Cricket World Cup - Wikipedia. The 1. 97. 5 Cricket World Cup (officially called the Prudential Cup) was the first edition of the Cricket World Cup, organised by the International Cricket Conference (ICC). It was held from 7 to 2. June 1. 97. 5 in England. The tournament was sponsored by Prudential Assurance Company and had eight participating countries: the six Test- playing teams of the time (Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Pakistan and the West Indies), plus leading Associate nations Sri Lanka and, for the only time, East Africa. The teams were divided into two groups of four, with each team playing the other teams in their group once; the top two from each group qualified for the semi- finals, with the winners of these matches meeting in the final. Each match consisted of 6. England, New Zealand. West Indies and Australia were the teams to qualify for the semi- finals, making this the only World Cup thus far in which no team from the Indian subcontinent made this stage. Australia defeated England and the West Indies beat New Zealand, before the West Indies, the pre- tournament favourites, defeated Australia in the final at Lord's by 1. World Cup winners. The opening match of the tournament featured one of the most bizarre batting efforts in one- day history, by India's Sunil Gavaskar. After England scored 3. Dennis Amiss making 1. Gavaskar batted through the full 6. Indian fans. The format of the first world cup was 2 groups of four teams each, and each team playing each other. The top two team from each group then advance to the Semi Finals, where the winners then advance (qualified) for the finals. The first Cricket World Cup was played in England on seven different venues. A total of 1. 6 matches were played in the 1. Cricket World Cup, including two semi- finals and a final. The ICC decided that England should host the first tournament because it was ready to put the resources needed in organising the inaugural event. India proposed that it should host the third Cricket World Cup, but most ICC members believed England was a more suitable venue because longer period of daylight in June. This meant that a match could be completed in one day. Sri Lanka and East Africa were the only two teams without Test status. Group stage. Australia initially suffered a collapse just as dramatic, falling to 3. History of Daylight Saving Time — DST. Daylight Saving Time (DST) is used to save energy and make better use of daylight. It was first used in 1908 in Thunder Bay. The Bitter End 1969 - 1975. January 1, 1969 - Henry Cabot Lodge, former American ambassador to South Vietnam, is nominated by President-elect. The 1975 Cricket World Cup (officially called the Prudential Cup) was the first edition of the Cricket World Cup, organised by the International Cricket Conference (ICC). The 1975 was amazing live. I've been to several concerts and I can easily say that this concert was one of the best ones I've ever been to.Gilmour (2. 8 from 2. The West Indies won the toss and sent New Zealand in to bat first. New Zealand batted well against the bowling at first, reaching 9. However, when captain Glenn Turner (3. Geoff Howarth (5. New Zealand lost 9/6. The first digital camera was patented in 1978. It was called the electronic still camera. Sasson was not allowed to publicly talk about it or show. Title: The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975) 7.4 /10. Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site? If you’re a digital photography buff, here’s some required trivia knowledge: what you see above is a photograph of the first digital camera ever built. The West Indies responded, with Alvin Kallicharan (7. Gordon Greenidge (5. West Indies to their target. Australia won by 4 wickets. Headingley, Leeds, England. West Indies won by 5 wickets. Kennington Oval, London, England. In the final, the West Indies beat Australia by 1. Clive Lloyd (1. 02 from 8. The Australian innings was marked by top- order batsmen being run out when going for runs after misfields. February 10-March 1, 1975: Bill Wyman uses the Rolling Stones Mobile Studio at his home in England to work on compiling unissued old Rolling Stones recordings for. More Americans describe themselves as “pro-life” on abortion (51%) than “pro-choice” (42%) for the first time since Gallup began asking the question in 1995. A total of five of their team were run out, three by Vivian Richards. There was no 'Man of the Series' awarded in 1. West Indies won by 1. Lord's, London, England. Attendance: 2. 4,0. Best Movies of ALL TIME . Anyway, you click on us, which is the surest way a website has of measuring interest in its content. The All- TIME 1. 00 Movies feature. Thousands of readers have written in to cheer or challenge our selections, and thousands more have voted for their own favorites. The response simply underscores Richard’s and my long- held belief that everybody has two jobs: his own and movie critic. The idea was to assemble 1. TIME began, with the March 3, 1. Later, each of us was asked to contribute five items in sidebars called Great Performances (acting), Guilty Pleasures (trash treasures) and Top Scores (soundtracks). Essentially, though, a century of movies from 8. That shouldn’t be hard: pick a picture for each year, with 1. Not so simple, in fact, for we faced a couple of complications. The first was that two of us were to agree on the selections; and, though my admiration for Schickel is hardly bounded, and he probably doesn’t mind me, no two critics will agree on all, or even most, great films. The other is the onus of the list- making process. It’s a truism that a list like this takes either an hour (go with your initial inspirations) or a month (weigh every film with Solomonic probity). Our effort clocked in at about four months, off and on. And the clock is still running. Why do the list? I guess Josh and Mark and Jim Kelly, our peerless leader, hoped to sharpen the profile of the website, and indirectly the magazine. As a TIME staff member, I write for the website pro bono, or rather pro ego. Or, honestly, for the fun of it. That’s how this TIME 1. LISTOMANIAI feel one of my grand gender generalizations coming on, and I can’t resist it, so here goes. Guys love to make lists. The assembling and codifying of useless information speaks to our inner math nerd, our rampant nostalgiast. Girls can play Little League baseball now, but the kid in the stands keeping the box score, and tallying individual achievements into season slugging percentages, is very likely to be a boy. Turning our pastimes into numbers is a way not only of quantifying but also of justifying them. They acquire an atomic weight; to rank them is to give them solidity, meaning. As a kid I would study the major league batting averages in the Sunday paper more assiduously than any school subject, and I kept box scores of the games our neighborhood team played. Sometimes I devised imaginary box scores too. I know what you’re thinking: he must have been a lonely child. Actually, I wasn’t; I had a loving, indulgent family. But around the nation, countless other kids, more talented or preoccupied than I, were doing the same thing, bending the MLB numbers, reconfiguring the figures. Eventually they would form a group, the Society for American Baseball Research, SABR for short. One of their group, Bill James, coined the term SABRmetrics to describe the grown- up, boy- like study of those numbers. The statistics they produced, and the inferences they made from those stats, would enrich the game and change the way it was played. So there. As with baseball, so with favorite movies, TV shows, comics. One of my youthful heroes was Fred Von Bernewitz, a Maryland boy not much older than I was. He created, mimeographed and published the E. C. Checklist, a compilation of every story in each of the dozen or so “New Trend” comic books (Vault of Horror, Weird Science, Mad, etc.) that EC published from 1. Bless his innocent obsession. His list was a signal to hundreds of other E. C. I mean, how could it be, if so many other shared it? A half- century later, with the hardcover, much- expanded edition of the Checklist still in print (under the title Tales of Terror! The EC Companion), Von Bernewitz’s labor of adolescent love is easy to celebrate as trash- art pedantry. Back then, though, applying the rudimentary scholarship of list- making to comics was as radical as Brando’s first movie mumble, or the scream of Little Richard on “Long Tall Sally.”I too was a teenage listmaker. I saw a lot of movies and, at year’s end, picked my favorites. I recently dug up my Top Five of 1. The Seventh Seal, Some Like It Hot, North By Northwest, Rio Bravo and Imitation of Life. Looking at this quintet, I marvel at the maturity of my youthful tastes. The point is that listmaking is a first step to an informed enthusiasm. Juggling, sifting, thinking about the best films leads to measured judgments, the plundering of film histories, a nascent critical acuity. That’s how a hobby becomes a craft, sometimes a career. Just add verbs and thoughts. Can the choices Schickel and I made have the shelf life of the Von Bernewitz checklist? Probably not; this is just one of what must be a hundred 1. Does film criticism have an equivalent to SABRmetrics? You can’t calibrate genius. There are no Win Scores, no Favorite Toy, for movies and their makers. Many readers would say that Schickel and I have no greater claim than anyone else to impose our crotchets on you. Doesn’t everyone see a lot of movies and, gradually, amass some all- time preferences? Sure. But, pardon me, we’re better. Our claims to expertise: 1. Our employment is our diploma. Still and all, list of favorites like the All- TIME 1. Movies is just that: a banquet, a groaning board of our fondest prejudices. You’re all invited to devour the food, or throw it at us. ONCE, TWICE, THREE TIMES 1. There are 1. 01 ways to choose 1. But I participated only in this century selection, so I’ll tell you what I did. First it’s like a game: I’m throwing a party? My idea was to invite different sorts for a richer mix. Highbrows and no- brows, the solemn and the frivolous, embracing many genres (musical, western) and forms (short films, experimental, documentaries). I want the Marx Brothers to co- exist with a Robert Bresson nano- drama. And Indian family melodramas to rub shoulders with 7. An eight- decade, international melange. Then it’s research. I re- viewed many of the films under consideration. I looked at the IMDb’s list of the top 2. I dipped once more into Roger Ebert’s two volumes called The Great Movies, which contain some very thoughtful journalism on the subject. I also took a long browse through the stacks of that moldy old library of film trivia, my brain. The result was about 1. Richard the First (Schickel) had already compiled a list of 1. Neither of us knew the other’s preferences until we’d finished this initial round. After this double- blind taste test, the serious work began on the All- TIME 1. Movies. Finally, then, it’s like a marriage. Once, twice, three times 1. Schickel’s list, my list, our list. For movie critics, deciding which films are best is an anecdotal way of debating first principles. It’s theoretical and, toward the end of the process, it’s personal. Schickel and I were the co- captains of a lifeboat, with some of our favorites clinging to the sides, and we had to determine whose stiff fingers to pry off, which noble films to send into the sea of anonymity. One of the great, not guilty, pleasures of this exercise was to spend lots of quality schmoozing time. I live and work in Manhattan, Schickel is based in L. A. But whereas I do all my work for TIME, the magazine and website, he is a busy- busy freelance: writing books, contributing a book review column to the Los Angeles Times and cobbling up feature- length documentaries on top auteurs, most recently Woody Allen, Charles Chaplin and Martin Scorsese. He snorted at some of my selections (notably, The Fly); I yawned at some of his. He thought I was too much the China hand and Bolly- woosiast; I rankled at the inclusion of nearly every film noir melodrama ever made. I argued that, with A Streetcar Named Desire representing Marlon Brando and director Elia Kazan, the presence of the Kazan- Brando On the Waterfront was redundant; he trumped my nagging by citing Waterfront in the Great Performances and Top Scores sections. Schickel and I knew we were playing a game; we did our research; and we’re still married. CUTTING ROOM FLOOR: Here are the films from our original lists that were dropped: Schickel’s Cuts. Corliss’s Cuts. INSIDE THE LISTSA scanning of both lists shows that Schickel and Corliss agreed on 3. Sherlock Jr., Sunrise, City Lights, King Kong, Bride of Frankenstein, His Girl Friday, Pinocchio, The Lady Eve, Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Double Indemnity, Children of Paradise, Detour, White Heat, Kind Hearts and Coronets, A Streetcar Named Desire, Singin’ in the Rain, Ikiru, Ugetsu, Smiles of a Summer Night, Sweet Smell of Success, Yojimbo, The Manchurian Candidate, 8- 1/2, Persona, The Godfather and The Godfather Part II, Aguirre the Wrath of God, Chinatown, Taxi Driver, E. T. Note that, as we approach the present day, agreement gets rarer. We had 1. 0 coincidental selections in the 1. That mirrors a consensus on classic films, especially classics from Hollywood, and a fragmenting of taste ever since. There were also five movies on both early lists that didn’t make the final selection: Potemkin, Scarface, The Miracle of Morgan’s Creek, Raise the Red Lantern and All About My Mother. I guess we came to think of Potemkin an “official” great film that lodged in our memories more than in our guts. Raise the Red Lantern I reluctantly dumped in favor of another Gong Li- starring Chinese film, Farewell My Concubine, with its explicit approach to Chinese politics and a great performance by Leslie Cheung. As for directors of the other three films, they already had films on the final list. You see The Good, the Bad and the Ugly and Once Upon a Time in the West? Listen to the conversation Mark Coatney conducted with Schickel and me, and you’ll learn that, among the strategies Richard the First used in preparing his original list, one was to start with the directors he thought the best, then choose his favorite of their films. Further, he wanted to reward peak periods in the careers of great directors.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2017
Categories |