HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rajiv@dvorak.amd.com (Rajiv Malhotra)
Subject: Re: Ravi Shastri (Indian team for 1st test)
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.; Austin, Texas
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 23:50:12 GMT

In article <C19Iyn.3B0@cs.uiuc.edu> bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao) writes:
>
>In the absence of Shastri you have to eiter weaken the batting 
>and go with 5 bowlers and 5 bats plus More (why not Yadav???),
>and use Prabhakar to open the batting!!  Thats just great -- we
>ask the most consistent bowler overthe last two series to
>opne both the batting and bowling -- a good way to burn him out...
>
>or go in with only 4 bowlers..  Just whhat we need -- have Kapil
>bowl another 30-40 overs/inning and blow his career to pieces..
>
>There is another problem -- whichever lineup you choose,
>
>Sidhu,Raman/Prabhakar,Azhar,Tendulkar,Amre,Kambli,Kapil there
>is only ONE grafter in the first 7 bats -- Amre -- in fact only
>one person capable of putting his head down and building an innings
>in the entire side.  Everyone else is a strokeplayer -- dazzling
>when he comes off, but as Shamim said "a surefire recipe for disaster
>in the Tests".

All the issues you brought up have been troubling me too. Maybe,
just maybe Ajay Sharma is the answer. He is an allrounder.
A much better bat then a bowler though. The other choice is 
Chauhan, a much better bowler than a bat. 

>
>Finally, since I believe we must have 5 bowlers, it allows much more
>stability to the lower order -- if we choose 5 bowlers for the 1st
>Test -- we will have a tail of Srinath, Kambli, and Raju -- 
>reminiscent of the Pras,Bedi,Chandra tail where 8 down = all out
>most often -- with the instability of the Indian top order, this
>does not bode well....
>

It beats the hell out of me as to why Yadav has been dropped. He
is supposedly a much better bat than More ( Is this something 
to do with the 30 xtras in the 2nd ODI?). This would allow more
freedom to go in with 5 regular bowlers.  The Indian XIV has
3 regular spinners and for Calcutta it is likely that at at least 
two would end up playing. Since Raju has not been very adept at
taking wickets, Chauhan is worth a try.


>
>No question in my mind.  We need Ravi Shastri to open the Test team, 
>and we need him badly!

I agree. I think we will see him in both the tests and ODIs
as soon as he is fit. He will strengthen the ODI team by being
the 5th bowler AND the slogger.

>
>Bharat

Rajiv

-- 
  
--- There is no future in time travel.
 
****     Rajiv Malhotra    *** 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: SAbbas@massey.ac.nz (S.G. Abbas)
Subject: Re: The best ever Test  XIs
Organization: Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
X-Reader: NETNEWS/PC Version 2c
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 00:22:08 GMT


Regarding Pakistani IX I will agree with you except with your Captain's
choice. My vote will be Mustaqu as (C) and Imran Khan as (VC).

S.G.Abbas@massey.ac.nz
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: pshah@cup.hp.com (Pankaj Shah)
Subject: Re: India Vs England full score card.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:23:39 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.8 PL6]

: 	England
: 	=======
:         .
:         .
: Extras					30
					       ^^^^
Wow!  That is a LOT of extras in 50 overs!  Was one of the Indian bowlers 
having a bit of trouble?
From: atul@theory.lcs.mit.edu (Atul Shrivastava)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Couple of World Cup 92 stats needed
Date: 21 Jan 93 16:53:50 GMT
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science


Hi,

  I'd like to know the answer to following questions related to WC92 held
in Oz/NZ last year.

   1. Which batsman scored the maximum runs. (including finals/semis)
   2. Which batsman had an average of 100+ in WC 92?
   3. Which bowler took maximum number of wickets in WC92 (including
      finals/semis)
   4. Who was the most economical bowler (in terms of bowling averages)
      during WC92.

Thanks,
--Atul
From: drinnen@deakin.edu.au (Philip Shead)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: World cup stats exact figures.
Date: 22 Jan 1993 02:07:45 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

	Well seeing the general confusion and incorrect answer given for the
questions. I reach for my ABC Australian Cricket Almanac (great book).
 The most runs :
M.D. Crowe 9 matches 9 in. 5no 456 runs 114.00 avge 90.66 S/R
 also  the one to average greater than one hundred.
Most Wickets :
W. Akram  10 matches 89.4 overs 18 wickets at 18.78 
Most economical
D.N. Patel 79 overs for 245 runs at 51.69 runs per hundred balls
next was Whitney,Derek Pringle, and McDermott 
On average D.A. Reeve 8 wickets at 15.75 is the lead.

--
PS. Does anybody have the score from the Queensland v Tasmania match.
Did it actually start on Thursday?
-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That was drinnen@sol.cc.deakin.oz.au and if you don't agree, well I don't care.
Just remember most people have the same problem as Arthur Dent :
'I seem to have this tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle'
From: drinnen@deakin.edu.au (Philip Shead)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Australia name a 14 man squad for fifth test.
Date: 26 Jan 1993 07:49:40 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

The big news  is that Jo Angel (LHB RFM) has been placed in to the 
sqaud in preference to better performed Brendan Julian (RHB LFM)
(Quick quick there's two exact opposites for your ambidextrous's).
  The fourteen man squad includes the intial twelve for the Adelaide test
and late inclusion Justin Langer. 
The squad is ;
Taylor (vc), Boon, Langer, M Waugh, Martyn, S Waugh, Border, Healy
Dodemaide, Angel, Warne, Hughes, May, McDermott. 

There is a lot of conjecture over  wether Australia will play two
spinners and there have been suggestions that they may play just
five batsmen (Yeh right after 7-75 in adelaide). The theory seems to 
be that they wouldn't select Angel if he wasn't going to play and the
two spinners did a lot of damage in Adelaide. I am dissapointed they
didn't bit the bullet and dump Taylor, his form is rotten and Hayden's is
great. Even a lot of commentators are uggesting that he should be dropped.
My suggested team (not from sqaud)
Hayden, Boon, Langer, M Waugh, Martyn, Border, Healy, Julian, May, Hughes 
McDermott

My team from squad
Taylor, Boon, Langer, M Waugh, Martyn, Border, Healy, Angel, May, Hughes
McDermott

Likely team :
Taylor,Boon,?????,M Waugh,??????,Border, Healy,??????,?????, Hughes, McDermott.

I have no idea which way they will I guess Langers in and nobody knows
with the spinners.

And finally  1 run win, who said test cricket is dead.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: rohanc@leland.Stanford.EDU (Rohan Koduvayur Kri Chandran)
Subject: Re: Akram
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 04:23:15 GMT

In article <728103454@lear.cs.duke.edu> azhar@duke.cs.duke.edu (D. Salman [Quintessential] Azhar) writes:
>In article <1993Jan26.222152.24592@leland.Stanford.EDU> rohanc@leland.Stanford.EDU (Rohan Koduvayur Kri Chandran) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan26.200402.18044@cs.sfu.ca> apurva@cs.sfu.ca (Apurva Desai) writes:
>>>That would not only be a loss to Pakistan cricket but also to world cricket.
>>>I hope it doesn't mark the end of The Best Bowler In The World Today.
>>er... where does Curtly Ambrose come into this????????
>>Rohan
>
>Curtly ranks himself second to Wasim, with Waqar coming in thirs.
>Several cricketing enthusiast will have problems seeing Waqar below
>Wasim, let alone Curtly.. Me... I rank Wasim, Curtly, and Waqar in top
>three, with the final ranking depending on current form.
>
>	   Salman [expert commentator] Azhar
>
>
I'm glad someone can see a way to differentiate between these three and rank
them accordingly :-) I for one can do no more than say they are the best three
bowlers around today. I would have problems putting any one of them above the
others.

Rohan

--
*******************************************************************************
Manchester United Football Club		*  INDIA - winners of nothing in
_______________________________		*          recent cricket history.
Leading the way in the nineties		*
1990 F.A.Cup				*   ODIs - Eng 1  India 1  
1991 Cup Winners Cup			*  TESTs - Eng 0  India 0
1993 League Champions ???		*
1993 F.A. Cup ???                       *  KAPIL DEV - 412
*******************************************************************************
Rohan Chandran				             rohanc@leland.stanford.EDU
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 09:01:22 EST
From: Spaceman Spiff <SXK129@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Selfish Gavaskar & Shastri

>It seems you never watched that match but only saw the misleading statistics.
>For chasing 333 you need to start right from the first over or simply quit,
>staying throughout taking singles getting out at the end in trying to
>accelerate at a time when he could have only improved his stats & thats what
>he did, yes 83 off 96 will look good but not when its 7.4 r/o required or does
>he expect the tail-enders to make-up the damage done by him in last few overs.

well, perhaps you didn't watch the match.  your comments seem to be
motivated more by personal prejudice than anything.  in that match.  india
lost 2 quick wickets and were something like 20 for 2.  if gavaskar had got
out, the indian batting would have totally collapsed given its fragile nature
at the time.  kapil was having a terrible series as a batsman, vengsarkar
wasn't playing, amarnath was having a nightmare series and shastri hadn't
developed into a reliable batsman yet.  the man in was malhotra, who had a
terrible time initially, and just couldn't get started. given the dependence
of the indian batting on gavaskar, gavaskar played a pretty good innings.
he really didn't get the kind of support he could have. malhotra scored
65 off 70 balls (acclerating late). but india never had a chance.
or perhaps you would have preferred it if gavaskar had got out and india
was dismissed for about 150 or so.

>Anyone who watched that match on TV may remember the expert commentator
>Faroukh Engineer saying-"now he has started hitting sixers when we've
>allready packed our calculators, why didn't he do that earlier?"

i wouldn't give any credence to what faroukh engineer says. that guy is either
gushing with praise or damning the batsman. in spite of all the hype, he really
wasn't that great a test cricketer. he didn't score many runs and had only
about 82 victims in about 40 tests. he was in no position to criticise anyone.

Stay cool,
Spaceman Spiff

Non illegitimati carborundum          Don't let the bastards get you down
From: rajesh@ivy (Rajesh Raman)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Selfish Gavaskar & Shastri
Date: 26 Jan 93 23:03:53 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: ivy.wpi.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Bhaskar Natarajan (bnataraj@uceng.uc.edu) wrote:


	Please respond to Mr. Spaceman's response that India were 2
	wickets down and that Ashok Malhotra didn't look in too good a
	shape. BTW, I don't remember that match. 
--

Rajesh Raman

--
From: wcc@cup.portal.com (wcc - usa)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: What happened ??
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 14:33:17 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world

What happened in the recent World Cup series held in OZ??

We have heard nothing (Only just found this newsgroup) and was
wondering how OZ faired??

Any news anyone can give me on the 92/93 series (One day, Test, etc.)
would be appreciated.

Waiting to here. (A Cricket sick Aussie !)

Rgds,
Darryl
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: karnik@cs.umn.edu (Neeran M. Karnik)
Subject: Re: Couple of World Cup 92 stats needed
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 21:22:13 GMT

In <1993Jan21.165350.27882@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> atul@theory.lcs.mit.edu (Atul Shrivastava) writes:

>  I'd like to know the answer to following questions related to WC92 held
>in Oz/NZ last year.

	I would too :-)

>   1. Which batsman scored the maximum runs. (including finals/semis)
>   2. Which batsman had an average of 100+ in WC 92?
>   3. Which bowler took maximum number of wickets in WC92 (including
>      finals/semis)
>   4. Who was the most economical bowler (in terms of bowling averages)
>      during WC92.


	Oh, by the way, could the resident statisticians pleeeeease post
the answers to #2 and #3 above a.s.a.p?? There's a reason for this, and I
suspect Atul knows it too :-) Actually, there's a contest on BBC World
Service - a cricket quiz. Here are the three questions:

1. Which team made the lowest score in the WC92?

	Of course it was Pakistan vs. England...

2. & 3. Same as 2 & 3 above.

	So, let's all send in our entries! Who knows? One of us might
get lucky and win the prize (which I think is a cricket book produced
by the Beeb).

	Incidentally, there was a similar contest after the football
world cup of 1990, with three questions, and a 'lucky draw' to find
three winners, live on Sportsworld, and believe it or not, yours truly
was one of the winners!! I couldn't believe it at first, hearing my
name (badly mispronounced, but I'm not complaining) on the Beeb :-) My
prize was a superb book on the history of the football world cup, with
descriptions of EVERY game ever played in the WC (autographed by -
gosh, whatshisname... the guy who scored 3 goals in the 1966 finals for
England at Wembley? Geoff Hurst?)

	So, there's hope! Maybe one of us can win this one! Dig out
your records... The address to send your postcards to is:

	Cricket Quiz
	BBC World Service Sport
	Bush House, London
	UK.

>--Atul


     +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
     | Neeran M. Karnik | #2 fan of Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar on r.s.c.  :-> |
     | Dept. of CompSci.| "I am Sachin's number one fan" - Sunil Gavaskar  |
     | U of Minnesota   | "A jewel in India's crown" - Tony Cozier         |
     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: farrell@coral.cs.jcu.edu.au (John Farrell)
Subject: Re: Rule Changes for West Indies (was Re: West Indies team...) 
Organization: James Cook University
Date: 27 Jan 93 01:38:49 GMT

In <1993Jan26.032228.12202@ucc.su.OZ.AU> mikef@dph1.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Blind Boy Grunt) writes:
>There are two other factors pointing to the removal of this law: the West
>Indians pace bowlers are very adept at adjusting their length so that they
>are bowling short balls that rise just below shoulder height (I would think
>these deliveries are in fact more intimidating than bouncers); and that 
>the general consensus in the cricket world (commentators, ex-players,
>newspapers, rsc, my friends...) is that it is a silly rule.

  Yes, it is a silly rule. *All* balls over shoulder height should be no
balls. If a bowler can't intimidate a batsman by bowling at his chest or his
elbow, then the bowler is lacking technique.

Friendless
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: khans@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (sanjay.a.khan)
Subject: Re: Madan Lal
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:05:13 GMT

In article <s!k3qbn@rpi.edu> divaka@rpi.edu writes:
>Thank you very much for the Madan Lal update. I always admired him for
>his spirit. He would always give hundred and fifty percent of himself
>to his team. He was perhaps limited in talent, but always used it to 
>the fullest. One of the greatest tryers of Indian cricket. Nice to know
>that he is equally enthusiastic at every level of the game.
>                                Thanks again,
>                                                        ajay

Still remember the fantastic catch he took to dismiss
Peter Toohey in one of the Tests during India's tour 
down under in 19777-8 (Bedi v/s Simpson). He had to have 
run at least 30 yards to his left along the fine leg fence
before divivg full length to pick up the miscued hook.
Truly one of the memorable catches of all time.

Sanjay Khan
From: vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com (Umesh Vaghela)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: India England News....
Date: 25 Jan 93 11:32:39 GMT
Reply-To: vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com (Umesh Vaghela)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


Last couple of days have been both good and bad for England.
Good for the reason that Graham Gooch and Robin Smith scored centuries
against India-U25's and Graeme Hick also getting some runs, though Mike
Artherton failed to score a single in the first innings against U25's.

The bad thing for England has happened is that Phil DeFreitas, probably
the most effective bowler of England, has aggarevated a groin injury and
is most certainly out of the first test match against India if not out of
the rest of the series. Devon Malcolm is suffering from a viral infection
in his throat though he came today to bowl against the U25's and took
three wickets.

The other worry for England is their spinners. John Embury got hit all over
the ground in earlier matches, and is now out with some injury.
Ian Salisbury and Phil Tufnell got their spin thrashed by a little known
U25 batsman K***** who took 19 off one of Tufnell's overs, and Salisbury
gave some 40 runs for his six overs.

This brings in a big bowling problem for England. The only other bowlers
england have are Lewis, Reeve and Hick (part-time). Reeve has suffered the
same fate as the other bowlers, Hick will be concentrating on his batting
as the selectors knife is hanging over his neck, this leaves Lewis who is
yet to show a consistency in his bowling.

So don't be surprised if you see both sides scoring huge totals. Indian
spinners may play a major role in the test.

Lets wait and see. I wish I could be there.............wish..wish..wish.

--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                            Umesh Vaghela                                |
|            Digital Equipment Corporation - Reading, Berks, UK.          |
|                                            _ _ _ _ _ _ _       (_\|/_)  |
|   E-mail : vaghela@marvin.enet.dec.com    | | | | | | | |TM    (`o_o')  |
|            vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com     |d|i|g|i|t|a|l|       \'U`/   |
|            vaghela@wikkit.enet.dec.com    |_|_|_|_|_|_|_|       (___)   |
|            vaghela@ikabod.reo.dec.com                                   |
|       @'                      \O                                        |
| ___  /\                        /\  ___                                  |
| |||_/\_\*_______________________/\_|||                                  |
|All views & opinions expressed here are entirely my own and NOT digital's|
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: rakesh@ecr.mu.oz.au (Rakesh DESAI)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Tim May v Greg Matthews
Date: 26 Jan 93 22:29:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: mulga.9302709.2881
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia

In article <9301260027.AA16531@eros.cc.deakin.OZ.AU>, drinnen@deakin.edu.au (Philip Shead) writes:
> 	Well in one innings Tim May has taken more wickets than Greg Matthews
> would take in a 5 test series. I assume this means Greg Matthews will never
> play a test again (I hope).

You are right.  I guess Greg Matthews concentrated too much on his
batting than his bowling and forgot that Australia needs a good
offspinner rather than an O.K. batsman.

>  Sqaud for England IMHO
> Langer 
> Hayden
> Boon
> Martyn
> M Waugh
> Taylow
> Border
> Healy
> Zoehrer
> McDermott
> Hughes
> Dodemaide
> Reid
> Julian
> May
> Warne
> ******** who's number 17.
> O'Donnell, Jones I have no idea.

Despite my previous Anti-Mark Taylor and Anti-Steve Waugh feelings I
believe that both will be selected for England because of their previous
record.   And to be fair to Steve Waugh he hasn't done very badly in
Test Matches.  My squad for England will look like, IMHO ofcourse

Openers
+++++++
1) Mark Taylor (vice-captain)
2) David Boon
3) Matthew Hayden

Middle Order Batsmen
++++++++++++++++++++
4) Justin Langer
5) Mark Waugh
6) Steve Waugh
7) Damien Martyn
8) Dean Jones  ( I never said I am unbiased :-})
9) Allan Border (captain)

Wicket Keepers
++++++++++++++
10) Ian Healy
11) Tim Zoehrer (any better suggestions Berry, Emery, etc ?)

Spinners
++++++++
12) Tim May
13) Shane Warne

Pace Bowlers
++++++++++++
14) Craig McDermott
15) Merv Hughes
16) Mike Whitney (Reid would be ideal but his fitness can't be trusted)
17) Paul Reiffel  (A replacement for Alderman is needed and Reiffel is
			the best prospect to move the ball around )

Any comments?  

Before Ashes I guess 14 will be selected for NZ.  My guess is from above
17, Dean Jones, Tim Zoehrer and Mike Whitney may be dropped. Jones and
Whitney because of injury and second WK may not be taken in 14.

further comments?

rakesh

ps:  Yesterday's test was a beauty.  After 1986 Aus-Ind tie (which I saw
on telly live) this was the best possible test I have ever seen.  I
would have loved a result like tie.  1 run victory to WI is very cruel
justice.
************************************************************************
*   Rakesh Desai, Mech & Manf Eng, Uni of Melbourne, Parkville,Vic 3052*
*   email: rakesh@ecr.mu.oz.au *(BH)+61 3 344 6728  +61 3 328 2258(AH) *
************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: bnataraj@uceng.uc.edu (Bhaskar Natarajan)
Subject: Re: Selfish Gavaskar & Shastri
Organization: University of Cincinnati
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 22:14:02 GMT

In article <93024.230719SXK129@psuvm.psu.edu> Spaceman Spiff <SXK129@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>many, you are so dumb that dan quayle could take lessons from you.

	There is no need for this.

>the only reason india came back to tie the hockey match was because west
>germany took off their best few players. bills won because they got a few
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	They tanked the match you mean ?? BTW, do you acknowledge that
	India TRIED ??

>calls in their favor and houston choked.
>when kirti azad won the game for india, the total being chased was 197 in about
>50 overs. in the jam match, the total was 334 in 45 overs. can you even begin
>to comprehend the difference? there is almost an order of magnitude difference.
				^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	Agreed there is no parallel between the two games, but anyone could
see that there was a PALPABLE difference in the attitude of the Indians
(rather between Azad in the day-night and Gavaskar in **that farce of a match**
	
>in the first case, even tho' wickets fell early, the runs required was still a
>very gettable 100 in about 20-odd overs. the required run rate never went over
> 8 or so. in the second match the runs required was 250+ in about 30-0dd overs.
>and its pretty obvious that any team would rather chase 140 in 20 overs than
>350 in 50 overs even tho' the required run rate is the same. the sheer number
>of runs scored by the WI, coupled with their marvellous pace attack, put the
>game out if india's reach. but, you in your infinite wisdom would have
>preferred that india slog from the beginning and lose by 200 runs.

	The situation in that game for India was no different than what
the Sri Lankans faced when we smashed 300 in 40 overs... the difference
was that they went down with their guns blazing !  (If i'm right the Windies
scored 345-4odd in 45-47 odd overs... a RR reqd. of 7.5 odd at the BEGINNING
of the game. The RR reqd. went 8+ in the 10th over and was out of reach 
by over 20. That is why, ACTION was needed (much like Mahanama and Gurusinghe
gave in that Bombay match) and not a sheet anchor role. GEEEEZ ! 

	And just look at stats and you'll see that it was NOT the Pace Attack
of WI that operated in the bigger chunk of the inning !

	And do you prefer we lose by 200 runs after trying or 100 runs 
without trying ?

>>In a limited overs either you win or lose,
>no shit, sherlock!

	Look, there is no need for this. Why do we have to get personal ?

>Stay screwed,
>Spaceman Spiff

	And this... Look Spaceman, i really admire your knowledge of the
game and like reading your articles, but this is going too far.

Cheers,
Bhaskar { CNN ranks the Bearcats at #6 and Duke at #7, Wheeee !!!!}