HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket

Pakistan 1st innings

Aamir    c Atherton    b Mallender  23  (34/1)
Rameez                 b Pringle    17  (60/3)
Mujtaba                b Mallender   7  (54/2)
Miandad  c Smith       b Pringle     6  (68/4)
Malik    batting                    13
Ul-Haq   c Hick        b Munton      5  (80/5)
Akram    batting                     0
Extras                               9
---------------------------------------
Total   ( for 5 wkts )              80

Pakistan won the toss. Rain has interrupted play several times. 
After Mujtaba was dismissed (54/2), Miandad came in and hit a
four and a two in the same over from Mallender. The next over
from Pringle was a marathon. Rameez was bowled off the first
ball (60/3). Malik edged the next one short of Hick at slip. Three
no balls followed, the last of which had Miandad "caught" at
shortleg by Smith. Wonder of wonders, the next ball was not a
no ball, and Miandad this time was caught by Smith as he prodded
forward again (68/4). Two wickets in a 9 ball over. Rain immediately. 
Tea taken.

After tea, Malik was dropped by Stewart off Munton. Asif Iqbal has been 
all but moaning about the uneven bounce. Haq looked in good form
but played a terrible shot and was caught easily at slip. Wicket
maiden for Munton. Akram is in.

Didn't really hear the England team, but from what I heard it seems
to be : Gooch, Atherton, Smith, Gower, Hick, Stewart, Ramprakash,
Lewis, Pringle, Munton, Mallender. God knows what the batting order
is.

rajeev
From: srd@ukc.ac.uk (S.R.Davies)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Field Hockey
Date: 31 Jul 92 12:46:04 GMT
Reply-To: srd@ukc.ac.uk (S.R.Davies)
Organization: Computing Lab, University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.

In article <342@wavefront.wti.com> ravi@wti.com (Ravi Raj) writes:
>In article <867@hobby.ukc.ac.uk> srd@ukc.ac.uk (S.R.Davies) writes:
>>
>> by inventing our own stupid names for American sports, such as Indoor
>> Netball and Field Wrestling and see how they like it.
>>
>
>It makes sense to call it Field Hockey because of the existence of
>another Olympic sport -- Ice Hockey. It probably would also make
>sense to classify wrestling as Field Wrestling if there existed an
>equivalent sport on ice -- like Ice Wrestling!


     Well the game of Hockey has existed for several hundred years longer
 than either the modern Olympic Games or Ice Hockey, and I do not see
 why it should have it's name changed now. There are two games now ....
 Hockey and Ice Hockey .... no problem.

     Actually, Field Wrestling was a feeble attempt at humour .... it
 was my joke name for (American) Football.

     Regards, Steve.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: rajah@soda.berkeley.edu (Raja S Kushalnagar)
Subject: Cricket in Olympics?
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 20:50:11 GMT

I was startled when I noted that baseball was a full-fledged event
in the Olympics, and had been for quite a while, for it certainly
does not seem to be `widespread', as required by the Olympic charter.
(North America, Far East, and that's about it).  And I can think
of many other sports that are not that widespread either -- e.g.,
pelota, etc.  Though cricket is played mainly by Commonwealth countries,
they are widespread enough -- Europe, Australia, Asia, Americas and
Africa -- five continents, which should qualify.  Though perhaps, not
until the advent of the one day matches in the early eighties, was it 
practical to compress a tournament into two weeks.  Still, one-days
have been around for a long time, and I'm surprised why there has
not been any open debate or bidding to get cricket included in the
Olympics. 

Anyone know if there has been any active bidding for getting cricket
included in the Olympics, and if so, when could we expect it to be
included? 2000 AD?

	-Raja
Disclaimer: No posting can ever be more accurate than h bar over pi. :)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: aamir@cs.sfu.ca (Aamir Husain)
Subject: Pak vs Eng T4
Keywords: D4 2nd session
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 14:25:23 GMT

Pakistan were earlier bowled out for 221
salim malik remaining 82 or so not out,

mallander took 5/50

England are 29/2

target is 99 to win

atherton = 5 lbw Waqar
smith = 0 ct zahid fazal b waqar

pakistan is still fighting hard, akram and waqar bowling really well

Aamir

england 37/2
From: x90mumtaz@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Pakistani Players Use Filthy Language!?
Date: 23 Jul 92 14:26:24 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

In article <92205.035855U28765@uicvm.uic.edu>, <U28765@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
> Salam to Everyone:
> 
> 2) A recent post of an article by Sunil Gavaskar discussing Pakistani
>    cricket team's winning mentality included an excerpt about how the
>    above occurred during Pakistan's tour of India where JM scored 280.
> 
> 
> Asif the Asymptote
> Chicago


I thought that JM scored 280 in Faisalabad, Pakistan

Atif Mumtaz
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: s1172217@giaec.cc.monash.edu.au (Mark Smith)
Subject: All ICC countries
Organization: Monash University College Gippsland, Churchill, 3842, Australia
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:11:39 GMT

Founding Members: Australia, England
Full Members: India, New Zealand, Pakistan, South Africa, Sri Lanka, West
Indies and now Zimbabwe.
Associate members: Argentina (74) Bangladesh(77) Bermuda(66) Canada (68)
Denmark (66) East and Central Africa (66) Fiji (65) Gibraltar (69) Hong Kong (
69) Isreal (74) Kenya (81) Malaysia (67) Netherlands(66) Papua New Guinea (73)
Singapore(74) United Arab Emirates (90) USA (65) West Africa(76)
Affiliate Members: Bahamas(87) Belgium(91) France (87) Germany(91) Italy (84)
Japan(89) Nepal (88) Switzerland (85)

The numbers in the brackets represent the year in which that country was
elected in to that category.

I know that Guensey and Austria also have cricket teams but are not affilated
with the ICC.

This was posted in reply to a question on cricket in the Olympics, there would
be enough sides for this to happen its just a matter of arenas to play the
games and time to play them, I think that even a 50 over a side knockout comp
would take to long.

Mark.
From: karnik@cs.umn.edu (Neeran M. Karnik)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: England XI v Rest of World 1992 July 29
Date: 30 Jul 92 16:28:58 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.

In <1992Jul29.234219.2903@st-andrews.ac.uk> cdcs@st-andrews.ac.uk (Colin D. C. Steele) writes:

>England XI v Rest of World
>55 overs per side

>REST OF WORLD

>  DL Haynes     c Lewis    b Malcolm    28
>  MJ Greatbatch       run  out          43
>  PV Simmons    c Lewis    b Malcolm    10
>  RB Richardson c Rhodes   b Fraser      6
>  MD Crowe      c Cork     b Tufnell    56
>  SR Tendulkar  c Broad    b Lewis     100
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	Wheeeee! At last! He just needed some distinguished company to
	bring out the best in him :-)

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  Neeran  Karnik  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dept. of Computer Science,      | Email: karnik@cs.umn.edu,
University of Minnesota         |        karnik@atto.cs.umn.edu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: sobitha@author.ecn.purdue.edu (Sobitha W Samaranayake)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: T4 D3 PA-18/1
Date: 25 Jul 92 14:16:49 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network


Pakisthan 18/1

Amir is out -1

England 320
Gower 18 n.o
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: karnik@cs.umn.edu (Neeran M. Karnik)
Subject: Re: Question on No Ball
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:04:31 GMT

In <1992Jul29.174339.5475@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu> vu0208@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (!) writes:

>In article <1992Jul29.103407@is.morgan.com> andyc@is.morgan.com (Andrew Coad) writes:
>>I recently called "No Ball" on the first delivery of the game because the bowler
>>had not declared his bowling style to me. In the back of our scorebook it clearly
>>stated that a bowler must decalare his bowling style to the umpire and must also
>>declare any changes to it. As an afterthought,

>So any spinner bowler must tell in advance before he throw a googly,
>or a leg spinner bowls an off spin!!!

	Heavens no! A "bowling style/action" is one of....

	Right arm over the wickets
	Right arm around the wickets
	Left arm over the wickets
	Left arm around the wickets

>> I checked in Wisden for the same
>>ruling but could not find it anywhere - it merely said that a bowler must declare
>>any *change* to his bowling style; no reference was made to the initial style and whether that had to be declared. What do you all think? Was I correct?

	As per my understanding, it is considered "proper" but not necessary to
declare the bowling action before the first ball. And it IS necessary (as you
found in Wisden) to declare a change in action. I have declared a no-ball, and
been no-balled myself for this reason :-(

>NOT AT ALL!! then what fun is left in the game!

	Oh, it's still a funny game all right :-)

>>Andrew Coad

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  Neeran  Karnik  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dept. of Computer Science,      | Email: karnik@cs.umn.edu,
University of Minnesota         |        karnik@atto.cs.umn.edu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: js138@cus.cam.ac.uk (John Sloan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Eng v Pak Day 3 (Close of play)
Keywords: Score
Date: 25 Jul 92 18:50:09 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England


Pakistan 1st innings 197 all out
England 1st innings : overnight 216-1

GA Gooch			?	       135
MA Atherton			b Akram		76
RA Smith	c ?		b ?		42
AJ Stewart			?		 8 (?)
DI Gower			not out		18
GA Hick				b Younis	 1
MR Ramprakash			?		 0
CC Lewis			?		 0
DR Pringle			b ?		 0
NA Mallender			?		 1
TA Munton	c Imzamam	b Mushtaq	 0

Total					       320 all out
	
(Not sure about the order of Hick, Ramprakash.  May have been the other way around)

Wasim Akram	?	?	 40(?)	1
Aqib Javed	?	?	 40(?) 	1
Waqar Younis	30	3	117	5
Mushtaq Ahmed	29.5	6	 60	3

Pakistan 2nd innings

Aamir Sohail	c Stewart	b Mallender	 1
Ramiz Raja	c Atherton	b Munton	63
Asif Mushtaba	c Hick		b Mallender	11
Javed Miandad	c Stewart	b Mallender	 4
Salim Malik			not out		13
Inzmam-Ul-Haq			not out		 2

Total						98 for four

An amazing collapse by England, the last 8 wickets falling for about 28 runs, and David Gower, not the slowest of scorers, left stranded on a mere 18.  Pringle's dismissal was the most unimpressive - he padded up to a ball pitching outside off stump, bat high in the air and it went round the pad to bowl him.

Mallender is bowling well, and cheaply for his three wickets.  Asif Mushtaba's dismissal was from a ball which hit his foot and lobbed to second slip.  Didn't look like it caught the bat on the way past, and Asif clearly didn't think so.  Umpire Palmer did, however.
From: cdcs@st-andrews.ac.uk (Colin D. C. Steele)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: R.S.C.Scores be used more frequently
Date: 23 Jul 92 09:53:42 GMT
Organization: St. Andrews University, Scotland.

In article <3572@keele.keele.ac.uk> csp48@seq1.keele.ac.uk (J.W. Kirriemuir) writes:
>> 	I second this + also earlier proposals to use
>> 	rec.sport.cricket.scores
>> 	for the test match updates.
>
>I "third" this, seems sensible to me.
>
>Colin's opinion is important here, as he is the main contributer of
>scores to the newsgroup (county ones, that is). What do you think,
>Colin?

I'm not particularly fussy where I send them. Up to now I'd sent them to
rsc simply as rscs has had a fairly low profile recently. Also I tried to
send today's scores to both groups but there were technical difficulties 
about getting them to rscs (but I'm sure I can overcome this). I'm willing
to go along with the consensus but it would be handy if others could let
me know what they think.

CDC
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: Rajeev.Pant@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Rajeev Pant)
Subject: Quad and Triple Tons in Ranji Trophy.
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 21:43:15 GMT

QUAD AND TRIPLE TONS IN RANJI TROPHY
------------------------------------

RUNS    PLAYER  	TEAM		VS.		VENUE	SEASON

443*	B.B. Nimbalkar	(Maharashtra)	WI States	Poona	1948-49
377	S. Manjrekar	(Bombay)	Hyderabad	Bombay	1990-91
359*	Vijay Merchant	(Bombay)	Maharashtra	Bombay	1943-44
340	S.M. Gavaskar	(Bombay)	Bengal		Bombay	1981-82
323	A.L. Wadekar	(Bombay)	Mysore		Bombay	1967-68
319	Gul Mohammad	(Baroda)	Holkar		Baroda	1946-47
316*	Vijay Hazare	(Maha)		Baroda		Poona	1939-40
313	W.V. Raman	(Tamil Nadu)	Goa		Panjim	1988-89
303*	Abdul Azeem	(Hyderabad)	Tamil Nadu	Hydrbd. 1986-87
302*	Arjan Kripal	(Tamil Nadu)	Goa		Panjim	1988-89 
        Singh

Note:
-----
W.V. Raman / A. Kripal Singh both scored triple tons in the 1st innings,
of the same match.

Arjan Kripal Singh is the son of A.G. Kripal Singh, a test cricketer of yester
years famous for century on debut (only century). Numerous Indian cricketers
(Lala Amarnath, Surinder Amarnath, Abbas Ali Baig, Hanumant Singh,
Deepak Shodhan?, etc)  suffered the same fate, before the taboo was broken
by G.R. Vishwanath, and later Md. Azharuddin.

Four triple centuries have been scored at Bombay, but only two (by SMG 
and Sanjay Manjrekar) have been scored at the Wankhede Stadium. The other two,
by Merchant and Wadekar, were scored at the older grounds.(Corporation Ground 
and National Stadium?, could some cricket buff throw some light on this).

Kapil Dev scored 326/327 in a game before his Test debut. Was it a school
game or a Ranji game against Services (I can't recall) ? Does anyone remember
that match?

Rajeev

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 
Rajeev Pant
Dept. of Computer Science
Cal. State Univ., Fullerton
CA. - 92634
Tel: (&!$)-$$&-^&#&        <-- A Simple Code to Decipher 

EMAIL: xrpant@ccvax.fullerton.edu
       xrpant@aunix.fullerton.edu
       xrpant@fullerton.edu
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
--
   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:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: wakankar@egr.msu.edu (PUT YOUR NAME HERE)
Subject: Re: Hick in India ....(was Re: England 2nd Innings)
Originator: wakankar@frith.egr.msu.edu
Reply-To: wakankar@egr.msu.edu (PUT YOUR NAME HERE)
Organization: Michigan State University
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 19:07:38 GMT

In article <28JUL199219325965@ctrvx2.vanderbilt.edu> diwadkva@ctrvx2.vanderbilt.edu (Vaibhav A. Diwadkar) writes:

>	ultimately bowled by Waqar.  He has played some innings in recent
>	county games under great pressure, carrying the entire Worcs batting
>	on his shoulders.  Tests are ofcourse a dramatically different story.
>	you know, Indian nettors can easily recall tons of Ranji trophy
>	champion bats who repeatedly failed in the test arena.

	Ashok Mankad comes to mind who used to score a lot of runs in domestic cricket but miserably failed in Test matches.


	Parag
From: 5912ramasubr@vms.csd.mu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: 2ND DAY SCORE
Date: 24 Jul 92 15:14:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: vms.0095E0B1.98700880
Reply-To: 5912ramasubr@vms.csd.mu.edu
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services

Heard on the Beeb
-----------------
Pakistan all out for 197 an hour before lunch on the
second day. Salim Malik scored 82 n.o.
Mallender took 3 wkts. The other three bowlers took 
2 wkts each

In reply
England 76 for no loss shortly after lunch.
Gooch and Atherton both in their mid-twenties.
bye,
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: mohan@phi.mel.dms.CSIRO.AU (Mohan Krishnamoorthy)
Subject: Re: Excitement and Controversy
Organization: CSIRO, Div. of Mathematics & Statistics, Melbourne, Vic., AUSTRALI
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 23:54:33 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.150232.11597@maths.nott.ac.uk> anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) writes:

> In article <1992Jul29.002708.17363@dmpe.csiro.au>
> mohan@phi.mel.dms.CSIRO.AU (Mohan Krishnamoorthy) writes about the

> Gooch run-out decision:

>> I saw the same replay that Kre did (presumably) and I thought it was a
>> terrible decision.

>	What you possibly didn't see [and certainly those listening to the
> radio didn't see!] was the second replay.

[...detalied and irrelevant description of run out deleted...]
[...thanks, all the same...]

>	Summary:  in my view, a mistaken decision, but not "terrible".

If you had read my article thoroughly, you may have gleaned that the
points I made therein were, in summary, the following:

. definition of umpiring mistakes (Type-I and Type-II)
. the unequivocal statement that umpire Palmer made a Type-I mistake
  when giving Gooch not out when the batsman was `proven (to be) out'.
. the need to recognize it as a mistake -- else, progress in umpiring 
  standards will remain a myth
. the need to define the term `allowable mistake'

Right.  You felt that the mistake was not terrible (ie., that it was
actually `allowable').  I do!!  In other words, the mistake was _not_
`allowable'!  Clearly, there then is a need to define the term:

. `thresholding function' for recognizing allowable mistakes

Each of us have our own `thresholding function' and hence, the
differences in the interpretation and the implications of umpiring
mistakes.  Moreover, as someone else pointed out (Shamim Naqvi?), 
there is also the problem of inconsistency in the _application_ of
these mistakes -- more often than not, the euphemism for this is
`given the benefit of the doubt'!!

[...thesis on the Gatting-Rana incident deleted...]

/Mohan 

-------
The human animal differs from the lesser primates in his passion for
lists of "Ten Best".  --  H Allen Smith
-------
Mohan Krishnamoorthy, CSIRO, Division of Mathematics and Statistics,
Private Bag 10, Clayton, Melbourne, VIC 3168, Australia.
Phone: +61 3 542 2263; 	email: mohan@mel.dms.CSIRO.AU
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: jawad@ecst.csuchico.edu (Jawad Ali)
Subject: Re: 4th day of 4th test
Organization: California State University, Chico
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 15:41:07 GMT

In article <1992Jul26.133818.24785@cco.caltech.edu> sagrawal@cco.caltech.edu (Sanjay Kumar Agrawal) writes:
>England are 8 for no loss in their 2nd innings, needing 99 to square the
>series. Earlier they dismissed Pakistan for 221 in their 2nd innings. Malik
>again remained unbeaten on 84 (his batting average is really going to 
>shoot up!)

Salim Malik
		T	I	NO	HS	Runs	Ave.	100's
Tour so far	4	7	2	165	448	89.60	1
Home		39	53	10	119*	2048	47.62	8
Away		32	48	8	165	1820	45.50	2
Total		71	101	18	165	3868	46.60	10

j n a
From: cdcs@st-andrews.ac.uk (Colin D. C. Steele)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: County Championship 1992 July 27 (Monday)
Date: 27 Jul 92 21:08:57 GMT
Organization: St. Andrews University, Scotland.


County Championship 1992 July 27 (Monday)
Day 3 of 3

At Abergavenny
Glamorgan (5) 276 (A Dale 67, H Morris 71, GD Rose 4-59)
and 308-5 dec (H Morris 117, MP Maynard 57)
Somerset (7) 250-5 dec (AN Hayhurst 70)
and 293-8 (ND Burns 71*, GD Rose 50)
MATCH DRAWN


At Cheltenham
Sussex (8) 324 (DM Smith 81, NJ Lenham 83, AP Wells 63, CA Walsh 4-39)
and 242-9 dec (NJ Lenham 52, MCJ Ball 5w))
Gloucestershire (22) 221 (GD Hodgson 82, B Donelan 6-77)
and 346-6 (CWJ Athey 181, RC Russell 57)
GLOUCESTERSHIRE won by 4 WICKETS


At Leicester
Leicestershire (21) 193 (TJ Boon 58, MC Ilott 4w, NA Foster 4w)
and 230 (TJ Boon 52, NE Briers 61, SJW Andrew 4-54)
Essex (4) 75 (PA Nixon 4c)
and 280 (PJ Prichard 106, DJ Millns 5-67)
LEICESTERSHIRE won by 68 RUNS


At Lords
Middlesex (23) 366 (MA Roseberry 172, MW Gatting 90, PJ Berry 6w)
and 159-3 (MA Roseberry 81)	
Durham (3) 232 (PJ Berry 76, PCR Tufnell 5-83, JE Emburey 4-94)
and 118 (JE Emburey 5-43)
MIDDLESEX won by 175 RUNS

At Birmingham
Nottinghamshire (23) 415-7 dec (RT Robinson 189, M Saxelby 66, GW Mike 61*)
and 197-3 dec (RT Robinson 84, P Johnson 107*)
Warwickshire (4) 266-8 dec (BN French 6c)
and 229 (Pennet 4-58)
NOTTINGHAMSHIRE won by 117 RUNS


At Worcester
Derbyshire (5) 246 (PD Bowler 50, JE Morris 67, SR Lampitt 4w,
                    RK Illingworth 4w)
and 285-2 dec (PD Bowler 100*, CJ Adams 140*)
Worcestershire (7) 266 (TS Curtis 86)
and 162-3 (TS Curtis 96, WPC Weston 50*)
MATCH DRAWN


TABLE                  Pld.  Won  Btg.   Blg.   Tot.

1    Essex              15    7    45     40    197
2    Leicestershire     15    6    28     42    166
3    Nottinghamshire    13    6    35     33    164
4    Warwickshire       14    4    33     45    142
5    Kent               13    5    34     27    141
6    Hampshire          14    4    41     34    139
7    Northamptonshire   14    4    41     33    138
8    Middlesex          14    3    43     39    130
9    Worcestershire     15    3    39     42    129

10   Derbyshire         14    4    29     35    128
     Somerset           14    3    40     40    128
12   Sussex             14    3    40     37    125
13   Gloucestershire    15    3    29     42    119
14   Surrey             14    3    38     30    116
15   Lancashire         15    1    48     41    105
16   Durham             14    2    31     36     99
17   Yorkshire          13    2    34     32     98
18   Glamorgan          12    1    26     28     70

CDC
From: rrveerab@unity.ncsu.edu (Radhakrish Veerabadran)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: JUST THE SCORES MAN!
Date: 24 Jul 92 16:37:30 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University Project Unity

Is there any newsgroup that will just let us know the scores of recent
matches that are happening in this world and where there are no stupid 
comments and arguments that are prevailing in this group. If you know please let me know.
Krishnan.
From: craa27@vaxa.strath.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Run Out by the Bowler
Date: 30 Jul 92 11:12:38 GMT
Organization: Strathclyde University VAX Cluster

In article <1992Jul29.174322@axion.bt.co.uk>, dgrove@axion.bt.co.uk (David Grove) writes:
> 
> Wht has it been rammed down my (and many other's) throat by various cricket
> gurus that for the bowler to run out the non-stricking batsman before
> delivering the ball is so unsporting.
> 
> I once performed the dastardly(?) deed many years ago in a youth game (the
> fact that I'd been hit for 44 of 4 overs, with no wickets and numerous dropped
> catches may have prompted my action) and got a right rollocking the from
> the umpire (*their* umpire and for all I knew may have been the batsman's
> father).
> 
> I still maintain that if the non-striker leaves his ground before the ball
> is bowled then he deserves to be run out and like to think that if I was
> batting then would accept the outcome with the only anger being directed at
> myself for lacking concentration/being stupid.
> 
> Should the batsman attempt (unsuccessfully) a suicidal single (an equally stupid act and one that I'm not totally unfamiliar with) than the fielders
> quite rightly have no qualms about running him out.
> 
> What's the general opinion of RSC on this subject?
> 
> Dave Grove.  

I think that is the act of the scoundrel fit only for employment in the
Telecommunications Monopoly.

However your row with the Umpire would no doubt have been conducted in far
more pleasant and friwendly terms. Indeed you would probably have already
taken several wickets had third country Umpires been employed.

How many more such facts must be unearthed before the geriatocracy that
runs English Cricket resposnds to the aspirations of every cricketer.

-- 
Steve Holmes 
craa27@uk.ac.strath.vaxa
Strathclyde University
041 522 4400 X 3576
From: jawad@ecst.csuchico.edu (Jawad Ali)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: T4 D4 next over
Date: 31 Jul 1992 14:08:20 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


England are 65/4, still 34 away from victory.

Mushtaq at the top of his form.  Ramparkash is the new man in.

Stewart c. Moin b. Mushtaq .....2

Ignore the bowling stats that I just gave for Mushtaq.  He
has 2/10.

j n a