Following a hugely successful workshop on helping businesses in Donegal get Brexit ready by helping them prepare for customs, Local Enterprise Office Donegal has added a further two workshops on Prepare your Business for Customs- Getting Brexit Ready over the coming weeks.The feedback on the first workshop held in March was very positive, with 30 local businesses engaged on the six steps to prepare their business for Customs after Brexit.And because demand has been so high, further events are now scheduled for Tuesday 16 April in Letterkenny and Thursday 9 May in Solis Lough Eske, Donegal. Businesses in Donegal who are planning on moving goods to, from or through the UK after Brexit are being urged to prepare by attending the one day interactive workshop, but with demand for the limited places, very high – they are being asked to make sure they book in good time.Local Enterprise Office, Donegal, have stressed that the workshop is open to businesses from all sectors.“If the UK leaves the Customs Union and Single Market, it will become a ‘Third Country’ for customs purposes. At this workshop businesses can learn about the potential impacts, formalities and procedures you will need to adopt when trading with a country which is outside the Single Market and Custom Unions (a ‘Third Country’),” Head of Enterprise in Donegal, Michael Tunney said.He added that the workshop, is fully funded by the Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation through Enterprise Ireland and is delivered by BDO Ireland on behalf of the Local Enterprise Offices. “It will cover areas such as what export and import procedures apply, how tariffs work and how to correctly classify goods.This workshop is open to businesses from all sectors and the aim is to help Donegal businesses understand:* The Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) process* The Administration process around import and export procedures.* Custom formalities at borders * Tariffs and cost implication of tariffs* Import procedures, such as the Electronic Declaration Process and Automated Entry Processing (AEP)Huge demand for workshops on getting customs ready for Brexit was last modified: April 10th, 2019 by StephenShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Tags:BrexitdonegalLEO
Goalkeeper Petr Cech insisted that interim boss Roberto Di Matteo had done enough to be given the Chelsea manager’s job after the Blues’ Champions League triumph in Munich.Di Matteo has inspired a remarkable turnaround that has seen the club secure the European title for the first time and win the FA Cup.And Cech told Sky: ” Whatever happens to him he has got two fantastic cups. He’s done enough to get the job but now it is up to the board to decide.”Cech was a hero for Chelsea, saving a penalty in normal time and in a dramatic shoot-out.“Today I faced six penalties and six times I went the right way. It was a rollercoaster ride,” he said.“We all enjoyed it. When it goes to extra-time there is pressure and I thought Robben would go for power and shoot that way.”More reaction to follow later.Who was your Chelsea man of the match? Click here to voteFollow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
Former Chelsea boss Carlo Ancelotti wants to sign Ashley Cole for Paris St-Germain, the Daily Mirror say.There has been speculation about the England left-back’s future because he is now in the final year of his Chelsea contract.And it is claimed that Ancelotti is looking to capture him on a three-year deal.The Mirror also suggest Fulham are leading the chase to sign Ivory Coast striker Arouna Kone from Spanish club Levante.The 28-year-old is reported to have snubbed moves to Russia and Qatar because he is keen to play in the Premier League.Tottenham have also monitored him, with Sunderland and Wigan said to be interested as well.Meanwhile, The Sun say Fulham have had a £4.5m bid for winger Matt Jarvis rejected by Wolves.The Daily Mail report that Blackburn are close to signing Fulham midfielder Dickson Etuhu and have moved ahead of the Whites in the race for Huddersfield striker Jordan Rhodes.Raheem Sterling is again linked with a move from Liverpool to Tottenham – this time by The Sun.It is suggested that Spurs will offer £7m for the 17-year-old from Harlesden and that he would welcome a return to the capital.Sterling was recently linked with a loan move back to QPR, who lost him when he left Loftus Road to join Liverpool in 2010.This page is regularly updated.Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
Tag: 上海水磨论坛 Stoke v Fulham player ratings
See also:Fulham relegated after defeat at Stoke’Sad’ Magath apologises to Fulham fansFollow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
Tag: 上海水磨论坛 SA planning ‘massive’ rail investment
Increase in people’s movement “It is generally agreed that new rail technology generates social benefits which stem from savings, increase in reliability, comfort and safety, as well as from the reduction of congestion and accidents … It is the most environmentally friendly mode of transport,” Mahlalela said. The department’s director-general, George Mahlalela, said the investment will include beefing up operations in the passenger rail sector, with potential high-speed rail projects identified in Johannesburg, Durban, Cape Town and Musina in Limpopo province. Mahlalela said most of the country’s commuter rail system was nearing the end of its life-span. “We believe that an ambitious programme of introducing new rail stock and technology in our system is an absolute necessity,” he said. Sustainable investment environment The plan comes a week Transport Minister Sibusiso Ndebele and his Chinese counterpart, Liu Zhijun, signed a memorandum of understanding on co-operation in the rail sector. 2 September 2010 The department says the investment programme, which is expected to run for the next 20 years, will create “certainty” and allow manufacturers to retool their businesses, leading to sustainable local industrial activities. The Department of Transport says it is working on a multi-billion rand rail investment programme to upgrade and modernise South Africa’s aging rail network. “We are seeing a massive increase in long distance travel in South Africa … This puts a major strain on our roads and air traffic, and these challenges can only be addressed through rapid rail system,” he said. Source: BuaNews Mahlalela said the massive increase in people’s movement and road traffic was posing serious challenges for South Africa’s economy. “Our view is that the rail sector should be one of the major investment areas for the transport sector and the economy of South Africa.” Over R40-billion has been invested in the past five years in passenger rail infrastructure across the country. Mahlalela said this included the R25-billion invested on the Gautrain and almost R13-billion on the rehabilitation of passenger coaches and signalling systems.
Nuclear power is dead. Long live nuclear power. Nuclear power is the only way forward. Nuclear power is a red herring. Nuclear power is too dangerous. Nuclear power is the safest power source around. Nuclear is nothing. Nuclear is everything.It is now generally agreed that the world must rapidly reduce carbon emissions in order to fight off dangerous climate change, but the “how” of that process remains up for debate. And within that debate, nothing seems to produce such starkly opposing viewpoints as nuclear energy. Some experts and advocates argue that carbon-free nuclear power represents the only real hope of keeping the planet’s temperature in check. Others claim that nuclear is risky, unnecessary and far too expensive to make a dent.The same basic data set — nuclear plants currently in existence, those under construction, the status of new technologies, the history of costs and delays, and a few striking accidents — produces those totally contradictory opinions and predictions. Nuclear power is a Rorschach test: You see what you want to see — a rosy nuclear future or an old-world dinosaur in a slow death spiral — reflecting your own views on the energy present and future. In all likelihood, no one will be proven right or wrong for decades. The Fukushima shadowAlong with price hikes, the specter of major accidents hovers over every discussion of a nuclear scale-up. By most measures nuclear power is among the safest forms of energy ever devised. But when it does go wrong, it goes wrong in spectacular and terrifying fashion.The accident at Fukushima Daiichi in Japan in 2011 led to a shutdown of all the plants in that country (with very limited reactor restarts coming only last year), and it has convinced Germany and Belgium to phase out the energy source entirely. Though those phase-outs will account for only a handful of total reactors, they put a damper on the idea of a revolutionary nuclear scale-up.Many argue the fearful reactions and phase-outs are not entirely logical in the context of climate change. Fukushima clearly did result in a drop in global support for nuclear energy, but public opinion continues to vary sharply by country.In the U.S., a Gallup poll on nuclear favorability has shown a decline since Fukushima, but not a dramatic one. In 2015 public support for the use of nuclear energy hovered at 51%, down from a peak of 62% in 2010. The same poll, though, found that only 35% percent think the government should place “more emphasis” on nuclear; for comparison, 79% want more focus on solar power.Cousins to the fear of a massive meltdown are both the worry over nuclear weapons proliferation and concerns over waste disposal. Spent nuclear fuel is currently stored on the site of nuclear plants in pools of water or sealed in dry cask storage, and decades-old arguments over geologic repositories are unlikely to be resolved any time soon.With regard to weapons, nuclear plants produce plutonium during the course of their reactions, which can be made into bombs if enough is accumulated; terrorism and theft are thus constant worries. Both of these issues work to extend the shadow of risk stretching out behind nuclear power, and both lack immediate solutions. Will nuclear have to be part of the mix?The heart of Hansen’s and Oreskes’ disagreement regards the necessity for nuclear and the technical feasibility of scaling up renewables: Are other energy sources sufficient to wean us from fossil fuels? Or is the reliable, large-scale (a single new reactor can reach 1,600 megawatts capacity, three times the size of the world’s largest solar plants) baseload power that nuclear provides a necessary component of the low-carbon future?The anti-nuclear side of the argument focuses on several studies that have illustrated a renewables-only way to the goal, which could be cheaper and free of the risks associated with nuclear. Mark Jacobson, director of the Atmosphere/Energy Program at Stanford University, has published state-specific plans showing how 100-percent renewables penetration would be achievable. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory, part of the U.S. Department of Energy, published its “Renewable Electricity Futures Study” in 2012 and explained a clear path to 80 percent penetration in the U.S. Others have shown similar routes forward.When it comes to any energy source, it is cost that sits at the root of the discussion. Nuclear proponents argue that there are impediments to having a grid entirely run on renewables. Buongiorno, for example, says that the intermittency of solar and wind can realistically only be addressed by adding large amounts of electricity storage (in the form of large batteries or other newer tech such as compressed air) to the grid, and that would change the ongoing “renewable prices are plummeting” narrative.“When I hear people say ‘Oh, the costs are coming down,’ the costs for generation may be coming down, but if installing that capacity forces me to have energy storage, you have to add those costs,” he says. Think of it like buying a car: The baseline price sounds okay, but it’s all the options and add-ons that’ll get you. Buongiorno says he expects the costs of nuclear construction will come down, and that when storage costs for renewables are factored in, nuclear — with its reliable, 24/7 output — starts to look much more attractive as an alternative. RELATED ARTICLES Costs are a key considerationAdding more nuclear to the grid could reduce some of the burden on renewables and storage, but the economics of nuclear itself could prove an insurmountable roadblock.In general, the more experience accumulated with a given technology, the less it costs to build. This has been dramatically illustrated with the falling costs of wind and solar power. Nuclear, however has bucked the trend, instead demonstrating a sort of “negative learning curve” over time.Construction of a new reactor at Olkiluoto Nuclear Power Plant in Eurajoki, Finland, is nine years behind schedule and more than $US5 billion over budget. [Photo courtesy of Foro Nuclear.]According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, the actual costs of 75 of the first nuclear reactors built in the U.S. ran over initial estimates by more than 200%. More recently, costs have continued to balloon. Again according to UCS, the price tag for a new nuclear power plant jumped from between $2 billion and $4 billion in 2002 all the way $9 billion in 2008. Put another way, the price shot from below $2,000 per kilowatt in the early 2000s up to as high as $8,000 per kilowatt by 2008.Steve Clemmer, the director of energy research and analysis at UCS, doesn’t see this trend changing. “I’m not seeing much evidence that we’ll see the types of cost reductions [proponents are] talking about. I’m very skeptical about it — great if it happens, but I’m not seeing it,” he says.Some projects in the U.S. seem to face delays and overruns at every turn. In September 2015, a South Carolina effort to build two new reactors at an existing plant was delayed for three years. In Georgia, a January 2015 filing by plant owner Southern Co. said that its additional two reactors would jump by $700 million in cost and take an extra 18 months to build. These problems have a number of root causes, from licensing delays to simple construction errors, and no simple solution to the issue is likely to be found.In Europe the situation is similar, with a couple of particularly egregious examples casting a pall over the industry. Construction began for a new reactor at the Finnish Olkiluoto 3 plant in 2005 but won’t finish until 2018, nine years late and more than US$5 billion over budget. A reactor in France, where nuclear is the primary source of power, is six years behind schedule and more than twice as expensive as projected.“The history of 60 years or more of reactor building offers no evidence that costs will come down,” Ramana says. “As nuclear technology has matured costs have increased, and all the present indications are that this trend will continue.” Changing perspectivesIn the coming years, it may come down to just how dramatic the effects of climate change become to force the Rorschach muddle to resolve into a clear image.“As time goes on, and the impacts of climate change become more and more real — droughts and heat waves and sea-level rise and storm surge, coastal flooding issues, more powerful hurricanes and devastating storms and things like that are also a wake-up call to people,” says Clemmer. “Hopefully at some point it will be enough of a wake-up call that we’ll be demanding action to address climate change and reduce emissions. In that world, maybe there’s more of a positive light that would be shed on nuclear.”Macfarlane also suggests that the changing perspectives on energy requirements could shift nuclear fortunes. “We go through these different transitions as a society,” she says. In the past, these transitions have replaced wood with coal to help cities grow, and added oil to feed a boom in transportation.“Nuclear never fulfilled one of those kinds of needs,” she says. “We’re going through another transition where we need to decarbonize our energy sources, and maybe it will fill more of a natural need now. We’ll see.” In the run-up to that agreement, a group of the most prominent nuclear proponents — climate scientist James Hansen, Stanford’s Ken Caldeira and others — wrote in the Guardian that “nuclear will make the difference between the world missing crucial climate targets or achieving them.”This was met with particularly harsh disdain from Naomi Oreskes, Harvard science historian and co-author of Merchants of Doubt, who wrote a response at the Guardian branding this “a new, strange form of denial.” Today and tomorrowNuclear power today accounts for around 10% of the total electricity generation around the world. This varies sharply by country — in the U.S. the rate is about 20%, in Russia and Germany it is a bit lower than that, while some other European countries get 40% and 50% from nuclear reactors. France has long led the way proportionally, at more than 75% percent. (It has the second most total reactors, behind the U.S.) China, though building rapidly, drew less than 3% of its power from nuclear in 2014.There are 442 reactors currently in operation globally, and the International Atomic Energy Agency says 66 are currently under construction. Twenty-four of those are in China; no other country is currently building more than eight.That’s the nuclear landscape now. The question is, how will it change in the coming years? And equally important, how should it change? The answers to both of these depend on whom you ask. Nuclear power capacity varies widely from one country to another, with the U.S. leading in installed capacity and China in capacity under construction.The International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2014, which includes a close analysis of nuclear power, projects a 60% leap in global installed capacity by 2040, with almost half of that growth coming from China.“I think we definitely need it in the battle against climate change. This is broadly recognized,” says Jacopo Buongiorno, a professor of nuclear science and engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “Because now there is such an overwhelming concern about climate change, it’s like a tide that lifts all boats. Anything that is perceived as clean is going up. I think it is absolutely necessary.”That type of take on nuclear isn’t particularly hard to find, but neither is this one: “I don’t think nuclear power is a necessary component at all,” says M. V. Ramana, a research scholar at Princeton’s Nuclear Futures Lab. “Nuclear power as a share of electricity generation is only likely to decline in the foreseeable future. If we hold that up as a means of emission reductions, then we will not be successful with meeting any of the ambitious climate goals set” in the recent Paris agreement, in which 195 countries agreed to reduce emissions sharply. Cost declines are rareSome experts, however, dispute the idea that the “negative learning curve” is intrinsic to the nuclear industry. In a recent paper Ted Nordhaus of the energy think tank The Breakthrough Institute pointed out that the history of nuclear plant construction costs varies dramatically by country. South Korea, for example, has demonstrated a fairly consistent drop in costs over time; it imported its first designs from foreign companies with more experience before homegrown designs took hold, and all the country’s plants are built and owned by a single utility. Nordhaus wrote, “with the right policies and institutions, nuclear plants can be built quickly, safely, and cheaply.”Still, most countries have seen costs increase. As it stands, only China’s non-free market may allow for a truly rapid build-out of nuclear plants; the country’s current domination of the nuclear construction world reflects this idea, and the 2016 Five-Year Plan includes provisions to approve and build six to eight new plants each year.The industry, for its part, argues that the benefits of nuclear are worth the price tag. The Nuclear Energy Institute, which represents plant owners, builders, designers, suppliers and related companies, notes that in the U.S. nuclear power generates as much as $50 billion each year from electricity sales and revenue, and provides around 100,000 jobs. The lack of carbon emissions, of course, only adds to the benefits. Technological breakthroughs?Supporters of nuclear power hold out hope that new technologies will improve the economics and reduce the fear factor. There are ongoing efforts to develop small modular reactors, which produce about a third or less of a full-size reactor’s output and can theoretically be built faster and cheaper.Allison Macfarlane, director of George Washington University’s Center for International Science and Technology Policy and the former chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, notes that of the various companies working on these, only one (NuScale Power) is currently expected to actually submit application materials to regulators in 2016 — a step that is still years removed from actual functioning reactors.Long-term storage of spent fuel remains a problem. This is a fuel storage pool at the decommissioned BarsebÃ¤ck nuclear power station near Copenhagen, Sweden. [Photo courtesy of Foro Nuclear.]Other technological unicorns, though in many cases on the drawing board for decades, still remain off in the distance: different fuel sources such as thorium, molten salt-cooled reactors, even building plants on floating platforms like those used for oil drilling (a project that Buongiorno at MIT is heavily involved in) are all on the table.These have varying potential advantages: A floating plant could use seawater as a cheap and easy way to cool the reactor and would alleviate some of the safety fears by keeping the plant away from people and near a coolant should an accident occur; thorium could reduce waste and produce power more efficiently, though a U.K. government report in 2013 called the benefits “overstated” and experts have warned it could increase proliferation risks; and molten salts can operate at lower pressures than standard water-cooled reactors, offering some safety benefit.Nuclear research and development, though, moves at a snail’s pace, largely for safety reasons. If the goal is rapid emissions reduction, it is unclear if any of this new tech can play a role.“I think we need to do some work on it, see if we can develop some new technologies, but they are not going to be a solution in the near term at all,” Macfarlane says about the small modular reactors. “Some of these other things that just exist on paper right now? I think they’re much further out.”Clemmer, of UCS, agrees that the next 15 years or so are unlikely to feature much of a nuclear revolution. He says the 2030 to 2050 period, though, will be a crucial time for nuclear, with many existing plants in the U.S. and elsewhere due to retire — the IEA projects almost 200 reactor retirements by 2040. In that time frame, perhaps some of the new technology could make it to market. The Case for Nuclear Power — Despite the RisksSafe Storage of Nuclear WasteOn the Closure of Vermont YankeeThoughts on Nuclear PowerThoughts on Nuclear Power — Part 2Fukushima and Vermont YankeeFukushima’s No-Entry ZoneNuclear Meltdown in Japan and Our Energy FutureBuilding Resilience for a ‘Close Encounter’ with DisasterReport Gauges Future of Untapped Renewable EnergySolar Potential Is Far Greater Than Earlier Estimates Dave Levitan is a freelance science journalist. This post originally appeared at the website Ensia.
3. Consolidate RevisionsImage via debasige.However, reviewing in real time doesn’t completely streamlines the process. Unless your videographer or editor is on a retainer, running with revision requests off the top of your head can really hold up a project. Instead, many video professionals will push for a consolidated list of revisions to knock out in one batch edit. This is especially true when working with a middle man or agency. To save the most time (and the most unnecessary rendering time), the onus falls to the client to make sure all stakeholders have had a chance to view a draft before sending over consolidated revisions.4. Download Final Videos (and Assets)Image via GaudiLab.Another concern that may seem obvious to video professionals is transferring videos and assets. While working with cloud services and video-hosting platforms may seem simple on the upload, for those unfamiliar with these services, knowing to download all the assets, view them properly, and then store them isn’t a given. For many in the profession, sites like Vimeo are standard for sharing videos (clients can download directly from the site), while sites like DropBox make sharing project folders with RAW files and assets easier (read about it here). It’s also worth noting that professional services like these are often monthly or annual expenses that video professionals have to cover just to ensure they can work with clients when projects arise.5. Upload to Their SitesImage via Leif Eliasson.Similarly, when clients do successfully download their final video, it’s not always immediately clear what they should do with it. Ideally, the video’s purpose and distribution is something videographers and clients will discuss early on, so the crew can keep these things in mind during production. A video for a television broadcast requires a much different shoot than one intended for Facebook and Twitter. When a project is complete and delivered, the client might still need some hand-holding during the uploads to platforms like YouTube, Vimeo, Facebook, Twitter, and even Instagram.Here are some resources for uploading best practices.Everything You Need to Know About Putting Your Videos OnlineHow to Properly Export Video for VimeoEverything You Need to Know Before Posting Your Videos on Reddit 6. The Cost of ArchivingImage via AH Images.Once final videos are delivered, many clients assume that the videographer saves all RAW video files and assets forever. It’s not uncommon to get an email a year later from a client asking for the files for some other video project — or for an updated version. However, archiving footage and assets is no small task. When done correctly, archiving is an involved process that takes up both time and hard drive (or cloud) space. Discuss archiving with the client during the initial conversation about the scope of work, and then account for a few hours (or even a few days) to archive, back up, and store the project properly.Here are some tips and tricks to refine the archiving process.Archive Your Project With the Premiere Pro Project ManagerThe Best External Hard Drives for Video EditorsPremiumBeat Backup Archives Before you start your next corporate or commercial project, share these points (or this article) with your favorite clients.Cover image via Monkey Business Images.There are many things you might take for granted in the film and video industry. This might include things like filmmaking terms and lingo, intrinsic costs and values — even just a basic understanding of how long it takes to plan, shoot, and edit a video from start to finish.However, for those outside the field (i.e. your video production clients), all the aspects and moving parts of video production can be confusing.To streamline the relationships and expectations between both parties, here are seven helpful things video professionals can share with their favorite clients before jumping into a project.1. The Importance of ContractsImage via Gajus.For clients unaccustomed to working with video professionals (or any creative services, really), the importance of contracts or “statements of work” can seem a little unnecessary. I mean, if you agree to a project, shouldn’t it be easy to see it through then simply invoice for it later?Well, for film and video folks, it’s really not that simple. Often, there are expenses we have to pay upfront to even get started on a project. Whether that’s renting cameras or gear, modifying or performing upkeep to existing gear, hiring other shooters or crew members — it can add up quickly.Film and video projects can also often be difficult to define in terms of scope of work. If your upfront agreement doesn’t take changes, delays, or setbacks into account, then you can end up with disparities between an agreed-upon price and the final amount of work.Sitting down together and building out a solid contract for a project, which defines everything start to finish, benefits both parties. It eliminates unnecessary back-and-forth on revisions, and it provides stability for video professionals so they can make the necessary arrangements to dive right into the work.2. Access to Drafts and Review ProcessImage via GaudiLab.Technology has truly revolutionized what used to be perhaps the most arduous part of any film or video project. Sharing drafts and revisions between clients and video professionals has never been easier — and it’s still just as important as ever.Some clients like to keep tabs on projects throughout the entire process. This gets tricky, especially during editing. But if you use one of the collaborative sharing services below, clients can review drafts in real time.Screenlight.tvWipsterFrame.ioVimeo Review 7. Maximizing Their InvestmentImage via DisobeyArt.Finally, once everything is said and done, clients need to feel confident that they’re doing everything they can to maximize their investment. It’s just as frustrating for video professionals to send something off and see it misused or underutilized as it is for clients to fail to see the return on the investment they’d hoped for. Social videos, for example, need optimization for the best return. If you discuss the nature of the project early (one-off or campaign?), you can deliver evergreen content rather than something that will really only perform well once. There’s a lot to read up on, but here are some good resources to keep in mind.Facebook Hack: How to Optimize Your Video PostsGetting Flagged on YouTube or Vimeo? Here’s Why5 Quick Tips to Boost Your Video’s YouTube Rank3 Things You can Learn about Video Marketing from Wipster’s CEOMust-Know Filmmaking and Music Trends for 2018
Filmmakers like Shyam Benegal, Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra, R Balki and first-timer Sanjay Puran Singh are a happy lot as each of their films clinched coveted honours at the 57th National film awards announced on Wednesday.Benegal’s ‘Well Done Abba’ has won the National Award in the Film with a Social Message category and even though the veteran filmmaker has won about 17 National awards earlier, he said that recognition can’t be “measured” and it’s always good to have another one.”I am very pleased with the award since it is a recognition for the film. National awards are always special and welcome,” the 75-year-old director told PTI.The film is a political satire with Boman Irani, Minnisha Lamba and Rajit Kapur playing pivotal roles.Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra’s second directorial ‘Delhi 6’ bagged the Nargis Dutt award for Best Film on National Integration. It is his second National honour after ‘Rang De Basanti’ bagged one in 2006.”It feels good when one’s work has been awarded. It is especially a great honour since it is the National award when the country is honouring, not some commercially-motivated prize,” said Mehra.Delhi 6, which starred Abhishek Bachchan, Sonam Kapoor, Om Puri and Waheeda Rehman, is based in Chandni Chowk of old Delhi and deals with issues like caste discrimination, communal divide and other social stigma.”I am most happy since this was a socially oriented film showing the religious and cast divide in India. A film like this which goes against the current trend takes time to get its recognition. I hope this award gives birth to 10 more films like ‘Delhi 6’,” said Mehra.advertisementAmitabh Bachchan starrer ‘Paa’ won the Best Hindi Film award, and its director R Balki called the recognition an added “bonus”.”For me the most important thing is to make a film and people should love it. I just wanted to make a good film in the form of ‘Paa’. Awards are a bonus and yes, they do call for a celebration,” said Balki.Sanjay Puran Singh Chauhan, who won the Best Debutante Director award for his sports-based film ‘Lahore’, said the honour came to him as a surprise.”This is a very special moment for me and ultimate encouragement as a filmmaker. I was sure that Farooq Sheikh would receive an award but my winning the National award came as a surprise,” said Chauhan.Sheikh won the Best Supporting Actor award for the film, which carries the message of unity and sportsman spirit between India and Pakistan with the backdrop of a the sport of kick boxing.
Tag: 上海水磨论坛 Hockey World Cup 2002: Opportunity for Indian hockey team to count itself amongst the elite
f On a sunless winter’s day, all that stood out in the grey was a flaming garland of marigolds on the statue. When the Indian hockey team left the National Stadium in Delhi on its last morning before flying off for the World Cup, they walked briskly past the statue.,fOn a sunless winter’s day, all that stood out in the grey was a flaming garland of marigolds on the statue. When the Indian hockey team left the National Stadium in Delhi on its last morning before flying off for the World Cup, they walked briskly past the statue. Maybe they were preoccupied. Maybe it was late.Maybe they were only doing what Indian hockey has been trying to do all these years. Leave the shadow of its giants behind, throw off the burden of its history and look for new routes, new roads, new histories. The statue, though, was smiling. Dhyan Chand – for it is his bronze image that backs the stadium’s new hockey turf and looks out towards India Gate – would have approved. He could use the company.To judge Indian hockey by its yesterdays is like taking modern India to task for not resembling the Gupta era – they were both Golden Ages, remember. The Olympic golds, the wizards of hockey, the breathless beauty of it all, came from a time when our mothers were fainting at the sight and sound of Elvis Presley.In the past 30 years, the honours list has grown thin: the World Cup in 1975, an Olympic gold in 1980, an Asian Games gold in 1998 and a Junior World Cup only last year. The Indian team returns to Malaysia, the country where it won the Cup 27 years ago, but it will be playing a very different game from the one played by its illustrious predecessors.advertisementDhanraj Pillai”When Dhanraj begins to run, the opposition runs with him.”CEDRIC D’SOUZA, Indian coach, on star striker PillaiIn the past quarter century, there have been few sports that have changed as much as hockey – not just in terms of equipment and surface like tennis, but also in tactics, techniques and pre-match preparation. It is where the Indians fell apart in the past two decades and it is why, along with other reasons like sheer administrative blindness, catching up has been like puffing up the Everest in bathroom slippers.When the World Cup explodes from the first whistle on February 24, the nostalgia bugs would be advised to switch channels from some damned cricket match and watch. Sixteen nations will play on a turf called System Five, the ball hit from a standing stroke will travel at speeds between 120 and 150 kmph, and go from stick to goal in 1.5 seconds. Once the wizards of hockey attacked in waves, weaving pretty rings around defenders. Today’s stickmen will play, to borrow from Harry Potter, wizard’s chess at full tilt. In this game only if the men of action and men of thought combine as a seamless whole can a team hope to succeed.Where then do the Indians fit in this intricate and grand design? Baljit Singh Dhillon, the Indian captain and a quiet man of reasonable words, says, “We have always gone one step ahead. But we have to listen to the criticism until we win something big.” The only way to judge the team – they rarely play as a unit at home – is by results. Through 2001 there have been flashes of light. The Indians won the Champions Challenge in Kuala Lumpur, earning them a ticket into the Champions Trophy, meant only for the top six hockey nations in the world.At the World Cup the Indians, who finished ninth in the last edition in Utrecht, Holland, will play seven group matches in nine days. They are in the “easier” of the two groups, but while Australia has old “pedigree”, no longer can the other teams in their group – Korea, England, Malaysia, Poland – just be sneezed away.The CompetitionGermanyEfficient set piecesSpeed on the breakConvert close to 60 per cent chancesStars: Bjorn Michel, Oliver DomkePakistanSuperior skill advantageGrasp of tactical hockeyAbility to score off penalty cornersStars: Shahbaz Ahmed, Sohail AbbasAustraliaSpeed in the D, fitnessSuperb midfieldersAggressive play in the first 10 minutesStars: Troy Elder, Brent LivermoreHollandSpeed over the groundSure hands in the DSmooth transfers out of defenceStars: Bram Lomans, Taeke TaekemaSo the Indians have prepared in three long camps, including physical training that would leave the cricket team counting its blessings (the minimum level required of the “bleep” test for endurance is set at 17 for the hockey team – the Indian cricketers strain for a bit over 11), early morning starts in freezing Ludhiana, video-analysis sessions and simulated matches in sweltering Chennai in which one half lasted an hour instead of the regulation 35 minutes, leaving athletes smelling their own blood. It is an enormous workload but it is what is being put in by every other team.advertisementThe Dutch are now in Egypt trying to duplicate Malaysian conditions and to keep set pieces away from spying eyes. For the first time the Indians sent assistant coach C. Kumar out to Malaysia for a six-nation event featuring the big daddies – Holland, Pakistan and Australia – so that he, armed with a video camera, could do a little bit of spying too. Coach Cedric D’Souza has worked out 12 penalty corner set pieces-stealthily moving arrows and dots, dodges and dashes-on his computer’s Power Point programme. It may seem obsessive and overzealous but, again, it is all mandatory.The team has headed for Kuala Lumpur on a bubble of goodwill but should they “fail” – and that’s a very loose definition – they know they will be taken to the cleaners. Indian hockey is not only a miserly employer – the players receive an allowance of $20 (Rs 960) per day and a match fee of zero – but an unforgiving one. A year after the India lost the final of the 1982 Asian Games to Pakistan, someone cut the electricity when goalkeeper Mir Ranjan Negi was getting married in Indore, the ceremony continuing in darkness.After Rajiv Mishra, a junior instrumental in taking India to the 1997 World Junior final, suffered from a knee injury, he was left out on a limb, the IHF President K.P.S. Gill remarking, “You can’t take care of someone who doesn’t want to take care of himself.” Clearly the golden era of nurturing hockey players is over too, gone like the grass on which the greats played.On the current Indian team, Jugraj Singh is already being hailed as the golden boy with the penalty corner hits and being thrown in to the sharks. Before he became a modern maestro Sohail Abbas of Pakistan was groomed for four years and sent to Holland to develop his penalty corner skills. Olympian striker Jagbir Singh says the reason Indians have won little recently has plenty to do with player morale. “We are always changing our players, putting them under pressure. Look at Pakistan – they value their players more. The confidence of their team is always higher.”The Indians now in Malaysia believe they are different. Half of the 22 now in Kuala Lumpur – the squad will be trimmed to 18 – come from the under-21 World Cup winning squad but have played on the national team as part of a core group in international competitions. Their pure optimism may be easily drained in the future but for the moment it is stuff that could be drunk neat. But only as an aperitif, to stimulate the senses.The meat and potatoes of the team remains the experience of Dhillon, the peerless Dhanraj Pillai, Sabu Varkey and defender Dilip Tirkey is worth its weight in golden boots. The pressure of playing for the “revival” of Indian hockey may just be too hot a cup of tea for the juniors.”We have to channelise their speed, thrust and off-the-ball running,” says Dhillon. “Sometimes greater the speed the greater the mistakes.”advertisementPillai, playing in his final World Cup, matching sticks and wits with the most youthful, will be the centre of attention and play two parts: that of goal-scorer and panic-creator. Says D’Souza, whose move to play Pillai out on the right instead of dead centre has caused some heartburn: “When he’s playing, the opposition is more on guard. Dhanraj’s reputation precedes him. When he runs, the opposition runs with him.” The point is whether he has the ball or he doesn’t. If he doesn’t, he is able to create space for the rest of the forwards. When it works, it is pure theatre. When it doesn’t, Pillai’s skills seem wasted. The great man has a great stage again.Worth the Wait: New find Jugraj Singh’s success in converting penalty corners will be crucialD’Souza has returned to handle the hot potato of the Indian team after a stint in 1996. He says he has tried to soften his own man-management style and break down the barrier between seniors and juniors, north and south. He has set up an “inner circle” of seniors, draws up the room lists and tries to put players from different regions together. “That way the common language is hockey. And humour. To the seniors I’ve said, ‘If you want to be called seniors, you have to take the responsibility of behaving like grown men, take charge of the younger players.'” It’s a prickly subject, this, a hangover from a history of deference. As a rookie, a member of this team found himself intimidated by the aloof manner of Pargat Singh, who to him became not Pargat Singh, comrade, but Pargat Singh, “triple Olympian”. The player says, “They were all supremely talented players but as a team – what?”It is a culture that needs to be dismantled before any team can move ahead. If not checked and balanced in this World Cup, it could yet delay India’s dream. Former coach and Olympian M.P. Ganesh tries to be realistic, “Getting into the semi-final would be a very good effort. What we all really need to see is India proving that they belong to the Champions Trophy group – the elite of the hockey world.” India did in an era long gone, but this is a new century and it must find its place , in it all over again.”We must get over this psyche of, ‘We were the champions and we will remain so,'” says Jagbir. When striker Deepak Thakur came home as a junior world champion, he saw what could be: not just the headlines and TV lights, but 400 children turning out for under-15 hockey trials in Patiala. It’s like every man on the team can almost sight the corner, can sense the moment when he can stop being the ordinary son of extraordinary fathers and be himself. It is time to turn the corner and time to turn the page.A new history for Indian hockey – whether a good, bad or an ugly one – waits to be written. The team now in Kuala Lumpur comprises its writers.