3 tests)
July-August 1994 : SA in England (3 tests)
September 1994 : SA in Paksitan (ODI only)
November-December 1994 : New Zealand in SA (3 tests)

A busy schedule.

-----------
Feroz Khan
Third Year Electrical Engineering
University of Natal
Durban
South Africa
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: Sanjay.Naik@launchpad.unc.edu (Sanjay Naik)
Subject: D1, T1
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 05:02:48 GMT

A good day for India. Once again, Kaps gets Jimmy Cook out in the first over.
I think Kapil's had Cook in the first over several times now (the one-dayers
in India and in the opening game of this tour).

Sadiq said that the Indians are not as good against spin nas they were a
few years ago and I agree entirely. We've lost some superb spin players in
Gavaskar, Vengy and Amarnath. But, I don't think Henry's gonna trouble us
much even though we're gonna have to bat last on what looks like a crumbling
wicket. I hope I don't have to eat my words !! 

Every time we've had the good fortune to dismiss Cook cheaply, Wessels has
compensated with a significant knock. I remember him making lots of runs
against India when the Australians were invited for a special one-day
tournament (Ranji celebration ?).

The crowd is a big disappointment though. Just 3000 :-( I think more are
employed to do the cleaning, etc. whenever a game is staged at the Eden
Gardens against any opposition. There must be a reasonable explanation for
such a low turnout. You'd think that SA's first game at home after their
long exile would have brought a larger crowd.

You know what I'm hoping for tomorrow, but this time I'm not going to say
it (in the hope for better luck).

Bye,

Sanjay Naik.

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: bmohan@pepper.rutgers.edu (bulusu mohan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: 199, 299, 499 !
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:54:25 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


Hi folks !

I am posting on this group for the first time so please condone any breach of
protocol. Rest assured it is not intentional.


I just remembered some interesting tidbit that I would like to pose as a 
question.


In test history, which batsmen got the scores of 199 and 299 ? Also, where,
when and against whom ?

Also, in first class cricket, which batsman scored 499 ? (I don't know of any
399 score)


Mohan
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: shamim@bellcore.com (Shamim Naqvi,MRE-2E342,829-4711,,21273)
Subject: Re: Damien Martin
Reply-To: shamim@bellcore.com
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Morristown, NJ
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 23:09:42 GMT

In article 115148SXK129@psuvm.psu.edu,  Spaceman Spiff <SXK129@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>mushtaq mohammed was only 15 when he made his test debut!!
>

Against the WI (Hall and Griffith) at Lahore, 1958-59. The match was at the Gymkhana Club ground (Gaddafi Stadium had not been constructed) also known as Bagh-e-Jinnah. 


	--SAN

Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: shamim@bellcore.com (Shamim Naqvi,MRE-2E342,829-4711,,21273)
Subject: Re: SA World Cup shock
Reply-To: shamim@bellcore.com
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Morristown, NJ
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 14:40:40 GMT

In article 6982@news.duke.edu,  shafqat@neuro.duke.edu (Saad Shafqat) writes:
>In article <1992Nov12.152613.13842@walter.bellcore.com> shamim@bellcore.com writes:
>>
>
>>Sometime later this year England and Australia are slated to lose their veto power 
>>in ICC. A majority then will be able to pass a motion.
>
>
>There you are, Tom.  The English-Australian veto in the ICC.  Unjustified,
>anachronistic.  If anyone's being paranoid, its England and Australia for
>hanging on to the despicable veto well into 1992.  I reiterate my nausea.
>
>
>Saad.
>
Actually, England to their credit never used the veto, officially. 

Privately, of course, many motions were never presented because of the threat of the veto.

	--SAN