In which World Cup, the matches were reduced from 60 to 50 overs per innings? ?->(Show Answer!)

1. In which World Cup, the matches were reduced from 60 to 50 overs per innings?

Answer: Reliance World Cup, 1987.

Reply

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->In which World Cup, the matches were reduced from 60 to 50 overs per innings?....

QA->Who becomes the fastest batsman to claim 9000 ODI runs (205 innings), surpassing former Indian captain Sourav Ganguly, who did so in 228 innings?....

QA->Sri Lankan batsman who became the 15th player in ODI history and the fifth from his nation to go past 9000 runs in the limited overs game?....

QA->In which World Cup, coloured clothing, white balls, day/night matches, and an alteration to the fielding restrictions were introduced for the first time?....

QA->Who holds the record of scoring most runs through boundaries in an innings in World Cup?....

MCQ-> In an innings of a T20 cricket match (a team can bowl for 20 overs) 6 bowlers bowled from the fielding side, with a bowler allowed maximum of 4 overs. Only the three specialist bowlers bowled their full quota of 4 overs each, and the remaining 8 overs were shared among three non-specialist bowlers. The economy rates of four bowlers were 6, 6, 7 and 9 respectively. (Economy rate is the total number of runs conceded by a bowler divided by the number of overs bowled by that bowler). This however, does not include the data of the best bowler (lowest economy rate) and the worst bowler (highest economy rate). The number of overs bowled and the economy rate of any bowler are in integers.Read the two statements below:S1: The worst bowler did not bowl the minimum number of overs. S2: The best bowler is a specialist bowler.Which of the above statements or their combinations can help arrive at the minimum number of overs bowled by a non-specialist bowler?...

MCQ-> Answer the following questions based on the information given below:In a sports event, six teams (A, B, C, D, E and F) are competing against each other Matches are scheduled in two stages. Each team plays three matches in Stage – I and two matches in Stage – II. No team plays against the same team more than once in the event. No ties are permitted in any of the matches. The observations after the completion of Stage – I and Stage – II are as given below.Stage-I:• One team won all the three matches.• Two teams lost all the matches.• D lost to A but won against C and F.• E lost to B but won against C and F.• B lost at least one match.• F did not play against the top team of Stage-I.Stage-II:• The leader of Stage-I lost the next two matches• Of the two teams at the bottom after Stage-I, one team won both matches, while the other lost both matches.• One more team lost both matches in Stage-II.The two teams that defeated the leader of Stage-I are:
...

MCQ-> Directions for the following two questions: Answer the questions based on the following information.The batting average (BA) of a Test batsman is computed from runs scored and innings played — completed innings and incomplete innings (not out) in the following manner:$$r_1 =$$ Number of runs scored in completed innings$$n_1 =$$ Number of completed innings$$r_2 =$$ Number of runs scored in incomplete innings$$n_2 =$$ Number of incomplete innings$$BA=\frac{r_1+r_2}{n_1}$$To better assess a batsman’s accomplishments, the ICC is considering two other measures $$MBA_1$$ and $$MBA_2$$ defined as follows:$$MBA_1 = \frac{r_1}{n_1} + \frac{n_2}{n_1}*max[0,(\frac{r_2}{n_2}-\frac{r_1}{n_1})]$$$$MBA_2 = \frac{r_1 + r_2}{n_1 + n_2}$$Based on the above information which of the following is true?
...

MCQ-> Directions for the following four questions: Answer the questions on the basis of the information given below.The year was 2006. All six teams in Pool A of World Cup hockey, play each other exactly once.Each win earns a team three points, a draw earns one point and a loss earns zero points. The two teams with the highest points qualify for the semifinals. In case of a tie, the team with the highest goal difference (Goal For . Goals Against) qualifies.In the opening match, Spain lost to Germany.After the second round (after each team played two matches), the pool table looked as shown below.

In the third round, Spain played Pakistan, Argentina played Germany, and New Zealand played South Africa. All the third round matches were drawn. The following are some results from the fourth and fifth round matches(a) Spain won both the fourth and fifth round matches.(b) Both Argentina and Germany won their fifth round matches by 3 goals to 0.(c) Pakistan won both the fourth and fifth round matches by 1 goal to 0.Which one of the following statements is true about matches played in the first two rounds?
...

MCQ-> Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Certain words/phrases are printed in bold to help you to locate them while answering some of the questions. The outside world has pat answers concerning extremely impoverished countries, especially those in Africa. Everything comes back, again and again, to corruption and misrule. Western officials argue that Africa simply needs to behave itself better, to allow market forces to operate without interference by corrupt rulers. Ye the critics of African governance have it wrong. Politics simply can't explain Africa's prolonged economic crisis. The claim that Africa's corruption is the basic source of the problem does not withstand serious scrutiny. During the past decade I witnessed how relatively well-governed countries in Africa, such as Ghana, Malawi, Mali and Senegal, failed to prosper, whereas societies in Asia perceived to have extensive corruption, such as Bangladesh, Indonesia and Pakistan, enjoyed rapid economic growth. What is the explanation? Every situation of extreme poverty around the world contains some of its own unique causes, which need to be diagnosed as a doctor would a patient. For example, Africa is burdened with malaria like no other part of the world, simply because it is unlucky in providing the perfect conditions for that disease; high temperatures, plenty of breeding sites and particular species of malaria-transmitting mosquitoes that prefer to bite humans rather than cattle.Another myth is that the developed world already gives plenty of aid to the world's poor. Former U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, Paul O'Neil expressed a common frustration when he remarked about aid for Africa : "We've spent trillions of dollars on these problems and we have damn near nothing to show for it". O'Neil was no foe of foreign aid. Indeed, he wanted to fix the system so that more U.S. aid could be justified. But he was wrong to believe that vast flows of aid to Africa had been squandered. President Bush said in a press conference in April 2004 that as "the greatest power on the face of the earth, we have an obligation to help the spread of freedom. We have an obligation to feed the hungry". Yet how does the U.S. fulfill its obligation? U.S. aid to farmers in poor countries to help them grow more food runs at around $200 million per year, far less than $1 per person per year for the hundreds of millions of people living in subsistence farm households.From the world as a whole, the amount of aid per African per year is really very small, just $30 per sub- Saharan African in 2002. Of that modest amount, almost $5 was actually for consultants from the donor countries, more than $3 was for emergency aid, about $4 went for servicing Africa's debts and $ 5 was for debt-relief operations. The rest, about $12, went to Africa. Since the "money down the drain" argument is heard most frequently in the U.S., it's worth looking at the same calculations for U.S. aid alone. In 2002, the U.S. gave $3 per sub-Saharan African. Taking out the parts for U.S. consultants and technical cooperation, food and other emergency aid, administrative costs and debt relief, the aid per African came to grand total of 6 cents.The U.S. has promised repeatedly over the decades, as a signatory to global agreements like the Monterrey Consensus of 2002, to give a much larger proportion of its annual output, specifically upto 0.7% of GNP, to official development assistance. The U.S. failure to follow through has no political fallout domestically, of course, because not one in a million U.S. citizens even knows of statements like the Monterrey Consensus. But no one should underestimate the salience that it has around the world. Spin as American might about their nation's generosity, the poor countries are fully aware of what the U.S. is not doing.The passage seems to emphasize that the outside world has
...