Sport Today

by **BALO** » Fri, 31 Jan 1992 14:41:51

Dear netters:

Even though I did not hear the cricket commentary. But for me it
looked like an easy victory for indians in the 4th test. But by gods
grace or dis-grace indians lost the test very narrowly. but let me say
this thing to every body how could indians play only with ELEVEN
and Australians with "THIR***" ( TWO key extra players!!!!) and
complaining that India did not win this match?? At least I dont have
any regrets. Do you guys!!! No wonder Australians won this match.
And they are going to win the final test too in the same way with
their TWO KEY EXTRA PLAYERS.

NO FLAMES PLEASE.

by **Sivaram Harihara** » Sat, 01 Feb 1992 01:33:06

I would have prefered if the whole Indian team had walked
out after Vensakar's dubious LBW decision. At this rate
the Indians do not have any haopes to even draw Test-5
beacause of this outrageous umpiring.

Neutral umpires are defeneitely the need of the hour.
I hope India walk out in the 5th test if this continues,
just to prove a point.

s.h

by **Santosh Rat** » Sat, 01 Feb 1992 04:08:14

Quote:

> Dear netters:

> Even though I did not hear the cricket commentary. But for me it
> looked like an easy victory for indians in the 4th test. But by gods
> grace or dis-grace indians lost the test very narrowly. but let me say
> this thing to every body how could indians play only with ELEVEN

^^^^^^^^^

Quote:

> and Australians with "THIR***" ( TWO key extra players!!!!) and

^^^^^^^^^^^
India also played with at least TWELVE players. Why don't you include
the substitutes in the player list of Indians, or is it that fielding
is not considered a part of the gaim (sp??? No flames please). No body
stops India from playing with THIR*** players as well. (How many
substitutes are allowed in one game?)
If, by above, you mean the two umpires in the side of Australia,
then say so. I have become sikh (sp??) and tired of the people
referring the umpires as players.
Regarding the neutral umpires, I think it is a rediculous idea. How
can you have a person without biasness? I think there should be one
umpire from each country. Or, the umpire should not know much about
cricket except for certain rules (e.g., getting out and wide etc.).
This way he or she will not know what will benefit his/her country.
Any other idea?

Sport Today

INDIAN "ELEVEN" VS AUSTRALIAN "THIRTEEN"

INDIAN "ELEVEN" VS AUSTRALIAN "THIRTEEN"

INDIAN "ELEVEN" VS AUSTRALIAN "THIRTEEN"

INDIAN "ELEVEN" VS AUSTRALIAN "THIRTEEN"