Tuesday, September 13, 2011


Cricket's Most Iconic Moments

1) Pakistan’s Javed Miandad clashed with Australia’s Dennis Lillee in one of the most disgraceful incidents on a cricket field. Lillee and Javed collided as the batsman completed a run during the November 1981 Perth Test. 


Lillee proceeded to kick Javed on the leg to which Javed reacted angrily, threatening to hit the bowler with his bat. Umpire Tony Crafter stepped between the two as Lillee prepared to have another go at Javed.

The blame for the incident was laid on Lillee by many experts. Former Australian captains like Bob Simpson and Ian Chappell condemned Lillee’s behaviour.

2) In Birmingham, August 7 2005, at the end of one of the greatest Test matches ever, England all-rounder Andrew Flintoff broke away from the team celebrations to console the dejected Australian batsman Brett Lee. 


Lee and Michael Kasprowicz had brought Australia within three runs of an unlikely win before Kasprowicz got out. England went on to win the Ashes for the first time in 19 years, but this moment stood out and Flintoff was applauded for his thoughtfulness.

Despite intense rivalry between the two teams, Flintoff and Lee remain mates.



3) India’s Yuvraj Singh hits the sixth six of an over from England Stuart Broad on September 19 2007 at Kingsmead, Durban during a World T20 match. Yuvraj became just the fourth batsman in history to hit six consecutive sixes in an over in senior cricket.


Minutes before this incident, Andrew Flintoff had sledged Yuvraj about his ordinary form, prompting this angry outburst on Broad.



4) In a decidedly one-sided series, Australia employed eight slip fielders in a one-day international against Zimbabwe at the Harare Sports Club on October 23, 1999. 


Australia were the world champions and dominant team while Zimbabwe were one of the weaker teams. Never one to miss a chance to show who's boss, Australia employed this extravagantly attacking field. They won the only Test by 10 wickets and all three ODIs.


5) Manoj Prabhakar pats Sachin Tendulkar at the end of the Manchester Test match against England on August 11, 1990. The two Indians’ rearguard action saved India the Test with Tendulkar making an unbeaten 119 – his first Test hundred. 


Tendulkar, 17, thus became the youngest Indian to score a Test hundred, and would go on to claim most batting records in international cricket.


6) Sachin Tendulkar is given out LBW on zero to Glenn McGrath after being struck on the shoulder, making this one of the most controversial LBW decisions. Tendulkar ducked thinking the ball to be a bouncer and was hit in front of the stumps. 


Australian umpire Darryl Harper ruled it out, making it the only known instance of a shoulder-before-wicket dismissal.


7) England all-rounder Ian Botham is seen in a reflective mood, smoking a cigar in the dressing room. Botham had made 149 against Australia in the Leeds Test match of 1981. Despite following on, England turned the game around with Botham’s heroics with the bat and Bob Willis with the ball. 


England won the series often called Botham’s Ashes for his complete dominance of Australia.


8) Sri Lanka captain Arjuna Ranatunga has a heated conversation with umpire Ross Emerson, who had no-balled Muttiah Muralitharan for throwing in an ODI against England, January 23, 1999, in Adelaide. 


Ranatunga led his team off the ground and threatened to abandon the tour since Muralitharan’s bowling action had earlier been deemed legitimate by the ICC. Play resumed after 14 minutes. England made 302.
Tensions between the teams simmered till the end when Roshan Mahanama was shouldered by captain Alec Stewart. In poetic justice, last-man Muralitharan came out to bat in the final over to hit the winning runs.



9) Australian players celebrate after running out South Africa’s Allan Donald in the World Cup semi-final in Birmingham on June 17, 1999.

A massive misunderstanding in the final over between last-man Donald and Lance Klusener, who had batted heroically to bring SA within a run of a win, ended the game in a tie.
Tournament rules allowed Australia to reach the final, which they won, beginning their decade-long domination of international cricket.


10) West Indian players give Brian Lara a guard of honour on April 18, 1994, in the Test match against England in Antigua. 


Lara beat the world record for the highest Test score --- 365 held by fellow West Indian Garry Sobers --- and made 375, a record that stood nine years.



11) England’s John Lever is seen with a Vaseline-soaked gauze over his eyebrows during the Test series in India in 1976-77. The reasoning was this helped prevent beads of sweat entering his eyes.

Lever took 7-46 on Test debut in the first Test in Delhi, swinging the ball in unhelpful conditions. During the third Test in Chennai, Indian captain Bishan Singh Bedi accused Lever of cheating by shining the ball using Vaseline.
Lever wasn’t punished, but India lost the series 1-3.

12) February 9, 1980, saw scenes that have rarely been seen on a cricket field. 


West Indies, on short tour to New Zealand, felt the umpires were biased. In the first Test in Dunedin, Michael Holding knocked over the stumps at the striker’s end after a caught-behind was turned down by umpire John Hastie. “This was not cricket and I didn't have to be part of it. I was on my way to the pavilion, quite prepared not to bowl again, when Clive Lloyd and (Deryck) Murray persuaded me back,” Holding said.
Later in the tour, Colin Croft shoulder-barged umpire Fred Goodall while running in to bowl. It marked the lowest point in the cricket relations between the two teams and the only incident where an umpire was assaulted by a player in an international game.



13) England captain and Pakistani umpire Shakoor Rana were embroiled in an angry, nose-to-nose, finger-wagging exchange on December 8, 1987, in Faisalabad.

England were miffed with Pakistani umpires in the series when things boiled over with this incident. Rana accused Gatting of cheating by moving a fielder while the bowler was running in.

Abuses were exchanged. Rana refused to umpire without a written apology from Gatting. Gatting demanded the same for being called a cheat. Day 3 was lost entirely with England in a strong position to level the series.
Gatting grudgingly apologised (above) at the behest of the England board.


14) BBC employees were on strike hence there’s no video recording of one of the greatest knocks in one-day cricket. On June 18, 1983, in Tunbridge Wells, India captain Kapil Dev came out to bat against Zimbabwe with the score reading 9-4 (soon to be 17-5). 


Kapil proceeded to pound 175 off 138 balls with 16 fours and six sixes, establishing a new record score for ODIs. India’s qualification to the semifinal was on the line.
They beat Zimbabwe here. Revitalised by Kapil’s feat, India went on to stun West Indies in the final.



15) On March 22 1992, the scoreboard at the Sydney Cricket Ground tells the story as England win a controversial rain-affected World Cup semifinal against South Africa.

Rain stopped play when South Africa needed 22 runs off 13 balls. Two overs were lost and according to the much-despised rain rule, the target was reworked to 22 off 1 ball).
It’s been 19 years since the incident and South Africa are yet to win a knock-out match at the World Cup.

16) The scoreboard at the Pietermaritzburg Oval in South Africa during this February 14 2003 World Cup game makes astonishing reading. 


Sri Lanka paceman Chaminda Vaas had reduced Bangladesh to 5-4 in the first over, taking all four wickets. Vaas took a hat-trick with the first three balls of the game, setting up a 10-wicket win.



17) Umpires Max O’Connell and Donald Weser persuade Australian batsman Dennis Lillee to swap his aluminium bat for a standard wooden one.

In the 1979 Ashes Test at Perth, England captain Mike Brearley noticed the ball had gone out of shape since Lillee’s arrival at the crease. There was no stipulation against aluminium bats so Lillee didn’t budge.
Australia captain Greg Chappell had to come out to intervene. Lillee finally threw away his bat in anger.

18) Helmets with visors were a rarity for long. On February 18, 1986, in an ODI in Kingston, Jamaica, Mike Gatting was struck on the nose by a bouncer from West Indies’ Malcolm Marshall. 


Recalling the incident, Marshall said, 'I went to pick the ball up. I actually saw this piece of bone on it. I was so scared, I dropped it.


19) Murmurs about his action were abound but this was the first time the unorthodox spinner Muttiah Muralitharan was no-balled for throwing. Umpire Darrell Hair laid down the law on Boxing Day at the Melbourne Cricket Ground in 1995.
Cricket would never be the same again. Sri Lanka would emerge stronger from the incidents of the tour to beat Australia in the World Cup final a few months later.


Thursday, August 18, 2011

Google and Motorola.....things if the deal would have happened in 2010



Google just plunked down $12.5 billion for Motorola Mobility. Would the deal have been cheaper if Big G had just purchased a handset maker back in January 2010 rather than launching the ill-fated Nexus One instead?


To figure that out, we need to look back at the state of Motorola some 19 months ago and apply some mathematical magic.


The thought experiment


When the Nexus One was introduced, Motorola sported a market cap of about $10.6 billion. That's for the entire Motorola beast, including the infrastructure and enterprise operations that later became Motorola Solutions. At the time, mobile devices represented 31 percent of Motorola's sales and did not generate profits. The only fair division available is to split the company along revenue lines.


Thirty-one percent of $10.6 billion is $3.3 billion, and Google is paying 3.8 times that amount. If the deal falls apart for some reason, like failing regulatory approval or due to Motorola's shareholder vote, Google will pay a $2.5 billion breakup fee that nearly equals our hypothetical early-2010 market cap.


In slightly more realistic terms, Google would probably have needed a similar-sized buyout premium back then. This would put the theoretical buyout price at $6.2 billion, or about half of the final price tag.


When Motorola separated last December, the final value of Mobility was one-ninth of the total company—Motorola shareholders received one Mobility share per eight regular shares. Using that ratio instead, you'd get a fair price of $1.9 billion including the buyout boost.


The road not taken


Any way you slice it, Google could have saved a truckload of cash by getting into the hardware game much earlier. Its bold plan to revolutionize the way cell phones are sold fizzled early on, and the Nexus One became nothing but a developer phone in less than six months' time. We don't know what that failed experiment ended up costing Google, but most of the pain was probably passed to Nexus-maker HTC.


Since then, Android's reference models have jumped from one manufacturer to another, including the Samsung-designed Nexus S and Motorola's Xoom tablet. With this acquisition safely under its vest from an early date, Google could have kept that zig-zagging firmly under control and in-house, while also clamping down on the much-maligned Android fragmentation issues.


Moreover, a stronger, Moto-powered patent portfolio might have encouraged Apple to keep its litigious fingers away from Samsung and HTC. Google could have been an official white knight standing by to help any handset designer in Apple's crosshairs. (Then again, Samsung is no slouch in gadgets patents either and Cupertino sure is going after that target. And Oracle would still be complaining about misused Java code. There are no magic bullets in the patent wars.)


On the other hand, Google would also have lost a chance to build the diverse support system that Android now enjoys. Some call it fragmentation and others call it choice or diversity; from that perspective, Mountain View would be probably better off leaving Motorola alone altogether, though it did manage to round up quotes from handset manufacturers saying they support the buyout.


What's new?


Ironically, buying Motorola Mobility makes Google a truer copy of the Apple business model. No longer a hands-off software provider with no financial interest in handset sales, Google now needs to worry about hardware implementation and direct profits. This two-headed beast will deliver the purest Android experience on the market, and will be held up as a role model or pariah when things go right or very wrong for the platform.


And let's not forget that Motorola Mobility might not go home with Google after all. Perhaps the biggest reason to pick up Motorola rather than just buying another basket of protective patents is that regulators might block a pure patent deal but could let this agreement pass because Google is buying hardware operations where it holds no monopoly whatsoever. That doesn't make it a slam-dunk, however.


All told, leaving Motorola on the table for a year and a half added at least $6 billion to the dollar cost but also brought about a slew of less obvious costs—and benefits.


For better or worse, Android just changed in a big way. And if Google had made this move a year ago, the market would look very different today in that unpredictable way that makes hurricanes out of fluttering butterfly wings.

Saturday, August 6, 2011

Barefoot into Cyberspace

Barefoot into Cyberspace

ADVENTURES IN SEARCH OF TECHNO-UTOPIA

by Becky Hogge

Contents

§             Prologue: Fierce Dancing
§             Chapter 1: Digging the command line
§             Chapter 2: Courage is contagious
§             Chapter 3: Information wants to be free
§             Chapter 4: Just kids
§             Chapter 5: Anarchists in the UK
§             Chapter 6: Information Overload
§             Chapter 7: Learning to love the Goolag
§             Chapter 8: Ciphers and Doppelgangers
§             Chapter 9: Infowar
§             Epilogue: Return to Chaos
§             Acknowledgements
§             Glossary
§             References


Alexander Solzhenitsyn



Prologue: Fierce Dancing

When I was sixteen, I read a book called Fierce Dancing: Adventures in the Underground. It was written by CJ Stone, a columnist for the Big Issue, and it was about the free party and road protest movement in Britain. Although I was a bit too young to have ever been to a proper free party, to join convoys of crusties on the way to an unsuspecting field in the heart of the British countryside and dance straight for twenty hours, I’d been to the odd local rave. Around Brighton, where I grew up, sound systems could set up in a forgotten pocket of the South Downs for a few brief hours before being disturbed by a police force now empowered by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act of 1994 to shut us down. We had a lot of fun.
Fierce Dancing filled in the blanks, it told the stories of the alternative cultures – pagans, new age travellers, punks and drop-outs – that had coalesced around this scene and contributed to its vibrancy. It told tales of women who gardened vegetable plots in no knickers, tepee valleys in the depths of Wales, and how to make poppy tea. It was, in that most adolescent sense, a revelation. And to an adolescent growing up in the consumerist nineties, seven years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and seventeen years into the rule of Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative party where alternative ideas about how to live seemed only to exist to sell ice cream and health drinks, it was also an escape. I’d often wondered what had happened to all the hippies. My favourite film at that time was Easy Rider. The legacy of the counterculture was celebrated in books and on TV, but, outside of the odd rave, the world around me seemed to contain little of the freedom, the rebellion and the exuberance that the sixties had supposedly promised.
For Stone, I suspect Fierce Dancing was a kind of eulogy. I suspect, from the way he speaks about them, that he didn’t expect the communities he was recording to survive much longer. The book itself is now out of print. I spoke to its publisher at a drinks party recently, who told me that it had sold around 25,000 copies. That figure is, apparently, “not bad for a zeitgeist book”.
Barefoot into Cyberspace, the book you’re about to read, is a zeitgeist book, too. At least, that’s what I intended it to be. At the end of 2009 I set out to record for posterity characters that, since I left adolescence and Brighton behind, had played key roles in the digital counterculture I eventually settled in to and that I suspected was about to disappear. These characters weren’t the “rip, mix, burn”, iPad-wielding social media consultants and purveyors of gadget-prop so often associated with the web. They were hackers and geeks, command-line cowboys, info-terrorists and civil libertarians. They had seen in the rise of many-to-many communications technology an opportunity to free modern society from corrupt institutions, to develop new ways of organising away from the imperative of industrial capitalism, and to seize agency and power from the jaws of the consumerist beast.
For the time that I travelled with them, I believed these things, too. I believed in them enough to abandon my career as a journalist and run an organisation called the Open Rights Group (ORG) which, as well as fighting to protect basic civil liberties online, campaigns against any kind of regulation that could prejudice the liberating aspects of the ’net. I don’t run ORG anymore, which is probably a good thing given how sceptical I became that its mission could succeed. It wasn’t that I didn’t think the techno-Utopians were onto something. I simply feared that the institutions of the old world they thought they could topple – be they corporations, media or politicians – had a lot of fight left in them.
But if Barefoot into Cyberspace was intended to be a eulogy, I hadn’t figured on WikiLeaks. Almost from the moment I started collecting material for this book, their story began to trespass on mine. By the end of the year – 2010 – in which the majority of this book was written, the culture I’d been a part of for almost a decade was headline news all over the world. It’s too early to tell what effect that will have on the techno-Utopian dream. All I can say is that it transformed this project from an exercise in cultural anthropology into something more like an adventure story. As a result, I had more fun writing this book than I could have imagined when I started it. I hope you enjoy reading it just as much.
Becky Hogge, June 2011



Read This

This book is distributed by Barefoot Publishing Limited under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 UK: England & Wales Licence.That means:
You are free
  • to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
  • to make derivative works
  • to make commercial use of the work
Under the following conditions
  • Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
  • Share Alike. If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar licence to this one.
  • For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the licence terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to http://barefootintocyberspace.com/book/hypertext
Any of these conditions may be waived by seeking permission from Barefoot Publishing Limited. To contact Barefoot Publishing Limited, email barefootpublishing [AT] gmail [DOT] com.


Book Link:

http://www.4shared.com/document/epJpS1Fq/Barefoot_into_Cyberspace.html