Bolton, bowlers see West Indies Women crash to heavy defeat

first_imgTAUNTON, England (CMC) – Out-of-sorts West Indies Women proved no match for World champions Australia Women and crashed to a heavy eight-wicket defeat, as they opened their ICC Women’s Cricket World Cup on a disappointing note here yesterday.They opted to bat first but were dismissed for 204 in the 48th over, with teenaged opener Hayley Matthews top-scoring with 46, captain Stafanie Taylor getting 45 and Chedean Nation, 39.All-rounder Deandra Dottin chipped in with a brisk 29 but veteran seamer Ellyse Perry grabbed three for 47 while leg-spinner Kristen Beams (2-30) and left-arm spinner Jess Jonassen (2-39) claimed two wickets apiece to cripple the Windies innings.The Caribbean side were well placed at one stage on 123 for two in the 33rd over but failed to kick on and lost their last eight wickets for 81 runs.In reply, opener Nicole Bolton struck her third One-Day International hundred – a delightful, unbeaten 107 – as the Aussies cantered to their target in the 39th over without raising a sweat.The left-hander hit 14 boundaries off 116 balls, adding 171 in a first-wicket stand with opening partner Beth Mooney whose 70 required 85 deliveries and included seven fours and a six.Off-spinner Taylor claimed two for 33 but the Windies bowling lacked edge and their fielding effort was ordinary, especially late in the innings as frustrations grew over the productive opening stand.Heading into the contest here on the backs of five straight defeats in warm-ups, the Windies were always facing a tough challenge against the clinical Aussies and played true to predictions.The 19-year-old Matthews accounted for much of West Indies’ early momentum, putting on 34 for the first wicket with Felicia Walters (7) and 52 for the second wicket with Nation.Walters, on ODI debut, laboured for 30 deliveries before pulling Perry to Elyse Villani in frustration, to depart in the 11th over.Matthews and Nation steadied the innings but their partnership hardly rattled the Aussies as it required 80 deliveries and Windies were still short of three figures at the half-way stage.All told, Matthews faced 63 deliveries and counted seven fours and appeared headed for her fifth ODI fifty when she gifted her wicket, bowled loosely, driving down the wrong line at Jonassen.Nation, who faced 73 balls and hit two fours and a six, was joined by Taylor and they put on a further 37, again without pressuring the Aussies.With the tempo needing a boost, Nation whipped Beams to Alex Blackwell at short mid-wicket in the 33rd over, to set the Windies back.Dottin arrived to play a typical cameo in adding 34 for the fourth wicket with Taylor. She smashed six boundaries off a mere 20 balls and was accelerating the innings nicely when she missed a drive at Perry and lost her off stump in the 37th over.The innings then declined quickly as former skipper Merrissa Aguilleira holed out to cover for one, off seamer Megan Schutt in the 39th before the last recognised batsman Shanel Daley miscued a Beams full toss to long on to perish for six in the 41st overTaylor tried to keep the innings together but holed out in the deep in the 46th over after facing 57 balls and counting a four and a six.Australia cruised in reply as Bolton and Mooney removed any doubt about the result with their dominant opening stand off just 181 deliveries.The Windies struggled badly and their only bright spark came when Matthews took a brilliant running catch in the deep to dismiss captain Meg Lanning in the 35th over for 12.West Indies take on India on Thursday in their second match of the tournament.WEST INDIES inningsH. Matthews b Jonassen 46F. Walters c Villani b Perry 7C. Nation c Blackwell b Beams 39S. Taylor c Villani b Jonassen 45D. Dottin b Perry 29M. Aguilleira c Lanning b Schutt 1S. Daley c Blackwell b Beams 6A. Mohammed run-out 9A. Fletcher b Perry 3S. Selman not out 3S. Connell run-out 1Extras: (b-2, lb-5, w-8) 15Total: (all out, 47.5 overs) 204Fall of wickets: 1-34, 2-86, 3-123, 4-157, 5-161, 6-168, 7-196, 8-196, 9-202.Bowling: Jonassen 9-0-39-2 (w-2), Schutt 8.5-2-22-1, Perry 9-1-47-3 (w-2), Beams 10-0-30-2, Gardner 8-0-35-0 (w1), Villani 3-0-24-0AUSTRALIA WOMENB. Mooney b Taylor 70N. Bolton not out 107M. Lanning c Matthews b Taylor 12E. Perry not out 5Extras: (b-4, lb-2, w-5) 11Total: (2 wkts, 38.1 overs) 205Fall of wickets: 1-171, 2-189.Bowling: Selman 4-0-19-0 (w-2), Connell 6-1-36-0, Taylor 8.1-0-33-2 (w-1), Daley 5-0-27-0, Mohammed 5-0-23-0, Dottin 5-0-25-0, Matthews 3-0-22-0, Fletcher 2-0-20-0.Points: Australia Women 2, West Indies Women 0.last_img read more

A Visit With Oasis tlc in Middletown

first_imgPhotos by Tina ColellaMIDDLETOWN – OASIS tlc is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to promote inclusion and acceptance of autistic individuals into their local communities by establish- ing environmentally exemplary farm centers that provide meaningful work, peaceful and healthy residences and community interaction.Students of the Transitional Residential/Adult Independent Learning (T.R.A.I.L.) Center help with raising chickens for eggs, growing food in a geodesic dome (soon to also be raising fish too), weave tote bags and color coded collars for the goats, create artwork and make bread. The farm features baby chicks and baby goats that are raised for their milk to make cheese and soap.Mai Cleary, president of OASIS tlc, holds a new baby chick while residents bake bread in the residence’s kitchen.last_img read more

GFI alumi are part of major league baseball history

first_imgFrom small beginnings in home town stadiums, many of the faces that have crossed the home plate in Grand Forks have made their way to stardom in the major leagues.Brent Lillibridge played in the 2003 Grand Forks International with the Seattle Studs. He is seen here crossing home plate after belting a home run against the Reno Astros in the championship game.Lillibridge was an outstanding player at the University of Washington and would be chosen in the fourth round of the 2005 amateur draft by the Pittsburgh Pirates. Later he was traded to the Atlanta Braves and made his MLB debut April 26, 2008. He was then traded to the Chicago White Sox.He was part of White Sox history earlier this season when, on April 11, he hit the 10,000th home run in the history of the Sox franchise. One article describes Brent as outgoing and an individual of deep faith who tries to connect with the White Sox fan base. Apparently he makes as much usage of Twitter as anyone on the team. Just a couple of weeks after he hit that milestone home run for Chicago he was once again in the news: Versatile, skilled Lillibridge makes statement, screamed one headline. Another said, Utility player secures White Sox win with pair of defensive gems.This occurred in the ninth inning of a 3-2 victory over New York in Yankee stadium. To make back to back game saving catches is a rare feat. After watching these sparkling defensive plays on video one can only shake their head. In fact, two of baseball’s all-time greats, Alex Rodriguez and Derek Jeter were doing just that, reflecting some exasperation and frustration but no doubt accompanied with admiration for the athletic ability and hustle of Lillibridge.Making this night in the Big Apple even more remarkable was that Brent, normally an infielder, was playing in right field for only the eighth time in his career.White Sox Manager Ozzie Guillen quipped, “I finally found my closer.”From Grand Forks to Chicago; from this small town in Southern B.C. to New York and Yankee Stadium; from James Donaldson Park, an intimate ballpark on the United States/Canada border to 40,000 seat United States Cellular Field (formerly Comiskey Park)… and the story continues… the GFI – don’t miss it!Brent’s saving catch on video: read more

L.A. Museum Sued Over I.D.

first_imgThey had a contract.  The American Freedom Alliance (AFA), which takes no official position on Darwinism vs Intelligent Design but wanted to present both sides of what they considered an important public issue, was scheduled to show two films at the California Science Center’s IMAX Theater – one which assumes evolution, and one which argues against Darwin.  A press release from the Discovery Institute (which was sending some of its representatives for a follow-up panel discussion) somehow prompted the Center to cancel the contract, leaving the AFA scrambling to find another venue.  The event was held Oct. 25 to a smaller audience at USC with poorer projection facilities.  The AFA is suing the California Science Center for breach of contract.  They issued a press release on their AFA website (PDF format).  AFA President Avi Davis explained their case: “The Center is a public institution and our event was planned as a debate with both sides of the controversy represented.  It is Orwellian when a public institution tries to suppress particular ideas it deems unsavory.  It can be likened to a public library removing certain books from its shelves because the librarian disagrees with the viewpoints expressed in them.”  The lawsuit alleges that the Center “conspired to drop the event because they did not want the museum to be viewed as legitimizing intelligent design as a scientific theory,” and claims that pressure was brought to bear on the Center from the Smithsonian and other institutions to drop the event.    The AFA also held “The Darwin Debates,” a debate on the origin and evolution of life, at a theater in Beverly Hills on November 30, featuring Michael Shermer and Donald Prothero defending Darwin and Stephen Meyer and Richard Sternberg opposing.  A recording of this debate is available on the AFA website.    Mike Boehm at the Los Angeles Times reported on the lawsuit and what occasioned it, but presented a biased definition of intelligent design that its proponents would not accept:Intelligent design is the theory that an intelligent being, rather than impersonal forces such as Darwinian natural selection, is responsible for shaping life on Earth.  An overwhelming majority of scientists and science and natural history museums consider the theory of evolution to have been proved beyond a doubt by genetic and fossil evidence.  Critics of intelligent design have dismissed it as a superficially scientific cloak for the straightforwardly religious belief known as Creationism that’s anchored in a literal reading of the biblical Book of Genesis.The official definition of intelligent design seen on the Discovery Institute’s site states simply, “The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.”    John West at the Discovery Institute published a rebuttal to the LA Times article at Evolution News and Views explaining the Institute’s view of what transpired and why the California Science Center’s censorship of intelligent design was a big deal.  The previous day, Robert Crowther on Evolution News and Views explained the connection with the Smithsonian.OK, you have links to both sides of this dispute.  Are you going to trust one of the most left-wing newspapers in the country to give a fair report, when they can’t get the definition of I.D. right, and insist on misrepresenting the views of the plaintiffs?  As news develops about this lawsuit, we will report it, or you can go to the sites above for information.(Visited 17 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Trev Talks – Kinder Morgan Court Decision

first_imgThis week on Trev Talks, we discuss the recent court decision that stopped construction of the Kinder Morgan pipeline.  Alan Yu of Fort St. John for LNG joins Trevor to talk about the decision and what it means for our region and the country.They also discussed LNG, Prime Minister Trudeau, Premier Notley and of course all things Energy.You can watch the Youtube version of the show above or watch it on Facebook below. Listen for Trev Talks every Friday at 10 a.m. on Moose FM and shared live on Facebook and Youtube.last_img

Samsung still has time to correct its foldable dream

first_imgNew Delhi: Just when the industry through innovation in the smartphone business had hit stagnation, Samsung wowed us with its first foldable device “Galaxy Fold,” worth a whopping $2,000. A super-premium phone that took almost a decade in the making and opens like a book when unfolded, shouted everything next-generation. However, the expectations took a beating when reports of the Galaxy Fold issues surfaced. The units given to international tech reviewers encountered display distortion and screen flickering issues, forcing the South Korean giant to postpone its launch in Hong Kong and Shanghai on April 23 and 24 respectively, and issue a recall of review units. The big question lingers: Will the “Foldgate” make a dent in Samsung’s image like the Galaxy Note 7 with exploding batteries did in 2016? According to CyberMedia Research (CMR), the smartphone major has been mature and pragmatic enough by postponing its launch and sorting out all the issues before its general availiability. “All said, for Samsung, there is no race for first past the post with its foldable smartphone. It is more imperative for the company to focus on not delivering a flawed product, but rather ensuring highest consumer experience when the device goes on sales,” Prabhu Ram, Head, Industry Intelligence Group (IIG), CMR, told IANS. Defending its devices just days before its roll-out, a Samsung spokesperson assured that the firm would “thoroughly inspect” the units. According to market research firm Gartner, foldable phones would make up 5 per cent of high-end phones sales by 2023 with around 30 million units. According to Faisal Kawoosa, Founder and Principal Analyst of market research firm techARC, from a technology-rich company like Samsung, “one would expect things out only after reliability of desired levels are achieved”. The Galaxy Fold is expected to be priced around Rs 1,40,790 in India. “Nevertheless, the lab and real-world conditions play differently. I don’t see it as a big issue as the product has not exchanged hands with consumers yet. They have time to correct this aberration,” Kawoosa told IANS. Some units of the Galaxy Fold, which became the first phone with a foldable OLED display, is encountering two primary issues: the foldable screen seems to have a layer of protective layer that is similar to a cheap screen film. Several units reportedly failed after the layer was taken off. Few other screens failed because the hinge exposed areas which allowed debris to get inside of the display, thus, damaging the unit. “We expect that users will use a foldable phone as they do their regular smartphone, picking it up hundreds of times a day, unfolding it sporadically and typing on its plastic screen, which may scratch quickly depending on the way it folds,” Roberta Cozza, Research Director at Gartner had earlier said. However, according to market research firm techARC, this is primarily a material issue than a design. “I think till the time it’s a plastic-based screen, the chances of such mishaps remain high. I would certainly like to see a glass display, that too from credible makers like Corning, to have a reliable foldable screen,” stressed Kawoosa. Moreover, there’s no denying that the second-generation of foldable devices would be better that the experimental and ambitious first generation iterations. “The first generation of an innovation is always experimental, and which over successive iterations achieves perfection. Let’s’face it. The Galaxy Fold was just a mistake in timing. It does not take away anything from its manufacturing capabilities,” Ram noted.last_img read more