Question
A statement is given followed by two conclusions
numbered I & II. Assuming the statement to be true, even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.  Statements: Australians are strengthened by Pat Cummins' return for the final test after serving a suspension. Cummins was suspended for breaching COVID-19 protocols and missed the third test. However, his absence did not impact Australia’s performance as initially feared.  Conclusions: I. Pat Cummins was suspended for applying saliva to the ball, violating the new playing rules introduced due to the COVID-19 pandemic. II. Australians were able to secure a favorable result in the 3rd test match.Solution
The statement mentions that Pat Cummins was suspended for violating COVID-19 protection norms but does not specify the exact nature of the offense. As a result, Conclusion I cannot be drawn based on the available information. Â The latter part of the second sentence states that Cummins' absence did not affect the team's performance as initially feared. This implies that, despite his absence, Australia managed to achieve a favourable result. Therefore, Conclusion II is logical and correct. Â Hence, the correct answer is (B).
Choose the wrong statement
The chemical name of ______ is sodium hydrogen carbonate.
What does Mohs scale measure?
What is the viscosity of an ideal fluid?
Ball pen functions on the principle of :
The reaction of an aldehyde with Tollens’ reagent results in:
Law of conservation of mass is not correct for
Which of the following statement regarding Rutherford nuclear model is NOT correct?
The percentage of nitrogen in urea is :
Which of the following organic compounds undergo nucleophilic substitution reaction most easily?
