HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: banarji@unixg.ubc.ca (Ajai Banarji)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Cricket Obituaries
Date: 7 Nov 1992 02:41:01 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

		Cricket Obituaries

  Here is a list of Test players who have passed away in the past few years
(since mid-1989). Most of this information is from the Wisdens of the
relevant years.

Jeff Stollmeyer (WI)	Sep 10 89
E. G. Mcleod (NZ)	Sep 14 89
H. B. Cave (NZ)		Sep 15 89
Norman Yardley (Eng)	Oct  4 89
Andy Roberts (NZ)	Oct 26 89
Rajindernath (Ind)	Nov 22 89
"Gubby" Allen (Eng)	Nov 29 89
J. Hardstaff jr (Eng)	Jan  1 90
Graeme Hole (Aus)	Feb 14 90
Leslie Ames (Eng)	Feb 26 90
Colin Milburn (Eng)	Feb 28 90
H. G. Owen-Smith (SA)	Feb 28 90
D. V. Dyer (SA)		Jun 18 90
M. J. Hilton (Eng)	Jul  8 90
J. D. Lindsay (SA)	Aug 31 90
Len Hutton (Eng)	Sep  6 90
Frank King (WI)		Dec 23 90
Miran Bux (Pak)		Feb  8 91
Bill Ponsford (Aus)	Apr  6 91
E. L. McCormick (Aus)   Jun 28 91
H. J. Butler (Eng)	Jul 17 91
F. R. Brown (Eng)	Jul 24 91
P. E. Jones (WI)	Nov 21 91
P. G. Z. Harris (NZ)	Nov 30 91
Mahmood Hussain (Pak)	Dec 24 91
Bill O'Reilly (Aus)     Oct  6 91

Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: pvr@argo.rice.edu (PVR Narasimha Rao)
Subject: Re: (none)
Organization: Rice University
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:13:51 GMT

In article <9211100123.AA24278@planck.ece.scarolina.edu>, rajagopa@charlie.ece.scarolina.edu (Sundararaman Rajagopal) writes:


|> That leaves us with either Jadeja or Amre.I would say Amre since he is a test
|> match player and has played well in the limited chances he has got.Also Jadeja
|> primarily being an opener will not fit into the middleorder.Also it is not
|> advisable at this stage to keep changing his order in the batting lineup.


Very sanely said.

We must decide between Raman and Jadeja and play _only one_ of them. If we
are indecisive and play both (with one of them coming in the middle order),
it doesn't look convincing.

Jadeja has never played in the middle order (I'm not considering first down
as a part of the middle order) except in the World Cup match against Aus.
There's no point in mindlessly manipulating the batting positions to fit
the guys we want. Of course, it may pay off, but it's a risk not worth
taking.

I think the only decisions to be taken are

(1) Who should be Shastri's opening partner: Raman or Jadeja?

(2) (a) Should Amre make his test debut or should we play 5 specialist
        bowlers?

    (b) If it is the second, should we play Raju or should we play
        Banerjee/Chetan as the fifth specialist bowler?

Definitely (1) is a tough one. Though a double century against a pretty bad
team doesn't mean anything as far as the ability to face Donald's pace is
concerned, it seems to be unfair to young Jadeja to ignore him. But, Raman
hasn't done too badly against Zim. However there's a difference between Zim
and SA. It's a very interesting situation. Let's wait and see what they'll do.

I think it makes sense to play Amre because Shastri seems to be getting back
his bowling rhythm. He can be the 4.5th bowler. Moreover, Banerjee, Chetan,
Raju are not in a great form either.


|> Discussions welcome!
|> 
|> Raj.

PVR
From: pieter@ford.ee.up.ac.za
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Wessels out on 118, SA 207/6
Date: 13 Nov 1992 08:43:18 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Almost at the end of the day's play Kumble striked again and SA is in
deep trouble at 207/6. Rhodes was caught bat-pad off Kumble for 41,
McMillan got 4 (I missed that) and Wessels was caught by Azhar in 1st
slip of a Kumble googly.

Now India just have to wrap up the tail. In at bat is Richardson (1),
Henry (0) and to come Pringle, Donald and Schultz, three no 11 bats
competing for the same spot :-)
From: pieter@ford.ee.up.ac.za
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: SA Cricket this weekend
Date: 5 Nov 1992 00:09:13 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

The Indian team for the game against an invitation team at Centurion
Park in Pretoria will be announced later today after an inspection of
a pitch that should give some support to pace/seam bowling. More is
fit and available for this game. The SA team for the first test will
be announced on Monday at Centurion Park during the tea break. Other
games starting tomorrow are Western Province vs Transvaal, Free State
vs Eastern Province, Natal vs Border.
From: KSRAO@power.ee.ndsu.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: NZ v Zim T2 D4 close of play
Date: 11 Nov 92 05:56:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: deepthou.9211111756.AA03893
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

NZ v Zim D4 post lunch  Updated at 13:55 GMT
  
      Zimbabwe lost three more wickets before lunch and Houghton declared their
first innings twenty minutes before lunch, with 52 runs behind. It makes Zim
283 for 9 declared. S'oua had five wickets. His figures were 5 for 76 when
bagged his fifth wicket. His final figures were 5 for 85

      NZ are 21 for 1 when Latham was out for 10. Greatbatch is the other
opener with 9.
      NZ are 100 for 3. Greatbatch was out for 13 and Andrew Jones for 38.
Martin Crowe is on 31 and Rutherford on 16.

      At the end of the fourth day's play NZ are 187 for 4. Crowe was lbw to
Tricos and Rutherford is at the crease with 57.
From: KSRAO@power.ee.ndsu.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: WI v WA D1 close of play
Date: 6 Nov 1992 07:04:45 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

    WI v WA  (four day game at WACA) D1 close of play.

     West Indies were all out for 280 in their innings just before the close of
play. The chief scorers are:

Lara 55, Haynes 52, Adams 52 and Logie 49.
Joe Angel Julian took five wickets each Joe Angel's figures are 5 for 59. WI
were 65 for for 1 but they lost four wickets starting with Haynes' at 117, in a
space of 6 overs for 22 runs.

     The latest score from Centurion Park (at 12:55 GMT) is : Board President's
team 172 for 4.


Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: ccrob@uqvax.cc.uq.oz.au
Subject: Re: Australian Selection
Organization: The Prentice Centre, Uni of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 06:20:30 GMT

In article <1992Nov13.101731.1@cc.curtin.edu.au>, operator@cc.curtin.edu.au writes:
>  
> I was wondering what's happening with the selection for the Aussie team to meet
> the WI's in the coming Tests.
> Just for Aussie cricket sake, with the coming Ashes series not too far away,
> shouln't the Australian selection for the Wi's series be focused with the 
> appointment of a new captain,which of course means that the dropping of Border
> is imminent.I am no critic of Border who has done a wonderful job for Australia
> as batsman and captain,just that he is already way past his prime and also that
> Australian cricket must look beyond Border,the time is just right.

I wouldn't think that with the most important test series for Australia since
1989 about to get underway that the time is right to drop the only experienced
captain in the Australian side. (Sure a couple of them have captained before,
but there is no obvious, experienced successor at this stage). And then on top
of that expect the poor bugger to captain the side in England.

I think you'll find that the Australian selectors are doing what you suggest,
but in a more controlled manner - allowing two younger prospects in Healy and
Taylor show what they've got.

As far as form goes - the man takes important wickets, and, as it happens, was
one of the few batsman to leave Sri Lanka with any runs against his name. You'd
want to have a good argument to drop a last-start centurion who takes wickets,
fields brilliantly and can captain as well.

(Personal opinion: Healy's tough and has a good cricket brain, but Taylor
probably has the edge as he's a batsman. I had thought on previous occassions
that Steve Waugh and David Boon were also chances. If I was a selector, I'd go
for Boon, but then again, I'm not a selector!)

--
Rob.
QUIT
in, I'm not a selector!)

--
Rob.
From: pvr@owlnet.rice.edu (PVR Narasimha Rao)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Ramakant Achrekar
Date: 11 Nov 1992 18:51:58 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Nov11.171816.23120@ousrvr.oulu.fi>, jma@phoenix.oulu.fi (Jacob Matthan) writes:

|> Fascinating statement about Vinod Kambli. "Vinod Kambli bothers too much about the 
|> material things in life. Wearing cut-off jeans and swaggering around with a Walkman does
|> not make a great player (or rather a great player)."


Well, may be I should not say this, but let me say it.

Kambli is from a not-so-affluent family. Considering that, it's not very difficult to
understand his craze or whatever for "material things in life".

PVR
From: khan@shrike.und.ac.za (Feroz Khan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: *Sixteen* overs by Kourie?
Date: 6 Nov 1992 10:27:17 GMT
Organization: University of Natal (Durban), South Africa
NNTP-Posting-Host: shrike.und.ac.za
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

B536HIND@UTARLVM1.UTA.EDU (C. S. Sudarshana bhat) writes:
: In a limited-to-52-overs one-day match, how did Kourie get to bowl 16
: overs?  Was this just a 'social fixture'?  Or has there been a change
: in the one-day rules lately?
: 
: PS: The first time I saw this statistic, I thought it was a typo; but
:     two netters can't (I believe) 'typo' the same number ;-)

It was a social fixture.


---------
Feroz Khan
Third Year Electrical Engineering
University of Natal
Durban
South Africa
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 11:51:48 EST
From: Spaceman Spiff <SXK129@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Damien Martin

In article <1992Nov6.202335.1@cc.curtin.edu.au>, operator@cc.curtin.edu.au says:
>
>When Sachin Tendulkar was introduced to Test Cricket he was only 18 and as
>
no, he was only 16 which makes his success even more amazing. pakistan great
mushtaq mohammed was only 15 when he made his test debut!!

Stay cool,
The Thinker

Cogito ergo potum                               I think therefore I drink
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SXK129@PSUVM.PSU.EDU                                Penn State University

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brain fried -- Core dumped
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: eb139@cs.city.ac.uk (MAHMOOD Z)
Subject: Re: picking seam and cheating?
Organization: City University
Date:  9 Nov 92 20:11:46 GMT

WELL SAID...
I totally agree with your posting and how the English cant take defeat by such
brilliant bowling by W & W.
As for the Hockey ruling..i really did not know that..now i do .. i am amazed
at the lengths the europeans go to to try ands achieve a high credibility
among a sport which they always seem to get beaten by Pak and India...
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: karnik@deci.cs.umn.edu (Neeran M. Karnik)
Subject: Re: cricket query
Keywords: cricket query/the lal's
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 17:20:05 GMT

In <6NOV199203221489@summa.tamu.edu> s2p5386@summa.tamu.edu (PARMEKAR, SANDEEP G) writes:

>Does anyone out there know if Madanlal and Arunlal are related to
>each other??

>Sandeep Parmekar


Yes. No. :-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  Neeran   Karnik  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dept. of Computer Science,      | Email: karnik@cs.umn.edu
University of Minnesota         |        karn0001@student.tc.umn.edu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: kumar@walnut.kumar (Kumar)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: I day's play score card
Date: 13 Nov 92 05:52:28 GMT
Distribution: rec.sport.cricket
Organization: University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA


Hi,

	Sorry for my impatience.  But, could someone please post the 

scorecard of the first day's play between India and SA. Thanks a lot

kumar
From: pieter@ford.ee.up.ac.za
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: First Over, SA 5 runs 1 wicket
Date: 13 Nov 1992 02:09:04 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

On a green pitch, India won the toss and sent SA in. Kapil opened and
got Jimmy Cook to edge the first ball of the match to Tendulkar in 3rd
slip. The ball swung and and seamed out to completely beat Cook.
From: ravi@wti.com (Ravi Raj)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Vinod Kambli
Date: 10 Nov 92 18:29:46 GMT
Organization: Wavefront Technologies Inc, Santa Barbara, CA
X-Disclaimer: Not a spokesperson for Wavefront Technologies, Inc.

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. 

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 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
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: pvr@argo.rice.edu (PVR Narasimha Rao)
Subject: Re: (none)
Organization: Rice University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:05:34 GMT


In article <1992Nov12.183859.18384@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao) writes:


|> Now, even if Amre is better at #6 (which is unclear) I think Raman


I am sure Raman is not in the team for his ability to play at #6 in a test
team, but he is there as an opener. The possibilities for #6 were Amre and
Kambli and Amre was selected only because they thought he was better.


|> must be allowed to play UNTIL Amre wins the spot back.  Amre has not


What do you mean by winning _back_? First, Amre hasn't yet played any test.
Second, why should Raman be suddenly considered for that position now and
Amre be asked to _win_ it from him? It is someone else who has to win it
from Amre, not Amre from someone else!


|> dazzled so far on the tour, and with Raman having succeeded (sort of)
|> in the Zim test -- well he did do better than numbers 1,4, and 5 by a


First, it is silly to compare Raman's performances at #2 with Amre's at #6
to decide who should bat at #6.

Second, Amre hasn't done too badly either. He did well enough in the ODI
(his 36 was supposed to have been full of clean strokes). In the tour
matches, he was better than Raman.


|> fair margin -- I think you can;t just oust him unless Amre has been
|> scoring tons of runs.


It should be the other way. I think you can't just oust someone who is in
the team as a #6 to accommodate someone who is in as an opener, unless the
latter has been |> scoring tons of runs.

To me, the whole thing looks like a farce. It's an artificial problem.

Having said that, I should say I have nothing against Raman. If he is in
flow, I _love_ watching the guy! But, you've got to be objective and
professional while deciding the team.

By making Raman bat at #6 today, are you planning to make him bat at #6
for ever? Or, if Jadeja doesn't do well, will you again convert him to an
opener? What is all this? What's the idea behind all this changing the
positions arbitrarily? Probably it is just that you don't want to drop
Raman. But, that's a silly reason. Not professional at all ...


|> Bharat

PVR
From: parama@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Vice_Captain_Trips)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: Cricket quiz
Date: 8 Nov 92 17:01:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: borg.17323
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

In article <9211070330.AA02494@deepthought.cs.utexas.edu> B536HIND@UTARLVM1.UTA.EDU (C. S. Sudarshana bhat) writes:
>107 and 182 n.o., vs. West Indies, Calcutta, 1978-79.  Result: India won.

Nope, this match was drawn. 

--P2
From: KSRAO@power.ee.ndsu.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: SA v Ind T1 D1 5 hours' play
Date: 13 Nov 92 14:11:44 GMT
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.

At 13:55 GMT (just a little over an hour to go before stumps) SA are 183 for
4. Wessels is 104 not out. He has scored centuries in both the tests that he
played for South Africa.


Earlier Cook was out for 0 and Hudson for 14.
From: cctr123@csc.canterbury.ac.nz (Alan Murray, CSC Operations, Uni of Canty)
Subject: Re: NZ v Zim T2 D3 Tea
Organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 20:54:18 GMT

In article <9211101410.AA23738@cs.utexas.edu>, KSRAO@power.ee.ndsu.nodak.edu writes:
> NZ v Zim T2 D3 Tea
>      There was only half an hour's play possible because of bad light,
> electrical storm and rain after lunch. The latest score is 228 for 6.

Rains a lot in Zimbabwe, doesn't it? :-).

Alan
From: shyk@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (shyam krishnamurthy)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: oiling or Seasoning?
Date: 11 Nov 92 05:09:42 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <1992Nov8.200209.9257@gmuvax2.gmu.edu> gsriniva@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Tin2) writes:
>
>Hi gys,
>I need to know how to season(i am not sure about this term) the bat.
>Although I have read about it before , I never paid much attention to
>it as I thought I wouldn`t need it.
>My friend brought a new bat Symonds super tusker for me. 
> It seems the person who sold the bat said to my friend asked him to
>oil the bat. Could any of u mail how to season or oil the bat. I am
>also not sure if I have to oil the bat or not.  Thanks in advance.
>
>Tin2
Brings back old memories of playing cricket in Bombay. It really depends on
what kind of a Bat you have. If it has some kind of a cloth or hide cover on
the bat you need not and should not oil it. But if it is bare wood, you should
. The oil we used to use was linseed oil. I think this was what was recommended
some ten years back. We used to sand paper the surface mildly before we 
apply the oil(lots of it and dry it out in the Bombay sun. I forget the duration, But make sure that the bat is dry before you use it. May be a good guess is 
season it for a month after applying oil.
Regards, Shyam.


Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: amanning@acd.acd.ucar.edu (Andrew Manning)
Subject: Re: WI beats WA, Zim v NZ D4 close of play
Organization: Ntl Center for Atmospheric Research, Atmospheric Chemistry
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:12:27 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.041904.13404@cs.su.oz.au> tom@cs.su.oz.au writes:
>|> 
>|> NZ v Zim Test 1 D4
>
>	This is a good case for saying averages are meaningless.
>	NZ are boosting theirs ridiculously against a very ordinary Zimbabwe	
>	bowling side, while England's batsman have just faced Pakistan,
>	and Aust have the Windies....
>
>	Of course these things even out in some respects, but
>	not perhaps completely?
>
Oh really? So if this is a "very ordinary Zimbabwe bowling side", what does
that make the Indian batting side? You know, the one with such "greats" as
Azzharuddin, Dev, Manjekar, and Tendulkar, and of course Shastri :-)

Andrew M.
From: shafqat@neuro.duke.edu (Saad Shafqat)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: SA World Cup shock
Date: 7 Nov 92 16:46:25 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <1dd1pjINN95@daisy.ee.und.ac.za> fkhan@daisy.ee.und.ac.za (Feroz Khan) writes:




>                                   The vote that the Asians have to
>draw has to come from Australia as the support of either England or
>Australia is needed to win the vote.
>


How utterly nauseating.  One can't imagine why English and/or Australian
support should be necessary for a succesful bid.  There's nothing special
about them. The empire was finally dissolved in 1980 when the union jack
was permanently lowered in Salisbury's Government House and Rhodesia
became Zimbabwe.  Read my lips, the party's over. Its time the ICC woke
up to the reality of the new dynamic in cricket and in the rest of the
world.  


--
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: NZ v Zim - Lack of Play
From: imf@datamark.co.nz (Ian Franklin)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 03:23:18 GMT
Organization: Datamark International Ltd.

In article <1992Nov5.231807.22108@dmpe.csiro.au> mohan@theta.mel.dms.CSIRO.AU (Mohan Krishnamoorthy) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.130231.11972@waikato.ac.nz> hist1261@waikato.ac.nz writes:
>
>[...stuff on Zim vs NZ Test delay _due to rain_ deleted...]
>
[stuff deleted]
>
>That doesn't mean they are necessarily indefensible!  Good of the New
>Zealand papers to carry that unnecessary interview of Martin Crowe.
>Did they carry the views of Houghton?  It is easy to beat your chest,
>jump up and down and cry fowl (like the British tabloids did, when
>Waqar and Wasim were ripping through their national team like a tailor
>would, his cloth).  It is more important to report objectively.
>

They did report Houghton comments.

[Other Stuff Deleted]
-- 
Ian Franklin       | imf@datamark.co.nz | +64-4-233-8186 (work) |
Datamark Intl Ltd  |--------------------------------------------|
Wellington         | I drink to make other people interesting   |
New Zealand        |                    - George Jean Nathan    |
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: 5912ramasubr@vms.csd.mu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: ZIM vs NZ T2 FINAL
Date: 12 Nov 1992 23:37:34 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services
Reply-To: 5912ramasubr@vms.csd.mu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: vmsa.csd.mu.edu

In article <1992Nov12.200036.4461@julian.uwo.ca>, raza@engrg.uwo.ca (Mr. Raza Syed) writes:
>First loss for Zimbabwe, still a good start to test cricket considering that
>they suffered their first loss in third match they played

Not to nitpick but it was their 2nd Test, and if you are counting
the limited over match then they have played a lot of that stuff.
Bye,






       *********************************
       *	N.Ramasubramanian      *    	    
       *********************************