HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mohan@theta.mel.dms.CSIRO.AU (Mohan Krishnamoorthy)
Subject: Re: Martin Crowe given out - part ii
Keywords: Martin Crowe
Organization: CSIRO, Div. of Mathematics & Statistics, Melbourne, Vic., AUSTRALI
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 01:19:28 GMT

In article <1992Dec9.041533.21177@cs.aukuni.ac.nz> awil2@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Andrew James Willmott) writes:

> In <1992Dec8.231643.10084@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au> danda@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Ajith Dandeniya) writes:

>> In the second test of SL Vs NZ, NZ skipper Martin Crowe was given out caught 
>> behind, but refused to go............

>> Sri Lankan umpires eventually reversed their decision and he ended up getting
>> a century.

>> Hope this trend doesn't catch on.  

> Which particular trend is this? The two reports I've heard have made it clear
> that it was obvious to everyone involved that the ball hit the ground first.

So what?  What relevance has that got with the discussion, which centres
on Crowe's refusal to go and his subsequent re-instatement.  The fact is
that, rightly or wrongly, Martin Crowe was given out.  The fact that he
did not go when given out is (and remains) really bad form.  

Your submission seems to indicate that:

    If in the opinion of the batsman, he is not out, he should stay his
    ground unless he is reinstated!

That, as a trend, is despicable and should stop.  I rather suspect the
original poster was referring to this trend in his posting.  Mind you,
the original poster did not question the fact that Martin Crowe may have
been given out wrongly.  The emphasis was on Crowe refusing to go.

> The despicable action here is that Gurasinga appealed for a catch, 

Hmmm!  I can only say that he is learning real quick to be what some
of the Ch-9 cricket commentary team call a very thorough, competitive,
modern cricket professional ;-)

More seriously, there are no saints in modern cricket.  Singling out
Gurusinga as a criminal, for appealing (even when he knew that it was
not out) is both silly and unrealistic.  This disease is something that
modern cricket is `blessed' with and don't let _anyone_ fool you into
believing that it is something observed in and practised by only a few
isolated test playing nations.  Of course, if one is blindly parochial
enough, you will label `your team' competitive; the `other team' cheats!

> though he must have known it was a bump ball. Martin Crowe knew a whopper of
> a mistake had been made, and stood his ground until the square leg umpire
> could inform his colleague of his mistake.

And _that_ is a _bad_ trend.  If the onus is left to the batsmen to
decide if they are out, why have umpires?

> New Zealand have quite enough problems of their own without having to deal wit
> gamesmanship such as this.

Real high pedestal stuff here!

> Andrew

/Mohan 

-------
Mohan Krishnamoorthy, CSIRO, Division of Maths and Stats,
Private Bag 10, Clayton, Melbourne, VIC 3168, Australia.
Phone: (Off) +61 3 542 2263;  (Res): +61 3 543 4248
Fax:   +61 3 542 2474; 	      email: mohan@mel.dms.CSIRO.AU
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: stallav@eos.ncsu.edu (SAIRAJU  TALLAVARJULA)
Subject: From those days ...
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:55:36 GMT

Hello everybody!

I am really happy for Kapil showed he is still very much 
in the business. At this juncture I would like to remeber
and share some thing exciting ....

I remember one of his memorable knocks in the Lords test 
in 1983/84 (?) series. England was initially in trouble
and Randall was dropped at this stage and he goes on
to score a ton and with Ian Botham's innings of 60+ they reached
400 odd. Kapil took 5 wickets.

India batted poorly and had to follow on. Kapil made a 30+.
In the second innings Vegsarkar made a superb hundred (it was his
3rd. successive ton at Lords) and yet India was 9 down with about
15 runs to avoid an innings defeat. Kapil was dropped at 11. The
next 9 overs saw a single handed destruction of english bowling
by Kapil. He made 89 in 52 balls, and I was praying that he would
break the then record for fastest test hundred. I remember English
comentators were all praises and awe struck at this hurricane knock.
Lords crowd was clapping and Kapil puts on his bowling shoes...
and leads his team on to the ground amidst a roar of applause.
India had about 10 overs to bowl. But those overs saw the English
shaken off their morale. Kapil was unplayable. He took three wickets
in a brilliant spell of swing bowling (both ways). 
The batsmen were being beaten every delivery of that Kapil's 
last over... Crowd cheering every ball and how much I wished 
that there were a few more overs!
But that was not to be. Draw of stumps......

Next day no miracle happened and Lamb and Gover made the required runs
and England won the match by 7 wickets.

Botham makes 128 in the second (Old Trafford) test.
And Kapil replies with 65. (That's where, ofcourse
Bob Willis found about a chap named Sandeep Patil)
In the final test at Oval, Botham makes a double century
and Kapil comes with a stupendous ninety.

Kapil was adjudged Man of the series. 

Make Cricket your way of life ...
Stallav_
From: kre@munnari.OZ.AU (Robert Elz)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: A v WI, 3rd test, stumps day 1
Date: 2 Jan 1993 18:14:22 +1100
Organization: University of Melbourne
NNTP-Posting-Host: munnari.oz.au

At the end of the first day's play, and after winning the toss
and batting, Aust 5/292 - losing three quickish wickets towards
the end of the day.

Taylor		C Murray B Bishop	20	1/42
Boon		C Murray B Adams	76	2/
S.Waugh		C Simmons B Ambrose    100	5/
M.Waugh		Run Out			57	3/
Martyn		B Ambrose		 0	4/
Border					 0
Matthews				 0
		Extras			19
				5/     292


		 O M W  R
Ambrose		20 6 2 37
Bishop		20 4 1 56
Walsh		16 4 0 57
Hooper		24 4 0 69
Adams		11 2 1 37

Mark Waugh began the rot when he called for a suicidal run, which
Hooper just managed to reach at mid wicket, fairly close in.  Having
picked up the ball in his left hand, Hooper had all day to throw down
middle stump at the bowlers end with Waugh still > 5 metres away (might
have been closer to 10).

Martyn lasted a while without managing to score, before Ambrose got one
to come back quite a way, perhaps take the top of the pad, and onto the
stumps.

Steve Waugh broght up his maiden century against WI with a nice straight
drive for three (his first century, or even 50, I think in test cricket
for quite some time), then soon after played one fromin front of his hip
straight into the hands of Simmons at backward short leg - Simmons only had
to move a little to his left to hold a pretty good catch.

Border's only "score" so far has been 4 leg byes from a short one from
Ambrose that wacked Border on the side of the helmet (the ear flap) and
went away to the Boundary.  Matthews hasn't been at the crease long
at all.

Australia were well on top most of the day, at 2/250 (approx) the WI
task looked very very hard, now with the three late wickets things look
a lot more even.

The pitch seems very dry and hard, with reasonable bounce, though nothing
much in it to please any bowlers.  The outfield is fast - plenty of fours.

kre
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com (Umesh Vaghela)
Subject: Re: India vs Comb. Uni score...
Keywords: Watan ke liye...
Reply-To: vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com (Umesh Vaghela)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 10:21:46 GMT


India Vs Combined University (3 days):
======================================

At the end of second day's play India were 273/8 in reply to Comb. Uni's
total of 174 all out.

Sachin Tendulkar scored his second consecutive century with 131 in two
first class games for India.

The game is likely to be a draw.
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                            Umesh Vaghela                                |
|                Digital Equipment Corporation - Reading, Berks, UK       |
|                                                  _ _ _ _ _ _ _          |
| 	Userid : vaghela@marvin.enet.dec.com	  | | | | | | | |TM	  |
|          	 vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com       |d|i|g|i|t|a|l|         |
|          	 vaghela@wikkit.enet.dec.com      |_|_|_|_|_|_|_|         |
|									  |
|All views & opinions expressed here are entirely my own and NOT digital's|
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: aamir@cs.sfu.ca (Aamir Husain)
Subject: Pak vs NZ 3rd ODI, plus Aus vs WI 5th day
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 02:05:38 GMT

i am catching both radio australia(not that good reception on 21740)
and RNZ at 17750

Pakistan made 139(?) all out (see post by A. Qadir)

NZ are 23/1 in(8), 33/1 in(9), 34/2 in(10), 34/2 in(11), 34/2 in(12), 
       35/2 in(13), 36/2 in(14).
figures in brackets are over number
latham - 0 out 
greatbach - 14 no(8), 24 no(9), 24 out ct Musthaq b akram at 34/2
jones - 5 no(8), 5 no(9), 6 no(10), 7
m. crowe

akram 4-0-0-16, 5-0-1-17, 6-1-1-17, 7-1-1-18
waqar 4-2-1-7, 
anjum 1-0-0-10, 2-1-0-10, 3-1-0-10


trivia kapil 232 ODI wkts
       akram 185 wkts oops 186 as i was typing this, S/R about 3.5

at the MCG WI vs Aus 5th day 1st session

Windies are 135/1 target 359
richardson out 52 2nd wkt to fall
simmons 80 not out
windies now 144/2

Aamir
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: New Zealand 33/2 after 13 overs
From: A.Qadir@massey.ac.nz (A. Qadir)
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 03:22:05 GMT
Organization: Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
X-Reader: NETNEWS/PC Version 2c

New Zealand 33/2 after 13 overs chasing 137 to beat Pakistan.
Altaf
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: david@datamark.co.nz (David Rowland)
Subject: Prediction For First ODI (NZ/ Pakistan)
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 04:18:15 GMT
Organization: Datamark International Ltd.


Ok you guys and girls, lets here them.

I predict NZ will beat Pakistan by the narrowest of margins.  The
reason is that Pakistan haven't been playing all that well lately
(barring the Queensland game) and the NZ squad, now back together
after Sri Lanka, will be in better spirits and want to do good in
front of their home ground.

See you at the basin this Saturday (26th).

Dave
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: saji@snert.ece.uc.edu (Sandeep  Aji)
Subject: Re: India defeated England in ODI series 93
Organization: University of Cincinnati
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 09:00:18 GMT

In article <1992Dec26.062119.23709@sco.COM>, pradeep@sco.COM (Pradeep Subramaniam) writes:

|> 
|> PS: I don't intend to start another argument about cricket and baseball.
|> To me, cricket is still the #1 game in the world. I however could not resist
|> a Yank run down Canada simply because a Canadian team had outdone them
|> at their own game.
|> ;-) ;-)
|> 

   Ya and how many Canadians were there in that Canadian team which beat the 
   yanks at their own game. 

   Aji

   

-- 
  | 	Sandeep A. Aji			| saji@thor.ece.uc.edu      |
  |     University of Cincinnati   	| saji@hagar.ece.uc.edu     |
  |        FINAL FOUR 1992              | 	                    |
  |                                     | 			    |
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com (Umesh Vaghela)
Subject: India vs Comb. Uni score...
Keywords: I want my present........
Reply-To: vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com (Umesh Vaghela)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 08:35:45 GMT


Scores of day one:
==================

Combined University 174 all out. (Shastri and Yadav shared 6 wickets)
India are 6/0.

Could someone from SA update the score regularly for this match.
Thanks in advance.

--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                            Umesh Vaghela                                |
|                Digital Equipment Corporation - Reading, Berks, UK       |
|                                                  _ _ _ _ _ _ _          |
| 	E-mail : vaghela@marvin.enet.dec.com	  | | | | | | | |TM	  |
|          	 vaghela@laxatv.reo.dec.com       |d|i|g|i|t|a|l|         |
|          	 vaghela@wikkit.enet.dec.com      |_|_|_|_|_|_|_|         |
|									  |
|All views & opinions expressed here are entirely my own and NOT digital's|
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: A.Qadir@massey.ac.nz (A. Qadir)
Subject: Test match btw Pakistan and NZ
Organization: Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
X-Reader: NETNEWS/PC Version 2c
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 02:10:10 GMT

Test match btw Pakistan and NZ, Latest scosre:
New Zealand 143/3 on 2nd day of the test match, earlier on Pakistan 
all out 216 in their first inng.
Altaf Qadir
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: tripunit@algol.cs.psu.edu (Mahesh V Tripunitara)
Subject: Re: SA India Day 3
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 21:12:34 GMT

In article <msains.46.725580035@ibis.ru.ac.za> msains@ibis.ru.ac.za (Malcolm Sainsbury) writes:

>there is nothing to beat the experience of actually being there.  Wish you
>could have been there too.

So do I...so do I...

Mahesh.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: cen466p@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au (S. Parthasarhathy)
Subject: FINGER site for updated score over summer break
Organization: Dept. of Chem. Engg., Monash University, Australia
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 06:26:16 GMT

I will try to update my plan file every hour with updated scores of WI-AUS
match at MCG and if anybody is interested can get by using finger

finger cen466p@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au

Paarthaa
ChemEngg
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: cen466p@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au (S. Parthasarhathy)
Subject: AUS-WI, MCG, D4 Lunch, AUS-II 80-4
Organization: Dept. of Chem. Engg., Monash University, Australia
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 02:09:19 GMT

Scores at D4  -  Lunch

AUS  I Innings :   395
WI   I Innings :   233

AUS II innings:           80 for 4 (D4 Lunch after 51 overs)
David Boon b Simmons      11        Warne (NW) c A'ton b Ambrose   5
S.Waugh c Simmons b Bishop 1        M. Waugh   c Adams b Walsh    15
Mark Taylor n.o           39
D. Martyn   n.o            2 ?
Sundries 7
1-22, 2-40, 3-41, 4-73
Ambrose 14-3-20-1  Bishop 12-2-23-1  Walsh 14-6-20-1  Simmons 11-5-11-1
-- 

Paarthaa
ChemEngg
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: karnik@cs.umn.edu (Neeran M. Karnik)
Subject: Re: Some thoughts...
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 20:00:57 GMT

In <_Ab=bzA@engin.umich.edu> sudhama@engin.umich.edu (Sudhama Gopalan) writes:

>>	One thing is, I hope, clear, the batting line up has ample
>>talent, and there need not be ay doubts about the abilities of Azhar,
>>SRT and Manjrekar as batsmen. What is missing is perhaps the
>>motivation, the application and the leadership. A year or so ago, when
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>Could'nt agree with you more. If you mean to say that Azhar, SRT and Manjrekar
>deserve an extremely long rope because they form the present and future core

	Nope, but IMHO, Azhar has done enough recently so that he should not
be dropped. He made the most runs in the ODIs, and was next only to Raman in
the averages. It wouldn't be fair to drop Sachin, since as Pieter said, he
does seem to understand his responsibility, and isn't one of those taking it
lightly. Manjrekar, perhaps, needs to play a few Ranji games to get back his
confidence and run-scoring habits. If he is dropped, I hope the selectors 
don't keep him in the 12, so that he is free to play for Bombay....


>>opening slots are up for grabs, and Surendra Bhave should be one of the
>>prospects. Kambli is almost certain to make the team, and one hopes he
>            ^^^^^^
>I'm not that optimistic about this man - he seems to be another of those happy-
>go-lucky types. But then he should also get his fair share of rope. I think 
>Jadeja (for instance) is towards the end of his.

	Kambli started out with a very West Indian kind of approach, very
attacking batsman, the swagger, everything! However, he has shown that he 
can last at the wicket long enough to compile the big scores, even the double
centuries. Definitely deserves a chance in Tests...


>Unrelated comment - see how unimaginative the composition of the touring side 
>looks now - Chetan Sharma and Banerjee are mere passengers. 

	Nah, Banerjee is the 'official singer' in the Indian team! Not just 
a passenger.... :-> This is the second tour he's been to, and it will be a 
pity to drop him without giving him a fair chance.... but he hasn't done 
sufficiently well in the side games to break into the team. Chetan Sharma
has been even less impressive, getting carted around as usual....


     +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
     | Neeran M. Karnik | #2 fan of Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar on r.s.c.  :-> |
     | Dept. of CompSci.| "Welcome to r.s.c.,                              |
     | U of Minnesota   |  where jingoism rules the netwaves" - McBean :-> |
     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: cctr123@csc.canterbury.ac.nz (Alan Murray, CSC Operations, Uni of Canty)
Subject: Re: 6 changes in NZ team vs. Pak
Organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 21:10:24 GMT

In article <1h5te6INNjfg@cronkite.cisco.com>, rgajendr@cisco.com (I. Rajeev Gajendran) writes:
> The New Zealand contingent on the net has sounded uniformly surprised 
> at what happened to the Kiwis in Sri Lanka

Hmm - have we??? Just goes to show that the people posting here know diddley
squat about cricket then as most cricket followers in NZ recognised that the
tour of Sri Lanka would be a difficult one BEFORE the team lost such players as
Danny Morrison and Chris Cairns let alone any subsequent team changes.

Alan
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao)
Subject: Re: S. Africa v. India averages after 3rd Test.
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 01:27:15 GMT

In article <29065@optima.cs.arizona.edu>, mshah@cs.arizona.edu (Munil A. Shah) writes:
|> > Here are the latest averages for the S. Africa v. India test series at the end
|> > of the third test.
|> > 
|> > Batting:
|> > Name      Matches   Innings     HS     Runs    Average     100's    50's
|> > More         3         4        55      102     25.50        0       1
|> > Shastri      3         5        23       59     11.80        0       0
|> > 
|> > Bowling:
|> > Name        Overs    Maidens    Runs     Wickets    Average     Strike rate*
|> > Tendulkar     7         2         14        1        14.00         42.00
|> > Shastri      31         4         74        2        37.00         93.00
 	
|> 	Do I have to repeat the same thing? Even More and Tendulkar .....
|> Shastri HI HI!!!

Isn't it wonderful what you can do with selective presentation of
statistical data when you are determined to prove a point.

Now while I will be the first to admit that Shastri's performance
has been lacking on this tour:-), the bowling figures do not tell
the true story -- perhaps, it might be instructive to state that
tendulkar stands above the rest of the Indian bowlers in terms of
both average and strike rate.. so by your reasoning we can say,
"Kumble Hai Hai" "Kapil Hai Hai"... -- in fact all bowlers did worse
than Tendulkar; not surprising as he bowled very few overs.

Also, (again averages are misleading), but the only other bowler who
did BETTER than Shastri was Kumble with 185/63/346/14 at 24.71 --
an excellent performance.  Shastri's bowling figures are actually
quite good, though his strike rate was not great, but it was about the 
same as Srinath and Prabhakar, Kumble again was better at 1wk/79 balls.

The startling statistic is that Kapil took a wicket only once every 119 balls 
-- that is one wicket every 20 overs!!  Yowch -- I knew he was not very
penetrative on this tour (as one would expect) but this is very poor.
This only furthers my view that we must, right away, relegate Kapil to the
role of second change bowler -- he should no longer be required to
open the bowling or be the spearhead of the India attck, but focus on
his batting.  That way he can still have 4+ years of great service to
India, and making him captain will give some stability.. but more of this
and even Kapil will start to wear down very quickly...

About the only two good things from this tour are the emergence of Amre
and Kumble....  even Kumble is not a strike bowler capable of taking
lots of wickets --- but he has been the one consistent performer in a
very sorry lot of bowlers.

|> -Munil

Bharat
(and before I am accused of being a Shastri fan -- I am not:-)
-- 
R. Bharat Rao                         E-mail: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu
AI Group, Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology
405 N. Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801   (217)-333-5978 (O), 337-6498(H)
Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
From: RAHULI@UCSVAX (RAHUL INDRAYAN)
Subject: Sack Manjrekar
Organization: UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS - AMHERST
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 13:21:02 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

Its time to sack Sanjay Manjrekar from the team. He has not scored even a single 50 in the last 20 or so matches he has played for India in ODIs. Heconsumes too many balls to score only a few runs. I hope the Indian manager at SA thinks this way too.
Thanks.
	- Rahul Indrayan
From: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.volleyball
Subject: Re: Question about blocking
Date: 28 Dec 1992 19:03:52 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.46
Originator: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu

From article <Bzw076.LF0@cs.uiuc.edu>, by wang@cs.uiuc.edu (Eric Wang):
[ 
[ 2.b Now comes the weirdness.  Same scenario as 2, except that the setter
[     is back-row, jump-set from in front of the attack line (right on the
[     net, in fact), and is of reasonable height, such that she touched
[     the ball entirely above the plane of the net.  Bizarre as it may
[     seem, the proper call is back-row attacker violation on the setter
[     at the instant the blocker blocks the set!  By 9.7, this is a valid
[     block.  By 8.14, "A blocked ball is considered to have crossed the
[     net", thus the setter is considered to have set the ball over the
[     net.  This violates 8.12 "Back row attacker", and 8.12.a explains
[     that the ball dies as soon as it's (legally) touched by an opposing
[     player, which in this case is the blocker.  (This time, setter
[     throws the fit.)
[ 
Is this a recent rule change? About two years ago this situation would not
have been a back row attack. If a ball is blocked in the plane of the net
on an attempt to set another player it is a legal block but not a back row
attack so that play should continue.
From: kellya@meaddata.com (Kelly Acord)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.volleyball
Subject: USVBA REGISTRATION
Date: 23 Dec 1992 16:10:22 GMT
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: mayberry.meaddata.com
Keywords: USVBA

I am putting together a womens team for the upcoming season in January and I need to know where I can write or call for registration forms.  Also would like some input on the number of people that works well for this kind of team.  We're guessing that eight would be enough.........thanks


Newsgroups: rec.sport.volleyball