Embed from Getty ImagesChelsea are one more win from the title after beating Middlesbrough 3-0 in a one-sided game at Stamford Bridge. Diego Costa, Marcos Alonso and Nemanja Matic scored for the Blues, who moved seven points clear at the top of the Premier League and will be crowned champions if they win at West Brom on Friday.Boro never threatened an upset and their defeat confirmed their relegation back to the Championship. Conte savours ‘big win’Embed from Getty ImagesAntonio Conte again insisted the title race iss not over, but he acknowledged: “For sure now I am a bit relaxed. This was a big step – a big win.”The Blues boss added: “At this stage of the season, to win is great and now we need to go another step, We have the possibility to do it on Friday against West Brom but it won’t be easy.“West Brom are a really good, physical team. But for sure today we took a big step – we must be honest.” Chelsea link ‘flattering’ – TierneyEmbed from Getty ImagesKieran Tierney says he is happy at Celtic despite reports linking him with Chelsea.It has been claimed that Chelsea are keen on the 19-year-old full-back, who has made three appearances for Scotland.Tierney told Sky Sports: “It’s just a story and I’m just concentrating on Celtic and my next training day.” Mackie offered deal – on reduced termsEmbed from Getty ImagesQPR have offered Jamie Mackie a new contract.Mackie, whose current deal expires this summer, is in his second spell at Loftus Road.Rangers’ financial position means the 31-year-old has been offered reduced wages, and the club are therefore waiting to discover whether he intends to re-sign.Mackie will be available on a Bosman free transfer if he turns down the offer or at least decides to keep his options open.Meanwhile, Karl Henry, whose contract is also due to expire, will be leaving after four years at Rangers.Henry, 34, has not played since December, when he was told he had no future at the club following a fall-out with manager Ian Holloway. Holloway wants more new signingsEmbed from Getty ImagesIan Holloway says it will take QPR two more transfer windows to significantly turn their fortunes around.Manager Holloway made wholesale changes in January and wants to further revamp his squad after losing 18 of his 30 matches since replacing the sacked Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink.Financial Fair Play rules and ongoing legal wrangling over the scale of QPR’s fine for the club’s previous lavish spending mean there will be less money to spend.“It’s going to take another couple of windows. We’re not moving forward money-wise, we’ll be moving backwards,” Holloway said.“Other clubs might be adding to their budgets, but we’ve thrown a load of money away and we’re not going to do that anymore.“Hopefully, with the new scouting network I’m putting together, I’ll be able to coach and I’ll be able to get people I can have.” Bees trigger Jota clauseBrentford have taken up an option in Jota’s contract to keep him at Griffin Park until the end of next season. The 25-year-old scored 12 goals in 23 games for the Bees after returning from a loan spell with Spanish club Eibar in January. Fulham ‘ready for everythingEmbed from Getty ImagesFulham boss Slavisa Jokanovic is confident his side can overcome Reading and reach the Championship play-off final.The Whites will face Reading over two legs for a place at Wembley, with the first leg at Craven Cottage on Saturday.Jokanovic declared: “We must be ready for everything. This team (Reading) finished third and that shows their level.“The table says they are favourites and we are going to try to surprise them. We must be ready.“It’s going to be a tough two games for us and for them too. We are confident and believe we can play good football and win.” Ads by Revcontent Trending Articles Urologists: Men, Forget the Blue Pill! This “Destroys” ED x ‘Genius Pill’ Used By Rich Americans Now Available In Netherlands! x What She Did to Lose Weight Stuns Doctors: Do This Daily Before Bed! x Men, You Don’t Need the Blue Pill if You Do This x One Cup of This (Before Bed) Burns Belly Fat Like Crazy! x Drink This Before Bed, Watch Your Body Fat Melt Like Crazy x Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
Some scientific papers brag that Darwin’s universal tree of life is coming into sharper focus, but as the data increase, so do the problems.Evolutionary TopiaryCase in point: Maximilan Telford in Science Magazine presumed to write about “The Animal Tree of Life” as if one such tree exists, but ended up showing that results of tree-building are highly dependent on the methods used. He spoke of a “strengthening consensus” emerging 150 years after Darwin moaned to Huxley that he would not live to see his tree of life established.The earlier disagreements derived from varying interpretations of the morphological and embryological characteristics of animals. Many of these characters have evolved repeatedly in unrelated lineages as adaptations to similar selective pressures or have been lost from certain groups through disuse. Today’s strengthening consensus is almost entirely thanks to the use of molecular genetic data in reconstructing trees. Heritable changes in nucleotides and amino acids are abundant and generally much less prone to the problems of convergent evolution and loss than are morphological characters.Some morphologists may disagree with that assessment, but Telford basically confessed long-standing disputes between the morphologists and the molecular evolutionists, despite his apparent favoritism for the latter. A distant view appears to show a tree, but the devil is in the details. He digressed into various “surprises” and taxonomic tricks to get the trees to match up:If we consider a summary of the trees produced from these data…, we find some familiar groups (arthropods, chordates, and echinoderms), as well as some surprises. For example, almost all premolecular phylogenies supposed a close link between the brachiopods (lamp shells) and the deuterostomes (chordates and echinoderms). Yet in Field et al.‘s tree, the brachiopods are placed far from the deuterostomes in the Lophotrochozoa, which include annelids and mollusks. This major rearrangement suggests that certain “deuterostomian” characters of brachiopods may have evolved more than once….Other surprises in the tree were less welcome. Probably the most striking result, and the one that provoked the strongest reaction at the time, was the conclusion that the multicellular animals evolved on two separate occasions from unicellular relatives…. It quickly became clear that this conclusion was incorrect and that it resulted from the cnidarians being misplaced in the tree. A second error—the placement of the flatworm Dugesia (Platyhelminthes) as a branch outside of the main groups of animals… took longer to resolve. We know now that its correct place is within the lophotrochozoans…. Both errors arose because the 18S rRNA genes of the misplaced groups evolve at an unusually high rate, resulting in “long branch attraction,” whereby rapidly evolving species are incorrectly placed close to the long branch leading to the species used to root the tree….In other words, the resolution of the tree depended on human choices made in forcing the data to match expectations. It’s like the tree was in the mind, and the methods had to be adjusted to force “surprises” to cooperate. A gardener can trim a bush to look like a giraffe (an artform called topiary); that doesn’t mean the plant would grow that way naturally.Telford went on to describe newer fit-forcing methods, such as “probabilistic methods that can accommodate the systematic biases present in real sequences, such as unequal rates of evolution.” Who could know, though, the rates of evolution without already having in mind a picture of how the evolutionary saga was supposed to unfold?Skeptics might complain that tree-building exercises like this do not “carve nature at its joints” but rather confirm a preconceived bias. They might also point out that confirming that bias required radical reorganizations of earlier visions of the tree, casting doubt on the lasting credibility of version 2013 that relies more heavily on molecular data than how the animals actually look:These studies have led to a widely accepted phylogeny of all animal phyla that has radically changed our views of animal evolution. Premolecular phylogenies generally envisaged a gradual increase in complexity from the earliest animals without a body cavity or coelom (acoelomate flatworms) via pseudocoelomate worms (such as nematodes and rotifers) to coelomate protostomes (annelids, arthropods, and mollusks) and deuterostomes (echinoderms and chordates) with a sophisticated mesoderm-lined coelomic body cavity.In contrast, today’s tree divides bilaterally symmetrical animals into protostomes and deuterostomes…. Within the deuterostomes, the simple urochordates (sea squirts) are closer relatives of the vertebrates than the more fishlike cephalochordates (amphioxus); a third phylum of deuterostomes, the hemichordates (acorn worms), are the sister group of echinoderms and not of the chordates.A view that “radically changed our views of animal evolution” does not indicate scientific progress. Just because something is “widely accepted” (by whom?) does not make it scientifically valid, either. Alchemy was widely accepted for centuries. An explanation that requires believing that features as important as the coelomic body cavity has been “gained and lost multiple times” should raise eyebrows.In conclusion, Telford appealed to the “future research” escape clause to clean up today’s messes:Although much of the animal tree is now resolved, a number of problems remain. These problems tend to involve relationships either of taxa with extreme systematic biases or among groups that seem to have originated in a rapid radiation, resulting in a lack of signal supporting individual nodes. Future progress will depend on increasing useful signal with larger “phylogenomic” data sets from the widest possible taxonomic sample and on continued improvement in the correspondence between real data and the models used when reconstructing trees.Thus Telford confessed a lack of correspondence between models and the real data. Are the “extreme systematic biases” in the data or in the scientists’ world views?Evolutionary TrackingIn “Following the footprints of positive selection,” a press release from the Broad Institute of MIT promised to showcase examples of real evolutionary progress: “genetic changes [that] have conferred an evolutionary advantage” if such an oxymoronic phrase has any meaning (i.e., only a rational mind can determine what is advantageous).Surprisingly, it took another radical rethinking to figure out how to find positive selection. The article calls it a “turning point” and a “shift” to try this new method: “the genome itself can be used as a starting point to guide scientists to important genetic locations, leading to hypotheses about human health and disease.”As much as this might sound like following the evidence without bias, in fact, nothing has been accomplished yet. The press release merely states that researchers are “poised” to make great discoveries with their chosen tools and datasets. Some candidate high-level findings were put forth: “Several important categories of pathways emerged from the team’s analysis, including pathways tied to metabolism, skin pigmentation, and the immune system.” Only the last one got any elaboration. Alas, the elaboration only mentioned suggestions and possibilities for counter-intuitive observations, like the fact that “The particular variant that the researchers uncovered makes the immune system respond less dramatically to invaders, which, paradoxically, seems to help in the fight against them.” How is that evidence of positive selection? With imagination, the data can be made to fit the theory:We were thinking, ‘Why would decreasing the signal be important?’” Grossman recalls. “One possibility involves the role of TLR5 in facilitating certain bacterial infections. It turns out that in order for these bacteria to enter the host organism, they have to invade activated immune cells and hitch a ride to the lymph nodes. If the receptors are never activated, the bacteria have much more difficulty infecting the host.”It would be hard to defend a loss of function as evidence of positive selection. Even so, this represents only “one possibility” to explain a conundrum – not a signal of positive selection that jumps out of the data. The article concluded with more promissory notes. “With this new data, we – and others – can examine numerous mutations and search for biologically meaningful outcomes,” one researcher hoped. No clear-cut example came from this hunt intended on “Following the footprints of positive selection.”Squeaky AnswersElizabeth Pennisi’s article in Science Magazine, “How Did Humans Evolve? Ask a Mouse” is another example of a headline that fails to deliver. She discussed a Harvard study celebrated by the previously-cited press release about positive selection: a mouse study at Harvard that focused on a gene for hair and sweat glands:Mice carrying human disease genes have proved valuable for learning what goes awry in people. Now, researchers have tapped the rodents to understand human evolution. Mice with a human version of a gene called EDAR have more sweat glands than normal, providing clues to how East Asians adapted to a humid environment 30,000 years ago.Certain people groups, such as Native Americans and East Asians, have thicker hair, Pennisi said, but it should be obvious that there’s a lot of difference between living members of ethnic groups that do not necessarily tell anything about “human evolution” from mice. Since mice and humans already have sweat glands and hair, what’s the point, Darwinly speaking?Then we find that the Harvard team cheated: they used intelligent design to insert the human EDAR gene into mice. Then they bred the resulting mice for several generations:The mice had thicker hairs in their fur, as expected. But they also had more sweat glands, denser mammary glands, and smaller fat pads around those mammary glands. “This study was able to show there are other, more subtle effects” beyond hair thickness, says Joshua Akey, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Washington, Seattle, who was not involved with the work.But why would this be surprising? They were grown with a human variant of a gene. This only provides a mouse model of a possible evolutionary change that might have helped certain people in certain habitats. Pennisi boasted that the study “pushes the field in novel ways,” but no matter the wishful thinking among the evolutionary biologists, she confessed at the end that the implications of this study are not at all clear:The group’s analyses and computer simulations looking at how 370A arose and spread indicate that the mutation creating the variant gene happened more than 30,000 years ago in central China. China had been relatively warm and humid between 40,000 and 32,000 years ago and then got cooler and drier. But Kamberov thinks that summer and winter monsoons still created high enough humidity that those people who were able to cool their bodies with extra sweat glands would have done better. Alternatively, or in addition, the increased branching in the mammary glands could have provided an advantage for raising infants. “It’s not clear which one of those [traits] resulted in differences” in survival and reproductive ability, Akey says.Surely easterners know from experience that more sweat glands do not help in areas of high humidity; and if the rest of the year were drier and cooler, the people would have had other worries on their minds than sweating. If “increased branching in the mammary glands” could have provided an advantage, why do infants survive outside China? Why didn’t the genes revert after the climate change? At best, these “evolutionary advantages” are of a very meager sort, considering the major overhauls Darwinism requires to get from mouse to human.The requirements of natural selection are very stringent. Only what promotes immediate survival counts. The advantage has to be so great that all the other members of the population must die so that the favored variant proliferates — this is called the “cost of selection.” This issue was not addressed in the article. Instead, Pennisi ended with a quote that says evolutionary theory can never solve it:The work “pushes the field in novel ways, Akey adds, as very few studies have pinned down the functional consequences of genetic changes that have been selected for. Although “the mouse model brings you closer” to understanding how modern humans have changed through time, Enard says, “without a time machine we will never get all the relevant data.“One might expect then, that to “ask a mouse” how humans evolved, the only answer would be, “Squeak, squeak.”We can dub this last story (the tale of a tail) the “Mighty Mouse Theory of Evolution” – not because the mouse is mighty (it’s only hairy and sweaty) – but because it Might help bring evolutionists closer to their coveted “understanding” of how humans evolved. But even if evolutionists think with all their might about their mighty mice, they might, instead, never understand anything about evolution, because it’s not a mouse with a human gene injected into it they need, but a time machine.The next best thing to a time machine is an Eyewitness who was there who can tell us how mice and humans “emerged” (and it wasn’t by a blind, unguided process of natural selection).We hope these three articles expose to the world the shenanigans of the Darwin Party: imagination, suggestion, and empty promises. Find one clear evidence supporting molecules-to-man evolution (or even a clear-cut case of “positive selection”) in any of these studies or models, or any any of the hundreds of other examples we have reported since fall of 2000. Time’s up. If this is the best the Darwiniacs can put forward after over 150 years of hunting for a magic tree that emerges by chance, they lose. Let them get out of the way of the researchers who have the resources to understand the origin of “complex things that appear to have been designed for a purpose,” as Dawkins described life. (Visited 27 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Tags:#Features#news#web Related Posts Just after we heard a number of rumors about the possible arrival of the rumored Google OS tonight, Google actually went ahead and announced that it will indeed release its own operating system – the Google Chrome Operating System. For now, Google plans to aim this OS at the netbook market. The OS will only become available for consumers in the second half of 2010, but Google promises that it will open-source the code later this year. According the the announcement on the Google blog, the OS will run on standard x86 chips as well as ARM chips, and Google is already working with a number of OEMs to bring devices that run the Google Chrome OS to the market. Google Chrome OS is Not AndroidIn the announcement, Google stresses that this operating system is a completely new project and not affiliated with Google’s Android OS, which, according to Google, was always meant to run on a variety of devices, including netbooks. Google acknowledges that the two operating systems might overlap in some areas, but the company believes that, ultimately, “choice will drive innovation for the benefit of everyone, including Google.” Here is how Google describes the OS:Speed, simplicity and security are the key aspects of Google Chrome OS. We’re designing the OS to be fast and lightweight, to start up and get you onto the web in a few seconds. The user interface is minimal to stay out of your way, and most of the user experience takes place on the web. And as we did for the Google Chrome browser, we are going back to the basics and completely redesigning the underlying security architecture of the OS so that users don’t have to deal with viruses, malware and security updates. It should just work.The Google Chrome OS will run on top of a Linux kernel, though the exact details about the actual implementation are still vague.Perfect for NetbooksThis kind of operating system would obviously be perfect for netbooks, which, after all, are meant to be constantly connected to the Internet and don’t have a lot of resources. Currently, most netbooks run Windows XP, which, by now, is a rather antiquated operating system. With Windows 7, Microsoft tried to release a version for netbooks that would only run three applications at the same time (though Microsoft has since dropped this limit). Maybe Google is going to take this even further and will release an OS that will only run one application – Chrome.With this, Google can obviously put its own web apps like Gmail, Google Calendar, and Google Docs at the center of the user experience, and this is surely part of Google’s motivation behind releasing this OS. But given that Chrome is simply a browser, any other web app would obviously also be able to run on it as well. frederic lardinois A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic…
LAWRENCE, KS – NOVEMBER 24: A general view during the game between the Rider Broncs and the Kansas Jayhawks at Allen Fieldhouse on November 24, 2014 in Lawrence, Kansas. (Photo by Jamie Squire/Getty Images)Get ready college basketball fans. It is March, which means Madness is right around the corner. Before it’s time to fill out our NCAA Tournament brackets, however, we have the conference tournaments, which can be amazing events in their own right.The Big 12 has been arguably the best and most competitive league in college basketball this year, and the conference tournament kicks off next Wednesday, March 9, at 6 p.m., with the No. 8 and No. 9 seeds playing on ESPNU. Seeding for the tournament isn’t set yet, but we have an idea of how things will shake out when the Big 12 standings are set on Saturday.With Monday night’s domination of the Texas Longhorns, Kansas has clinched the No. 1 seed in the tournament. The Jayhawks face the winner of the 8 vs. 9 game, currently slated to be Kansas State vs. Oklahoma State.There is a large gap between the top seven teams in the conference, and the bottom three. Texas Tech, currently No. 7, is 8-8 in the league, four games ahead of Kansas State. Oklahoma State and TCU each have 14 conference losses.The tournament will take place at the Sprint Center in Kansas City, Mo.Wednesday’s first round games will be broadcast on ESPNU. On Thursday, the first two games will be on ESPNU, and the second two will be on ESPN2. Friday’s games are on ESPN2, and Saturday’s championship game will be broadcast on ESPN at 5 p.m.Here is the bracket, which includes the tournament schedule, via the Big 12’s official website. The Big 12 standings won’t be finalized until after Kansas plays Iowa State at 3:00 p.m. on Saturday, March 5.More Big 12 Tournament notes:Iowa State won the 2015 Big 12 Tournament, defeating Kansas 70-66 in the final. The Cyclones also won the 2014 tournament, topping the Baylor Bears in the final.Kansas, winner of 12 straight Big 12 conference regular season titles, last won the tournament in 2013, blowing out Kansas State 70-54.Big 12 Tournament tickets are available at StubHub.Kansas will enter the tournament as a favorite, but Baylor, Iowa State, Texas, and West Virginia have all been very strong this year, and will vie for the Big 12 championship. We can’t wait for things to kick off from Kansas City.Information on the ACC Tournament is available here, and learn about the Big Ten Tournament here.
OTTAWA – Bob Zimmer, M.P. for Prince George-Peace River-Northern Rockies and Damian Collins, M.P. in the U.K., have sent a joint letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.Zimmer is Chair of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics and Collins is Chair of the UK Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee.The letter to Zuckerberg requests that he appears before an international committee formed by Zimmer and Collins to examine disinformation and ‘fake news’. The hearing on Tuesday, November 27 at the Westminster Parliament, will allow collaborative scrutiny by members of the national committees of both the British and the Canadian Parliaments in their studies into digital policy including disinformation, digital vulnerabilities, and the potential threats to democracies.Other parliaments are also being invited to attend the session.Both committees have separately requested Zuckerberg to appear before their respective committees to discuss the breach of personal information involving Cambridge Analytica and Facebook, as well as subsequent breaches. However, none of these previous requests were successful.In a statement, M.P. Bob Zimmer said, “We have asked Mr. Zuckerberg to appear at our committees several times and expect him to show respect for both of our great nations by appearing at this hearing to answer for his platform’s practices.”Both Zimmer and Collins would like to receive a response from Zuckerberg by November 7.
Indian Wells (United States): Ailing world number three Alexander Zverev crashed out of the ATP Indian Wells Masters, where Novak Djokovic’s third round match was suspended by rain with one game completed. Jan-Lennard Struff, ranked 55th in the world, notched his first victory over Zverev in five tries, breaking him once in the first set and three times in the second for a 6-3, 6-1 victory. “I’ve been sick for a week,” said the 21-year-old Zverev, who lost the Acapulco final to Australian Nick Kyrgios the week before Indian Wells began. “That hasn’t changed, unfortunately. Also Read – Dhoni, Paes spotted playing football together”I think I just got unlucky, I got a virus somewhere and that’s how it is.” Zverev, the owner of three Masters 1000 titles who has never made it to the quarter-finals at Indian Wells, said he would now focus on recuperating and preparing for the Miami Masters, where he’ll be hoping to improve on his runner-up finish to John Isner last year. “Now it’s about getting healthy and about recovering and preparing myself for Miami, because Miami is the tournament I do well in, history-wise,” he said. “Here I have always struggled.” Despite the circumstances, Struff was delighted to get a first win over Zverev. Also Read – Andy Murray to make Grand Slam return at Australian Open”Yeah, 6-3, 6-1, it’s amazing,” he said. “Played a good match. He was missing some shots today, but at the end of the day I’m very happy with that.” Struff next faces 13th-seeded Canadian Milos Raonic, who rallied from 4-1 down in the third set to beat US qualifier Marcos Giron 4-6, 6-4, 6-4. Giron, 25, looked set to claim the biggest win of a career that has been hindered by two hip operations when he took a 4-1 lead in the third set. But Raonic, runner-up at Indian Wells in 2016, called on all of his experience to turn things around against the American, who had never won two ATP Tour matches in a row until this week. “He came up with the goods and definitely pushed me sort of to the brink there where I was getting a little bit frustrated,” Raonic said. “I just kept trying to plug away. There were two games that I had break chances to get back into the third, and I didn’t make it count. Luckily I made the last two count. “I’m proud of the way I competed today. That’s what got me through,” said Raonic, who fell to Struff in the first round at Dubai last month. World number one Novak Djokovic, playing his first tournament since grabbing a record seventh Australian Open title in January, completed just one game against unseeded German Philipp Kohlschreiber before rain swept across the California desert. The duo were sent to the locker room and with no break in the weather in sight organizers suspended play for the night, with the match to resume on Tuesday. The winner will face in-form Frenchman Gael Monfils, who rolled past Albert Ramos Vinolas 6-0, 6-3. Monfils won his eighth career title at Rotterdam in February, followed up that performance with a run to the semi-finals in Dubai. In other early matches, 40-year-old Ivo Karlovic defeated India’s Prajnesh Gunneswaran 6-3, 7-6 (7/3). The Croatian veteran will face Austrian seventh seed Dominic Thiem, who beat France’s Gilles Simon 6-3, 6-1.
New Delhi: Capital markets regulator Sebi slapped Rs 94.5 lakh penalty on 17 entities for indulging in fraudulent trade practices in illiquid stock options segment on the BSE. The regulator, during the course of investigation between April 2015 and September 2015, found that 81.38 per cent of all the trades executed in the stock options segment involved reversal of buy and sell positions by the clients and counter-parties in a contract on the same day. Also Read – Thermal coal import may surpass 200 MT this fiscal These entities were among those “whose reversal trades involved squaring off transactions with significant difference in sell value and buy value of the transactions,” Sebi said in similarly worded separate orders on Friday. It further said trades of the entities are non-genuine as they are not executed in normal course of trading, lack basic trading rationale, lead to misleading appearance of trading in terms of generation of artificial volumes, and are hence deceptive & manipulative. Also Read – Food grain output seen at 140.57 mt in current fiscal on monsoon boost By indulging in such trades, the entities have violated provisions of the Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices (PFUTP) norms, Sebi said. Accordingly, a fine of Rs 9 lakh on Makers Casting, and Rs 8 lakh on Ashok Investors Trust has been levied by Sebi. Others have been fined in the range of Rs 5 lakh to Rs 6 lakh. The orders are in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Board of India’s announcement in April 2018 on taking action in a phased manner against 14,720 entities for fraudulent trade in the illiquid stock options segment. In a separate order, the regulator imposed a penalty of Rs 18 lakh on promoters of Man Industries for not making requisite disclosure to the company and exchanges after change in their shareholding in the firm. “Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers (SAST) Regulations requires every promoter of a target company to disclose details of any invocation or release of encumbrance of shares. Such disclosure of creation, release and invocation of disclosures required under…has to be made within 7 working days from creation, invocation and release of such encumbrance,” Sebi said. However, the entities failed to do so and consequently a fine of Rs 6 lakh on JPA Holdings and Rs 12 lakh on Jagdishchandra Mansukhani has been imposed by the regulator.
New Delhi: All good things must come to an end, and that stands true for hugely popular shows like ‘Game of Thrones’, ‘Big Bang Theory’, ‘Modern Family’, ‘Supernatural’ and ‘Suits’. Here are some shows that are coming to an end soon: GoT: With a storyline that paints a whimsical world of dragons and White Walkers on one hand, and stays close to reality by showing how relationships cannot be trusted when it comes to ruling a kingdom, the show, with its story based on George R.R. Martin’s novels, has become a global phenomenon.’Game of Thrones’ Season 8 will premiere internationally on April 14. Suits: The story started when a hotshot lawyer Harvey Specter (essayed Gabriel Macht) took a gamble by hiring a brilliant college dropout Mike Ross (Patrick J. Adams) as an associate in his law firm, and gave the audience a glimpse of the trials and tribulations of the legal world. The drama began in 2011. Supernatural: Credited as the longest-running sci-fi genre show, ‘Supernaturals’ is all about the supernatural and paranormal. It follows brothers Sam (Jared Padalecki) and Dean (Jensen Ackles) Winchester as they join their family business of hunting down supernatural monsters. Big Bang Theory: This show’s universe originated with the story of how four nerds – react when a girl enters their life as a friendly neighbour. Other shows include ‘Modern Family’, ‘Arrow’, etc.
On their own, Burns’s numbers are impressive. But when you compare them to those of his peers, they look downright heroic. Since the lockout — and excluding 2012-13, which was a half-season — the top-10 defensemen in the league each season2Ranked by points scored have scored an average of 58 points. This year, Burns scored 18 more points than that. The entire blue line corps of five teams failed to notch more goals than Burns, including the Washington Capitals, who had the best record in hockey. Other blue liners have been snubbed since Pronger’s Hart win. Most notably, Nicklas Lidstrom won seven Norris trophies as the league’s top defenseman, but he was never even named as a finalist for the Hart trophy.3Burns will likely win his first Norris tonight. It’s true that Lidstrom’s reign of dominance coincided with the rise of generational talents like Crosby and Alexander Ovechkin, but it’s difficult to believe one of the five best defensemen to ever play hockey wasn’t good enough to at least be considered as one of the three best players in the NHL during that stretch.And if the dearth of defensemen nominated for the Hart since Pronger’s win in ‘99-00 looks suspicious, all you’ve got to do is look at the three decades preceding his win to understand it’s been something of an enduring trend: before Pronger, the last defenseman to win the Hart trophy was Bobby Orr in 1971-72.4Orr won the award three times consecutively between 1969-70 and 1971-72, scoring 376 points over that stretch. It’s the second-best three year span for a defenseman in NHL history. And before Orr? It was Toronto Maple Leafs defenseman Babe Pratt, who won the Hart in 1943-44. Hockey writers—apparently—don’t have much love for defensemen.Although it ostensibly honors the best player on the ice, the Hart trophy is basically an award given to the top forward — and really just the top center 5Since Orr last won the Hart in 1971-72, 28 of the 45 winners have been center icemen. That Wayne Gretzky played in that span helped. — and every once in awhile the top goalie in the NHL. Until the Hart’s description reads, “Given to the league’s best centerman (and sometimes it’s best goalie, too),” it’s due time the PHWA begins taking the candidacy of the league’s top defensemen for the league’s top honors seriously. At the NHL’s annual awards show tonight in Las Vegas, the shiniest piece of hardware that will be given out is the Hart Memorial Trophy, which is awarded to the player deemed to be the most valuable to his team by the Professional Hockey Writers’ Association. The shortlist of nominees includes Penguins’ captain Sidney Crosby, Oilers’ phenom Connor McDavid, and Blue Jackets’ goalie Sergei Bobrovsky — all of whom had terrific seasons. But no matter who wins, there’s an argument to be made that it will be the wrong choice. This is because the league’s most outstanding performance came from someone who wasn’t nominated.San Jose Sharks’ defenseman Brent Burns turned heads all season, and often for reasons other than his toothless smile, man bun and ZZ Top beard. His production was everything you could ask of someone on the blue line, notching 76 points, tied for the fourth-highest point total by a defenseman since the lockout of 2004-05. Of those 76 points, 29 were goals, which was 70 percent more than the second-best defenseman and the most by anyone at the position since 2008-09. Burns isn’t only a goal-producing machine—he also led the league in point shares, 1Point shares roughly translate to the amount of a team’s points one player is responsible for. A decent analog is Bill James’ win shares, a complicated formula popular among baseball statheads. accounting for more of his team’s success in the standings than any of the three (still very worthy) MVP candidates nominated above him. He’s also the only player in the NHL to finish in the top five in both offensive and defensive point shares. That’s pretty impressive stuff, but not impressive enough to be a finalist for the Hart, apparently.Despite Burns’s gaudy scoring numbers and clear impact on his team’s success, it shouldn’t come as a shock that the PHWA left Burns off its list: Defensemen, despite representing one third of the players on ice, have a long history of being overlooked. The last time a defenseman was nominated for the Hart trophy, we were all basking in relief that Y2K hadn’t destroyed civilization. Chris Pronger won the award after his brilliant 1999-00 season with the St. Louis Blues. In his MVP-winning campaign, Pronger notched 62 points and led the NHL with 14.2 point shares, both of which fall short of Burns’s numbers from 2016-17.