Loss prevention associates are measured and evaluated against the organization’s expectations in a variety of areas. LP managers are ranked based on shrinkage numbers, cash handling in the store, internal and external apprehensions, plus asset recovery, to mention but a few.Many of these tasks are easily measured, while others are more difficult to benchmark.Evaluating interviewer performance is one area that can be difficult to measure against the department’s overall expectations, but can be a major return on investment for the interviewer and organization.- Sponsor – A number of factors will influence an interviewer’s overall success, making it difficult to compare performance between interviewers. Differing employee populations, frequency of cases, interviewer style, training, management support, availability of a mentor, and emphasis on performance are just some of the factors that make it difficult to compare one interviewer against another.Unfortunately, many interviewers have learned to interview by observing coworkers who may or may not have had the skills to excel in an interview or to train the observer. In other situations, interviewers have been rewarded with a confession even when they have applied improper or ineffective strategies. Receiving this positive result translates into the misguided belief in the strategy’s effectiveness. If novice interviewers had the ability to test strategies in a large number of confrontations, they would discover for themselves the ones that are ineffective, but that requires time and insight. Meanwhile, management is left with a group of interviewers who are each marching to their own drummer.Why Monitor Interviewer Performance?There are a number of benefits for monitoring interviewer performance. The primary ones are related to lawsuits, employee morale, shrinkage numbers, and department reputation.Spending the time to monitor and measure an interviewer’s performance requires an investment of time, effort, and money by the organization. Employee development could be reason enough to institute a program, but it may be easier to justify the effort once a needs analysis has been conducted. Looking at the numbers alone won’t give a clear indication of the skills of the organization’s interviewers. Anyone who has worked in a company for any length of time knows that what should be happening and what really goes on are not always the same.Focus GroupsPrior to making any changes, the pulse of the organization should be taken. What is being done well, and where are the opportunities for change? The most effective way to determine this is through the use of focus groups. When well planned and used effectively, a focus group offers a bright-light solution to quickly identify the opportunities to improve.It is often useful to bring in a neutral party to act as the moderator for the group discussions. This removes obstacles to communication in the group. Associates will be more candid in their comments and observations when speaking to a third party. Using a third party who understands the business may help give the group’s responses a context and insight that an unfamiliar moderator might not possess. Of course, this assumes the moderator listens and does not encourage a particular outcome toward which he is biased.Selecting the topics of inquiry is generally done with senior management based on their knowledge of the organization and perception of existing problems. Once these topics have been determined, the focus group moderator develops questions to explore them and establishes an outline for the focus group’s discussion.When selecting individuals for the focus groups, it is useful to separate senior management from lower-level associates so there is the freedom to speak candidly at all levels without fear of repercussions. Including various levels of competence in the group may also assist in developing additional insights that would not have come to light otherwise.The moderator is responsible for controlling the discussion and preventing the meeting from deteriorating into a gripe session or one which is controlled by a single individual. Looking for problems and possible solutions, the moderator explores the agenda and identifies information that may be useful to institute future change. It is here that the moderator explores the methods and techniques used to elicit admissions from dishonest associates during interviews.Once the moderator has identified the performance baseline for the organization, a plan can be instituted to develop solutions. The next step is to establish best practices against which performance will be measured.Best Practices for Measuring Interviewer PerformanceOne of the most disconcerting things to discover from focus groups is that the top performers are not necessarily using best practices to achieve their results. Confessions may be obtained through the use of ineffective strategies, threats or promises, or something not observable when looking at a statistical analysis alone.Because of their lack of experience, many interviewers fail to follow a plan, instead selecting bits and pieces of things they have observed in an attempt to build “their own style.” Unfortunately, these bits and pieces do not necessarily make for a compatible technique that gives the best return on the investment of their time and energy.Define Superior Performance. The first decision that management must make is what constitutes superior performance in an LP interview. Using the established policy, the department examines and critiques the performance of investigators as they develop the complaint from inception to conclusion. Each case, with its resulting reports, is matched against the expectations of the department, and the investigator is given feedback on his efforts. It is here that many organizations fails to monitor and measure what occurred afterward in the interview room, simply accepting a successful conclusion has occurred because a confession was obtained.Determine Preferred Methods. The initial step in developing an interviewer is to determine what strategies will be the preferred pattern of the organization. Many methods and variations could be used to confront a dishonest associate. This alone would make it difficult to mentor a large number of interviewers if they were allowed to mix and match loss prevention interview techniques on a whim. The monitoring program should not be so stringent that it does not allow for a flexibility of options that might be necessary should special circumstances arise. However, there should be a clear preference for a method that gives a consistent, desirable result and against which the interviewer can be evaluated.Standardize Evaluation. Once the preferred method has been selected, the real work begins to set in place a program that allows the development of the organization’s interviewers against the established benchmarks. Besides the coaching of the interviewer, the organization will standardize the evaluation by creating a universal process against which all interviewers are measured. This process will identify training opportunities and correct inappropriate behavior while encouraging the implementation of techniques that consistently achieve desirable results.One by-product of this standardization is peace of mind for senior executives, who no longer have to guess what occurs during the interviews. In addition, the organization is focusing on the interviewer’s communication skills, which can have a positive application in so many other areas of the job.TrainingAn important component in the development of an interviewer is providing an intellectual understanding of the loss prevention interview process selected. Too often, interviewers are allowed to observe an interview, and, while they see and hear what is being said, they lack an understanding of why it is being done in that way.The training process supplies the interviewer a context and an overview of the components in which he will later be asked to become competent, plus modeling their proper ruse. Supplemental testing of the interviewers can enhance their retention of the material and confirm their understanding of the content. The training mirrors the benchmarks against which the interviewers will be expected to perform during the interview.The Role of Coaches. The second component of the program is to train coaches who will evaluate the interviewers’ performance against the established best practices. The coaches must understand the mechanics of each component and use the selected method as their yardstick for measuring interviewer performance.The coaches undergo specialized training to hone their skills at observing and assessing the interview process, while practicing evaluations of the concepts being developed. This turns out to be the key component in making a mentoring program work, since the failure to correctly critique an interviewer results in encouraging inappropriate techniques, plus failing to identify additional training opportunities.An important part of the coaching experience is learning to give accurate feedback in a positive way that encourages change in the interviewer. The mentor-coach uses modeling, roleplay, and feedback to test understanding and mold the desired change in the interviewer. Changing an interviewer’s existing habits requires consistent practice with feedback in the selected method to reach the desired benchmark of performance.Practice the Script. The third part of the equation for change is self-practice and critique by the interviewer himself. Having been presented with a model of expected performance, the interviewer, through practice and self-critique, can modify his own performance in anticipation of the required role plays with the mentor coach. The interviewer has received the training and been apprised of the coming expectations of performance so he can now practice to exactly model the material and structure of the interview.Like with any skill, an individual who wishes to become proficient at interviewing must practice. Expecting to be able to perform without putting in the time to make the skill one’s own will result in sub-par efforts. These efforts will likely be confused and may contain patterns of behavior from what the interviewer used to do. A reversal to old patterns happens because those actions feel comfortable and do not require thinking or effort by the interviewer. The old adage, “Practice like you want to play,” is just as true in interviewing as in sports.The interviewer can initially prepare by using a written “script” that closely matches the model of the best practice interview. Reading the script multiple times familiarizes the interviewer with the flow of the material and prepares him for following the correct sequence of the interview’s internal structure.Next, the interviewer reads the script out loud a number of times to hear himself actually say the words. By now the interviewer has practiced the exact model of the structure perhaps a dozen times without the stress of having to improvise the words or flow of the material. At this point, the interviewer reads the script into a tape recorder and reviews his work, listening to the pacing and emphasis of the words. Each listening will help the interviewer modify his delivery making the words sound more natural and spontaneous. This consistent practice allows the interviewer to know what is coming next in the presentation making the transitions between parts more fluid.Practice without the Script. By now, the material has been practiced enough that it is beginning to replace the former patterns of the interviewer. The next stage of practice is to attempt the presentation without the use of the script.Again using a recorder, the interviewer goes through the structure using only an outline instead of the entire script. Reviewing the material, the interviewer will identify areas that are missed or misstated. Repeated self-corrections soon lead to ownership of the material with an easy flow and delivery.Finally, delivering the material without any notes and self-critiquing one’s efforts leads to the final polish of the interviewer’s presentation. The self-critique incorporates many of the facets that the mentor-coach will be looking for during the role plays or actual interviews.FeedbackThe mentor-coach uses a sheet that lists the preferred structure of the interview and all its subcomponents with space for ranking the interviewer’s efforts. This worksheet can be used by the interviewer or coach to evaluate the performance of the interviewer in role plays or actual interviews. The worksheet includes the structure of the interview so the coach can follow the interviewer’s progress as he moves through the framework. Skipped topics or improper emphases in the structure are noted for feedback at the exercises conclusion. Each area is rated from one to five indicating an ineffective to effective performance.For example, if the coach was evaluating an interviewer’s handling of denials, these would be some of the areas that would be considered in evaluating effectiveness.Interviewer’s timing in recognizing a subject’s emphatic denial was about to occurWords or statements that triggered the emphatic denialTone of voice and speed of deliveryPhysical behavior used to stop the subject’s emphatic denialVerbal behavior used to stop the subject’s emphatic denialTimeliness in re-accusing the subject after a denialEffectiveness at handling denials overallEffectiveness at avoiding denials all togetherTransition back to rationalization after the denial was handledEach of these will have subcategories that will be taken into consideration to determine the overall effectiveness of the interviewer. For example, the interviewer’s words or statements that trigger a subject’s denials have many elements that could be evaluated.Was the denial triggered by an inappropriate rationalization or by personalizing a rationalization before the subject was ready? Either might cause a subject to deny and the interviewer would need to be coached to correct this even if he was handling denials in a satisfactory manner.The subject might deny because the interviewer had mistimed the component parts of the interview.Denials could also be encouraged because the interviewer had misstated evidence or ignored the strength of the individual’s denials.The complexity of the evaluation requires that the coaches have a clear understanding of the process and the underlying strategies of the chosen method. The mentor-coach is attempting to move the interviewer as close as possible to the best practices model selected by the organization.One difficulty of this approach is controlling the mentor-coach’s natural tendency to teach outside the system. This requires that the mentor-coaches be monitored to assure a consistent accurate message is being delivered to the interviewer. Remember, the goal is to provide a solid foundation for the interviewer so that he can use that foundation for future growth.Monitoring the MonitorsThe final piece of the program is the commitment by senior management to the success of the program. This will require supervision of the coaches to make sure that the evaluations are being completed with the interviewers and that the feedback is having the desired effect.This can be accomplished with a reporting system spreadsheet listing the interviewers and their progress.It is also useful to sample performance on a random basis during visits to the interviewer either with the coach or in his absence to compare the evaluations to actual performance. The larger the number of interviewers, the more difficult it can be to manage without commitment of senior managers.While this process requires a significant commitment of time and effort, the end result is a significant return on investment, including better performance and case resolution, a more qualified valuable employee, and peace of mind for management. This article was originally published in 2004 and was updated July 18, 2018. Stay UpdatedGet critical information for loss prevention professionals, security and retail management delivered right to your inbox. Sign up now
Technologies like business analytics and Big Data are increasing the amounts of data that business need to store. For example, Syed Masroor, Head of technology and solutions at NetApp India, recently told ComputerWorld that Netapp has always “firmly believed that the entire datacentre will revolve around the storage system. And we are right today.”But heavy demand for increasingly more storage is putting a high stress on IT budgets. In order to allocate more storage, businesses are being forced to spend more money on new storage. And that in turn is forcing IT managers to be more creative in utilizing existing resources.The main tactic being deployed by IT managers is more efficient utilization of existing storage. The top three tools being used by IT managers include:Data compressionDeduplication, andStorage VirtualizationNatalya Yezhkova, research director, Storage Systems at IDC, said that our “research shows that the increased use of storage efficiency technologies is one of the major contributing factors in the slowdown of storage capacity shipments over the past 12 months. As awareness of these technologies increases, storage vendors should be ready to deliver a variety of technologies to the whole spectrum of customers, from large businesses all the way down to small companies.”
The WISE and NEOWISE teams are standing by their results, and say that Myhrvold’s criticism should be dismissed. “For every mistake I found in his paper, if I got a bounty, I would be rich,” says Ned Wright, the principal investigator for WISE at the University of California, Los Angeles. Wright says that WISE’s data match very well with two other infrared telescopes, AKARI and IRAS. To find out how accurately those infrared data determine the size of an asteroid, scientists have to calibrate them with radar observations, other observations made when asteroids pass in front of distant stars, and observations made by spacecraft up close. When they do that, Wright says, WISE’s size errors end up at roughly 15%.Amy Mainzer, the principal investigator for NEOWISE at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, points out some of the specific goofs in Myhrvold’s study. In one formula, he confuses diameter for radius, she said in a statement. “Our team has seen the paper in various versions for many months now, and we have tried to point out problems to the author,” she states. “We have strongly encouraged that the paper be submitted to a journal and peer reviewed. Instead, he released it without peer review.”Myhrvold retorts that he is fixing the errors, which he says are cosmetic and do not alter the thrust of his criticism. He says the NEOWISE scientists are defensive because many are involved in a proposal for a future asteroid-hunting telescope called NEOCam, one of five finalists in NASA’s Discovery program. “They’re up for this NEOCam thing and they’re afraid it looks bad. And it does look bad,” he says.This is not the first time that Myhrvold has been a thorn in scientists’ sides. In 2013, he found flaws in studies of dinosaur growth rates. He says his outsider, amateur status allows him to stir the pot in ways that insiders are unable to.Myhrvold has been interested in dinosaurs and asteroids ever since 1980, when he was a physics graduate student at Princeton University and heard a talk about the Alvarez asteroid impact theory. Last year, he says he was approached by the B612 foundation—which has been pushing for a privately funded asteroid-hunting space telescope of its own. “They came to see me hoping I would give them money or introduce them to my rich friends,” he says. He didn’t give B612 money, but he did begin to assess the relative merits of the different projects: B612’s proposed Sentinel telescope; NEOCam; and the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope, a ground-based telescope under construction in Chile. “Each of the projects had different assumptions, which is why each project has simulations which claim theirs is the best.”In the wake of that assessment, which was published last year, Myhrvold got interested in the WISE and NEOWISE data, and kept finding things to investigate. “I just got really stubborn,” he says.Wright says his team doesn’t have Myhrvold’s computer codes, “so we don’t know why he’s screwing up.” But Wright archly noted that Myhrvold once worked at Microsoft, so “is responsible in part for a lot of bad software.” Nathan Myhrvold—ex–Microsoft billionaire, patent accumulator, dinosaur geek, and noted molecular gastronomist—has a new obsession: asteroids. The CEO of Bellevue, Washington–based Intellectual Ventures says that scientists using a prominent NASA space telescope have made fundamental mistakes in their assessment of the size of more than 157,000 asteroids they have observed.In a paper posted to the arXiv.org e-print repository on 22 May, Myhrvold takes aim at the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE), a space telescope launched in 2009, and a follow-on mission, NEOWISE, which together are responsible for the discovery of more asteroids than any other observatory. Yet Myhrvold says that the WISE and NEOWISE teams’ papers are riddled with statistical missteps. “None of their results can be replicated,” he tells ScienceInsider. “I found one irregularity after another.”In a 2011 paper, the WISE and NEOWISE teams claim to determine the diameter of asteroids with an accuracy of better than 10%. But Myhrvold says they made mistakes, such as ignoring the margin of error introduced when extrapolating from a small sample size to an entire population. They also neglected to include Kirchhoff’s law of thermal radiation in their thermal models of the asteroids. Based on his own models, Myhrvold says that errors in the asteroid diameters based on WISE data should be 30%. In some cases, the size errors rise to as large as 300%. “Asteroids are more variable than we thought they were,” he says. He has submitted the paper to the journal Icarus for review.Sign up for our daily newsletterGet more great content like this delivered right to you!Country *AfghanistanAland IslandsAlbaniaAlgeriaAndorraAngolaAnguillaAntarcticaAntigua and BarbudaArgentinaArmeniaArubaAustraliaAustriaAzerbaijanBahamasBahrainBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBeninBermudaBhutanBolivia, Plurinational State ofBonaire, Sint Eustatius and SabaBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswanaBouvet IslandBrazilBritish Indian Ocean TerritoryBrunei DarussalamBulgariaBurkina FasoBurundiCambodiaCameroonCanadaCape VerdeCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChadChileChinaChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombiaComorosCongoCongo, The Democratic Republic of theCook IslandsCosta RicaCote D’IvoireCroatiaCubaCuraçaoCyprusCzech RepublicDenmarkDjiboutiDominicaDominican RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEquatorial GuineaEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Faroe IslandsFijiFinlandFranceFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabonGambiaGeorgiaGermanyGhanaGibraltarGreeceGreenlandGrenadaGuadeloupeGuatemalaGuernseyGuineaGuinea-BissauGuyanaHaitiHeard Island and Mcdonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)HondurasHong KongHungaryIcelandIndiaIndonesiaIran, Islamic Republic ofIraqIrelandIsle of ManIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJerseyJordanKazakhstanKenyaKiribatiKorea, Democratic People’s Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwaitKyrgyzstanLao People’s Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanonLesothoLiberiaLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtensteinLithuaniaLuxembourgMacaoMacedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascarMalawiMalaysiaMaldivesMaliMaltaMartiniqueMauritaniaMauritiusMayotteMexicoMoldova, Republic ofMonacoMongoliaMontenegroMontserratMoroccoMozambiqueMyanmarNamibiaNauruNepalNetherlandsNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaraguaNigerNigeriaNiueNorfolk IslandNorwayOmanPakistanPalestinianPanamaPapua New GuineaParaguayPeruPhilippinesPitcairnPolandPortugalQatarReunionRomaniaRussian FederationRWANDASaint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da CunhaSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Martin (French part)Saint Pierre and MiquelonSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSao Tome and PrincipeSaudi ArabiaSenegalSerbiaSeychellesSierra LeoneSingaporeSint Maarten (Dutch part)SlovakiaSloveniaSolomon IslandsSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSouth SudanSpainSri LankaSudanSurinameSvalbard and Jan MayenSwazilandSwedenSwitzerlandSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwanTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailandTimor-LesteTogoTokelauTongaTrinidad and TobagoTunisiaTurkeyTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUgandaUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited KingdomUnited StatesUruguayUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofVietnamVirgin Islands, BritishWallis and FutunaWestern SaharaYemenZambiaZimbabweI also wish to receive emails from AAAS/Science and Science advertisers, including information on products, services and special offers which may include but are not limited to news, careers information & upcoming events.Required fields are included by an asterisk(*)
Post a good bowling performance, Bangalore looked a bit vulnerable at the start. Malinga was making the ball speak and RP Singh too gave him good support. Dwayne Smith dropped a catch when Gayle was 21 and that proved to be the turning point at the Wankhede Stadium. Score | PhotosAfter smashing three sixes off Ojha, he simply wrested the game from Mumbai’s hands. Kohli and Dilshan gave him good support. A 9 wicket win with two overs to spare is a big win and this will definetely boost the confidence of the Bangalore team. As far as Mumbai is concerned, nothing much they could do. They were completely outplayed.IPL 2012: MI vs RCB Live: RCB win by 9 wicketsMI 141/6 in 20 overs lost to RCB 142/1 in 18 overs (Gayle 82, Kohli 36)Gayle’s 82-run innings was decorated with 5 fours and 6 sixesDilshan: All three departments did really well. We took the early wickets. Murali is a great bowler. Sri Lanka is struggling after his retirement. I am still enjoying playing with him. Malinga was the main bowler, he has taken early wickets in every game. We did not want to give any wickets to Malinga. When you are batting with Gayle, it’s much easier. When he starts hitting, I try to give him the strike. Enjoy batting with him Handshakes all around. Gayle has single handedly won the game for Bangalore. With this win, Bangalore move to the fourth position and I daresay, looking firm favorites to finish in the top 2. 11:28 pm | 17.6 overs: Rohit Sharma to Virat Kohli, SIX, finishes the game with a huge six. Tossed up on the middle, Virat Kohli comes down the track and hits it over the bowler’s head for another big six. Kohli looks at the dug out, pumps his fist to his heart. RCB win by 9 wickets advertisement10:55 pm | 11 overs: RCB are 76/1 at the stage. Good over there for RCB. Three sixes in a row by Chirs Gayle off Pragyan Ojha. One off a no-ball. Thre break-up 1-0-0-2-6-N6-6 10.6 Ojha to Gayle, SIX, is that the game? Tossed up well outside off, Gayle gets on the front foot and lofts it over the long off fielder, another big six for the big man. With that shot he brings up his sixth FIFTY of this year’s IPL! Splendid batting 10.6 Ojha to Gayle, no ball, SIX, this one is an easier full toss to hit, over the waist, Gayle flicks it to behind square for another big six. No ball called! 10.5 Ojha to Gayle, SIX, this was on the cards, bowling a full toss was just like sending out an invite with a betel leaf! Gayle stays in the crease and smashes it into the crowd over the deep midwicket boundary Captain Virat Kohli, right handed bat, comes to the crease 10:44 pm | 8.3 overs; WICKET! Didn’t look like he was out! Strange he has been given caught out! Ojha to Dilshan, out Caught by Dinesh Karthik!! Tossed up on the pads, Dilshan looked to sweep and the ball lobbed off the pads to Karthik. He appealed for the catch and Bowden, after an eternity, raised the finger. Dilshan could not believe the decision, but he has to make his way back. Dilshan c Dinesh Karthik b Ojha 19(25) [4s-3] (RCB 48/1 in 8.3 overs)Dilshan has been given out. There was an appeal for LBW and caught behind. It’s a bit unclear. The ball has pitched on or just outside the leg stump, but there was no edge. He has been adjudged caught behind10:28 Pm | 5.3 overs: DROPPED! And it was Gayle, imagine! RP Singh to Gayle, 1 run, Smith drops Gayle! Full and outside off, Gayle looks to loft it over long off, gets a lot of height, but no distance, Smith gets under it at point and drops a sitter. It was swerving in the air, but you have got to take those 10: 27 pm | 5.2 overs: RP Singh to Gayle, SIX, flat six! Short and outside off, Gayle goes deep into the crease and pulls it over the boundary rope. Muscular shot! 10:15 pm | 3 overs: RCB are 8/0 at the stage with openers Chris Gayle and Tillakaratne Dilshan in the middle.9:58 | 0.1 over: Malinga to Dilshan, no run9:56 | RCB INNINGS – Dilshan and Gayle are at the crease. Dilshan is on strike. Malinga will open the attackROYAL CHALLENGERS BANGALORE: Target 142 in 20 oversKieron Pollard: Pretty much satisfied. We didn’t get a good start but that’s part of cricket. 142 will be challenging on this wicket, we’re in with a chance and we have to bowl well now. It’s more suited to bowlers this time, last game was an absolute belter but this one is helping the bowlers. My shoulder is fine, I’m okay to bowl and I can bowl my full quota of overs.advertisementMUMBAI INDIANS: 141/6 in 20 overs (Dinesh Karthik 44) 9:42 pm | 19.6 overs: Good last over there for Mumbai as they post 141/6. MI’s West Indian recruit Kieron Pollard hit two big sixes in it as MI added 18 runs in the over off Vinay Kumar. The break-up – 2-1-6-6-2-1Mumbai have got to 140. Can Pollard make it 146?Harbhajan Singh, right handed bat, comes to the crease 9:20 pm | 15.5 overs: WICKET! Another one fails to read Murali! Muralitharan to Dwayne Smith, out Caught by Vinay Kumar!! Muralitharan has put a speed breaker on the Mumbai counter-attack in a space of 2 balls! Poor shot from Dwayne Smith though – this was the top spinner from Murali, Smith looks to slog across and hit it over the on side, gets a leading edge for a simple catch to point. Muralitharan on a hat-trick now. Dwayne Smith c Vinay Kumar b Muralitharan 2(3) (MI 100/6 in 15.5 overs)Kieron Pollard, right handed bat, comes to the crease 9:19 pm | 15.4 overs: WICKET! And Murali gets rid of Karthik! Muralitharan to Dinesh Karthik, out Caught by Virat Kohli!! This was always coming. Karthik was looking to hit every ball and perishes. Flighted again, Karthik looks to loft it over long on but doesn’t get hold of it. Dinesh Karthik c Virat Kohli b Muralitharan 44(39) [4s-3 6s-1] (MI 100/5 in 15.4 overs)9:16 pm | 15 overs: MI are 95/4 at the stage with new man Dwayne Smith and Dinesh Karthik in the middle. The run rate is 6.33 at the moment – a little better than what the Indians were posting in the initial overs. Still RCB enjoy the edge. It’s time Smith starts scoring briskly.Dwayne Smith, right handed bat, comes to the crease 9:12 pm | 13.6 overs: WICKET! Rayudu was looking to stabilize; sadly his effort comes a cropper in Harshal’s over. Harshal Patel to Rayudu, out Caught by Muralitharan!! Perishes trying to go for another big shot. Clever bowling though – bowls a back of hand slower one, Rayudu was down the track again but was deceived by the lack of pace, ends up checking his lofted shot and holes out to long off. Enter Dwayne Smith! Rayudu c Muralitharan b Harshal Patel 22(17) [4s-2] (MI 85/4 in 13.6 overs)Ambati Rayudu, right handed8:54 pm | 10 overs: RCB are 48/3 at the stage with Dinesh Karthik (13*) and Ambati Rayudu (3*) in the middle. MI have lost their top players – Sachin, Rohit, Franklin and are in trouble here. The run rate is a poor 4.80; clearly RCB have the edge.bat, comes to the crease 8:44 pm | 8.3 overs: WICKET! And Sachin walks off! Harshal Patel to Tendulkar, out Caught & Bowled!! The youngster has the final laugh! But wait. Is it a no ball? Nope. It’s a legal delivery and Sachin has to walk back. Good reply this from the bowler after being hit for four, bangs it short and gets it to rise on the body. Tendulkar c and b Harshal Patel 24(27) [4s-4] (MI 41/3 in 8.3 overs)advertisement8:20 pm | 4 overs: MI are 5/2 at the stage with Sachin Tendulkar and Dinesh Karthik in the middle. Sachin has scored just 2 runs off 12 balls. This is brilliant bowling from RCB. They’ve maintained tight lines and have given nothing away. Sachin Tendulkar wants to get going but the bowlers aren’t allowing him to do that.Dinesh Karthik, right handed bat, comes to the crease 8:10 pm | 1.5 overs: WICKET! Another one goes back in a jiffy and MI are in trouble here. Vinay Kumar to Rohit Sharma, out Lbw!! Rohit Sharma is not happy with the decision but he has to walk back! That looked pretty plumb – no reasons to complain, he should instead be unhappy with his poor choice of strokeplay. Good bowling from Vinay though – maintains it straight and gets it to nip in, Rohit looks to play across the line and misses it completely. Impact in line and hitting him in front of middle. No reason to give that not out! Rohit Sharma lbw b Vinay Kumar 0(3) (MI 2/2 in 1.5 overs) Rohit Sharma, right handed bat, comes to the crease 8:06 pm | 1.2 overs: WICKET! Okay RCB gain control early… Franklin departs. Vinay Kumar to Franklin, out Caught by Zaheer!! Catching practice. He has timed it well but straight to the fielder. Short and just outside off, Franklin plays the upper cut, times it well but holes out to third man. This is already a good start for RCB, they have been tight and have already struck. Franklin c Zaheer b Vinay Kumar 1(6) (MI 1/1 in 1.2 overs)8:04 pm | 1 over: MI manage to score 1 in the first over off the innings. Zak kept things tight for Sachin Tendulkar, the single came off James Franklin’s bat.8:00 pm | TOSS – Franklin and Tendulkar are at the crease. Franklin is on strike. Zaheer will open the attackTeams Royal Challengers Bangalore (Playing XI): Tillakaratne Dilshan, Chris Gayle, Virat Kohli(c), AB de Villiers(w), Saurabh Tiwary, Mayank Agarwal, Syed Mohammad Jamaluddin, Vinay Kumar, Zaheer Khan, Harshal Patel, Muttiah Muralitharan Mumbai Indians (Playing XI): Sachin Tendulkar, James Franklin, Rohit Sharma, Dinesh Karthik(w), Ambati Rayudu, Kieron Pollard, Dwayne Smith, Harbhajan Singh(c), Lasith Malinga, RP Singh, Pragyan OjhaHarbhajan: We would like to concentrate on good cricket and results will follow. We have been playing terrific cricket in the last week and we’ll look to continue. We have to be there and do our best, we’ve been fighting till the last ball in our games and that’s the way T20 goes. The wicket looks a bit damp, but I’m sure it will play well. Both the teams are good enough to win, may the best team win. Franklin, Pollard, Malinga and Smith are the foreigners. You can call the side Mumbai West Indians. Kohli: Love this stadium. Always enjoyed cricket at this ground, the atmosphere is brilliant. It’s a challenge and a learning curve for me to captain a side with so many experienced players. Playing in Mumbai against Mumbai is always big. We’ll just look to execute our plans and play well. Looks like there is something on the wicket early on and our fast bowlers will look to exploit that. Every game is a must win game for us, especially playing against a strong team like Mumbai. Loving the captaincy, I’m really enjoying it. Tiwary comes in for Pathan. Vinay returns. Gayle, Muralitharan, Dilshan and de Villiers are the foreigners. 7:30 pm | TOSS – Royal Challengers Bangalore have won the toss and elected to field
Nandu K Belani, Chairman, Belani Group has assumed charge as President of CREDAI Bengal for another term. He was announced President on the occasion of 30th Annual General Meeting held at ITC Royal Bengal on September 19. Piyush Bhagat of Space Group and Sanjay Jain of Siddha Group were announced Vice Presidents for the year 2019 – 20. The new committee of Managing and Executive Members of CREDAI Bengal for the following term was announced in the presence of members of the real estate association.