NAGPUR, India (AP): New Zealand’s spinners inflicted a shock 47-run defeat on tournament favourites India in the first game of the Super 10 stage at the ICC World Twenty20 yesterday. Left-arm spinner Mitchell Santner grabbed 4-11, leg-spinner Ish Sodhi took 3-18 and off-spinner Nathan McCullum added 2-15 on a helpful pitch as India were bowled out for 79 in 18.1 overs. New Zealand had earlier reached 126-7 in the Group Two match. Captain Kane Williamson’s decision to go in with three spinners paid off as India, which came into the tournament with 10 wins in 11 previous T20 games, failed to come to terms with the slow pitch. New Zealand have now beaten India in all five T20 games between the two teams, including two times at the World Twenty20. India had beaten South Africa inside three days in a Test here last year, but the turn on offer this time proved detrimental. Sodhi struck first ball as the in-form Virat Kohli (23) edged one to the wicketkeeper, at which stage India were 39-5. Captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni tried to rally his team, but his knock of 30 was of little use. “It was a low-scoring wicket,” Dhoni said. “I thought we restricted them to a good total, but the batting let us down. The shot selection kept putting pressure on the batsmen coming in. “They bowled well and exploited the conditions, but we lacked adaptability. We could have applied ourselves more.” Earlier, India restricted New Zealand to a moderate total with left-hander Corey Anderson holding the innings together. He scored 34 before being dismissed by pace bowler Jasprit Bumrah while trying to scoop the ball towards fine leg. Luke Ronchi got an unbeaten 21 off 11 balls down the order. “It was a tough surface,” Williamson said. “Any score was going to be tough here, but we would have liked to have a few more. We went in with this bowling attack after we had a look at the conditions.”
Arrived very quickly and i wear it all the time. It’s just what i was looking for so i’m very pleased. Product as described, good quality and arrived on time. Great seller, thanks very much. Glitz4Girlz® Black Velvet Scrunchie Hair BandTake on that eighties trend with this gorgeous velvet scrunchie! Perfect for use on those bad hair days, this scrunchie is a must have this season! Good product, lasted me ages, exactly what i expected it to be, really like it and hasn’t broken it at all and lasted for a while love it. I wear this allllll the time. Holds hair well and i much prefer it to tying my hair up with a regular elastic bobble. Lovely hair accessory, it is strongly elasticated for those of us with thick hair and i wear it often. Glitz4Girlz® Black Velvet Scrunchie Hair Band : Arrived very quickly and i wear it all the time. It’s just what i was looking for so i’m very pleased. Product as described, good quality and arrived on time. Great seller, thanks very much. Does the job plus quite surprised how cheap they are so definately a bargain. Does the job plus quite surprised how cheap they are so definately a bargain. I wear this allllll the time. Holds hair well and i much prefer it to tying my hair up with a regular elastic bobble. Good product, lasted me ages, exactly what i expected it to be, really like it and hasn’t broken it at all and lasted for a while love it. SummaryReviewer Nathalie DuboisReview Date2017-11-07 13:55:13Reviewed Item Glitz4Girlz® Black Velvet Scrunchie Hair BandRating 4.0 / 5 stars, based on 11 reviewsPrice£1.85
Essential Reading! Get my 3rd book: Eat Their Lunch “The first ever playbook for B2B salespeople on how to win clients and customers who are already being serviced by your competition.” Buy Now We use the word “dissatisfaction” to describe the gap between the status quo and some better future state. It might mean that your dream client is unhappy with something now. They might have some pain that they can point to. It might also mean they have aspirations. They might have a vision of where they want to go in the future. We call it dissatisfaction, but it’s really just a way to confirm that there is some gap between the present state and some better future state.If there is no gap, there is no reason to change. Sometimes your dream clients recognize the gap themselves. They can tell you exactly what’s wrong and what is required to make it better. You love it when you walk and your dream client has a list of problems, challenges, and issues that you can help resolve, don’t you? It means there is a reason to change. It means you can be compelling.But sometimes you find your dream client and they aren’t unhappy with the way things are going now. In fact, things are working out rather well in their opinion. Focusing on pain doesn’t work. But that doesn’t mean that your dream client shouldn’t be dissatisfied. You may need to work to show them that even though they’re not dissatisfied, that they may be capable of producing even better results. This provides a reason to change. It might also be compelling.Some of your dream client contacts may be change agents. They may operate from the idea that, “If it ain’t broken, break it!” They believe that there is always improvements to be made and that you can’t allow the status quo to take hold, lest you become complacent. They always see a brighter future. They are always moving away from the status quo and towards “better.” They have aspirations. They frame them in the positive.Some of the opportunities in your pipeline aren’t going to become deals. They have no dissatisfaction. Your dream clients don’t recognize a gap themselves. You haven’t done anything to show them that they have good cause to be dissatisfied if they’re not. And they don’t have a compelling vision of a better state that they want to bring to life. Whether they are moving away from something identifiable and negative or towards something identifiable and positive, you need dissatisfaction because you need a compelling reason your dream client will change. Without it, you have no deal.QuestionsCan you define the dissatisfaction in every opportunity in your pipeline?Can you define what the dissatisfaction should be in the “opportunities” where you can’t define the dissatisfaction?What do you do when you can’t find pain?How do you elicit your dream client’s desired future state when it’s positive, not an identifiable, negative pain?
TOKYO (AP) — It can’t dribble, let alone slam dunk, but Toyota’s basketball robot hardly ever misses a free throw or a 3-pointer.The 207-centimeter (six-foot, 10-inch)-tall machine made five of eight 3-point shots in a demonstration in a Tokyo suburb Monday, a ratio its engineers say is worse than usual.Toyota Motor Corp.’s robot, called Cue 3, computes as a three-dimensional image where the basket is, using sensors on its torso, and adjusts motors inside its arm and knees to give the shot the right angle and propulsion for a swish.Efforts in developing human-shaped robots underline a global shift in robotics use from pre-programmed mechanical arms in limited situations like factories to functioning in the real world with people.The 2017 version of the robot was designed to make free throws.Yudai Baba, a basketball player likely representing host Japan at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, took part in the demonstration and also missed a couple of shots. If the robot could learn a few more tricks, he was ready to accept the robot on the team, he said.“We human players are still better for now,” he said.Toyota’s basketball robot Cue 3 demonstrates Monday, April 1, 2019 at a gymnasium in Fuchu, Tokyo. The 207-centimeter (six-foot-10) -tall machine made five of eight three-pointer shots in a demonstration in a Tokyo suburb Monday, a ratio its engineers say is worse than usual. Toyota Motor Corp.’s robot, called Cue 3, computes as a three-dimensional image where the basket is, using sensors on its torso, and adjusts motors inside its arm and knees to give the shot the right angle and propulsion for a swish.(AP Photo/Yuri Kageyama)Right after missing, the robot slumped over. It wasn’t disappointment, but a temporary power failure.Cue 3’s name is supposed to reflect the idea the technology can serve as a cue, or signal of great things to come, according to Toyota.The company plays down how the technology might prove useful. It’s more about boosting morale among engineers, making them open to ideas and challenges.In making the robot’s outer covering something like that of an armadillo, the engineers said they were just trying to avoid the white metallic look often seen on robots.The maker of the Camry sedan, Prius hybrid and Lexus luxury models has shown off various robots, including one that played a violin. Another, resembling R2-D2 of Star Wars, slides around and picks up things. At Monday’s demonstration, it handed the basketball to Cue 3.Experts say robots that can mimic human movements, even doing them better, could prove useful in various ways, including picking crops, making deliveries, and working in factories and warehouses.Stanford University Professor Oussama Khatib, who directs the university’s robotics lab, said Cue 3 demonstrates complex activities such as using sensors and nimble computation in real-time in what he called “visual feedback.”To shoot hoops, the robot must have a good vision system, be able to compute the ball’s path then execute the shot, he said in a telephone interview.“What Toyota is doing here is really bringing the top capabilities in perception with the top capabilities in control to have robots perform something that is really challenging,” Khatib said.Japan has been aggressive in developing humanoids, including those that do little more than offer cute companionship.Toyota’s rival Honda Motor Co. has its Asimo, a culmination of research into creating a walking robot that started in the 1980s. It not only can run, but also recognize faces, avoid obstacles, shake hands, pour a drink and carry a tray.When will such robots be able to slam dunk, a feat that will require running, dribbling and jumping?“In 20 years, with technological advances,” said Tomohiro Nomi, a Toyota engineer who worked on Cue 3.By: Yuri Kageyama, AP Business WriterTweetPinShare0 Shares
… we have a small favour to ask. More people, like you, are reading and supporting the Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism than ever before. And unlike many news organisations, we made the choice to keep our reporting open for all, regardless of where they live or what they can afford to pay.The Guardian will engage with the most critical issues of our time – from the escalating climate catastrophe to widespread inequality to the influence of big tech on our lives. At a time when factual information is a necessity, we believe that each of us, around the world, deserves access to accurate reporting with integrity at its heart.Our editorial independence means we set our own agenda and voice our own opinions. Guardian journalism is free from commercial and political bias and not influenced by billionaire owners or shareholders. This means we can give a voice to those less heard, explore where others turn away, and rigorously challenge those in power.We hope you will consider supporting us today. We need your support to keep delivering quality journalism that’s open and independent. Every reader contribution, however big or small, is so valuable. Support The Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you. Ian Roberts in action during the Test match between England and Australia in 1994. Photograph: Getty Images Read more Reuse this content Parents and kids need to know. The media needs to ask current players are they are aware of these things. Are today’s players enacting preventative measures? Have they read the test results of their peers in the previous generations?What are the clubs doing? What is the Rugby League Players Association, the union, doing? Health and safety is paramount. It’s duty of care. It’s about the quality of people’s lives.I do some work for the NRL in a theatre sports program. We go around to clubs and talk about awkward issues: misogyny, depression, suicide, drug use, social media. The league is on the front foot. It’s progressive.And now we need to incorporate brain damage into the conversation. We have to talk about it. We can’t ignore it. And the players, like all of us, have to take responsibility for their own health. Topics Concussion in sport Twitter Read more When the test results came back I was half-expecting negative news. I’d played nearly 250 games of rugby league and been concussed over a dozen times. I wasn’t getting out without a scratch.But “irreversible long-term brain damage”? It hit me right in the guts. Share on WhatsApp comment Pinterest Is your child at risk of brain injury from playing football or rugby? Since you’re here… Share on Facebook Rugby league Health Share on LinkedIn Facebook For this is what happens when you’re concussed. Your brain is damaged. It is what it is. And it’s the language we have to use when talking about concussion.Fact: every time you’re concussed your brain is damaged. And it’s irreversible. And you need to know that, to hear it. We must have this conversation.Yes, for sure, when a doctor uses so emotive a term as brain damage – or one so medical-sterile as chronic traumatic encephalopathy – there’s a mix of shock and fear that hits you all at once. It’s almost a form of grief – for yourself.But it’s hard to sugar-coat “irreversible scarring on the brain”. It is what it is is. And as a sport, as a country, we need to have the conversation.I first noticed my memory playing up while living in Los Angeles. I’d spent seven years there as one of the lucky few – a working actor. And I’d never had problems with auditions – getting a page of script and getting my lines, I’d always been confident. But five or six years ago I noticed that dialogue just wasn’t going in. I was feeling uncomfortable in auditions. I wasn’t sharp, confident. I knew something was up. Every time you sustain a concussion it’s damage to the brain. It’s brain damage Ex-NFL player confirmed as first case of CTE found in living person – researchers Share on Messenger NRL Share on Twitter Share via Email Australia sport Share on Pinterest And so we were all given a series of tests and tasks, and scanning of the brain. And in all categories of the study the ex-players fared considerably worse. There was one test where you’d take a bunch of different-coloured pegs and plug them into holes in a block of wood. Thirty seconds later you’d take the pegs out and try to plug them back into the same holes. The ex-players came out far worse than the control group.Some of the other footballers, like myself, have a profile. But they’re not willing to go public. And I totally get that. Yet I believe this conversation needs to be had. Players, administrators, parents, kids, everyone in rugby league – in sport – needs to be informed about the long-term affects of repetitive concussion.And we need to call it what it is: brain damage.Yes, the term is confronting. It’s emotive. It’s what happens to people in car accidents, right? Thus it’s a word that resonates. It’s also fact. When you suffer a concussion you suffer brain damage. Calling it head trauma or a head knock, it’s like you’re cushioning the blow, so to speak. But every time you sustain a concussion it’s damage to the brain. It’s brain damage.The National Rugby League and other sporting bodies need to move forward with strategies for prevention. The NRL is making the right noises, and taking small steps. They’re educating themselves. They’re listening to experts. They acknowledge there’s an issue. The data is in: repeated concussion causes long term brain damage. Now, it’s hard to pinpoint a moment of realisation. People ask: “When do you remember forgetting stuff.” How can you answer that? I just knew I wasn’t confident in auditions. Forgetting lines was something I’d never worried about.For a number of reasons, not just my memory, I came back to Sydney three years ago and bumped into Alan Pearce, a professor at La Trobe University and expert in the neurophysiology of sports-related concussion. He was getting a research study together and asked if I’d be one of 25 ex-league players who’d been out of the game for 15-20 years. There would also be a control group of 25 men in the same age bracket who hadn’t played contact sport. Support The Guardian
TORONTO – A judge’s finding that numerous prison lockdowns amounted to cruel and unusual treatment for two detainees was overturned Wednesday along with the $85,000 in damages he had awarded them.In its ruling, Ontario’s top court found the lower court judge had overstated the frequency, duration and impact of the lockdowns affecting Jamil Ogiamien and Huy Nguyen during their detention at the maximum security Maplehurst Correctional Complex in Milton, Ont.“The lockdowns affecting Ogiamien and Nguyen occurred about half as frequently as found by the application judge,” the Appeal Court said. “In some instances, (they) were of a shorter duration and had less of an impact.”In May 2016, Superior Court Justice Douglas Gray awarded $60,000 to Ogiamien, 46, a Nigerian facing deportation, and another $25,000 to Nguyen, who was awaiting trial on firearms charges.The lockdowns they went through over a two-year period violated their rights because they were largely confined to their cells, deprived of the ability to maintain basic hygiene, and otherwise subjected to harsh conditions that affected their mental and physical health, Gray ruled.However, at an appeal hearing in February, the Ontario and federal governments argued that Gray had misunderstood the evidence. The governments also argued Gray had failed to appreciate the steps the province had taken — albeit to little effect — to address the long-standing staffing issues that resulted in the frequent lockdowns.The Appeal Court, which said it accepted that the detention conditions caused the two men hardship, nevertheless found Gray made errors in assessing the impact of the lockdowns on them. For example, Gray mistakenly found that Ogiamien and Nguyen were forced to share prison time with convicted offenders, the Appeal Court said.“Inmates in the remand unit at Maplehurst do not share their time in their cells with inmates who have been convicted and are serving a sentence,” Justice John Laskin wrote for the Appeal Court. “They share their time in cells with other inmates on remand.”Laskin also rejected Gray’s comparison of a lockdown to solitary confinement, calling it unwise to relate the two without expert evidence. He also noted that Maplehurst inmates shared cells during lockdowns.In all, the Appeal Court found the conditions inflicted on the two inmates — even if unpleasant at times — didn’t rise to a level of cruel and unusual punishment as Gray said it had. Among other things, they still had access to showers, their lawyers, medical care and even television.“Their treatment under lockdowns undoubtedly added to the hardships they experienced at Maplehurst but it was not treatment that met the high bar of being grossly disproportionate or so excessive as to outrage standards of decency,” Laskin said.While the ruling automatically negated the damages award, the Appeal Court also faulted Gray for deciding the men deserved the cash given that they had not asked for any money. Making the award, the court said, was unfair to the provincial and federal governments, which should at the very least have had an opportunity to make submissions on the issue.Ogiamien was released under strict conditions in the middle of last year as he fought deportation. Laskin declined to order Nguyen’s release in light of the finding that the lockdowns did not amount to cruel and unusual punishment, adding the conditions of confinement were no more restrictive than those faced by other remanded inmates.