Read Also: Serie A: Juventus suffer title setback in thrilling Sassuolo draw“It was a big thing towards the end of last season that we felt our team wasn’t fit enough, we got a few injuries. This season we’ve not had that kind of a problem.“No, it’s not going to be a problem and a concern for us but 24 hours, 48 hours is a big difference at this time as well.”FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmail分享 Manchester United boss Ole Gunnar Solskjaer claims it is unfair Chelsea have an extra two days of rest before their FA Cup semi-final showdown on Sunday. Solskjaer’s side face Crystal Palace in the Premier League on Thursday before returning to London three days later to play Chelsea at Wembley. While United endure that hectic schedule, Chelsea will have been resting since Tuesday’s 1-0 win over Norwich. United also played on Monday in a 2-2 draw against Southampton, with Chelsea in action at Sheffield United last Saturday. There is little opportunity for Solskjaer to rest players against Palace as United are chasing a top-four finish in the race to qualify for the Champions League. United are currently fifth, behind Leicester on goal difference and four points adrift of third-placed Chelsea. Solskjaer is concerned that United’s bid to reach the FA Cup final is being jeopardised by the fixture schedule.Advertisement “There is a concern, obviously, that they’ve had 48 hours’ more rest and recovery than us. It’s not fair,” Solskjaer told reporters on Wednesday. “We spoke about a fair scheduling going into this restart. Of course it isn’t. “But I have to think about Thursday. We’ve got to win that one, focus on that one, and then let’s pick up the pieces after that.” Solskjaer is adamant the semi-final is “irrelevant” when it comes to his selection against Palace at Selhurst Park. He believes United have the energy and drive to cope with the taxing programme despite fitness concerns over Mason Greenwood, Luke Shaw and Brandon Williams. “We’ve not really played every three days – we will now, definitely,” Solskjaer said. “The next two weeks will be hectic but, then again, we’re fit. Very fit. Our lads have not felt as fit as this for years, I’m sure. Loading…
Paul Smith has been told he will make a huge mistake if he attempts to trade punches with George Groves in their Bonfire Night showdown at Wembley Arena.Hammersmith’s Groves defends his British and Commonwealth super-middleweight titles – and his unbeaten professional record – against the tough Liverpudlian a week on Saturday.Smith, 29, was the British champion before losing to James DeGale, who was narrowly outpointed by Groves in their May grudge match.“I’m going to break him down and then knock him out.”Despite being outclassed by DeGale and stopped in nine rounds, Smith has been tipped by many to cause Groves problems because of his aggressive style.But Groves told West London Sport: “He’ll fight in a style where he’ll throw shots but end up taking shots too – and if he does that it’ll be a mistake, because the shots I’m going to be landing he won’t be able to absorb for 12 rounds.“Those punches will have a cumulative effect. I’m going to break him down and then knock him out.”Smith has bounced back strongly from the DeGale defeat, knocking out Paul Samuels and Hungarian Jozsef Matolcsi in the first round, improving his record to 31-2.He says he has what it takes to inflict the first defeat of Groves’ career and put himself in the frame for a world title shot.“I feel he is an overrated fighter who had a one-off performance against DeGale,” Smith declared.A win would move Groves a step closer to a world title shot“DeGale is an awkward fighter to face. When you get in the ring he surprises you with the shots he throws. Groves had the advantage having sparred with him in the past – there was no shock factor.“His win against DeGale does not give me any nightmares. I know I have the style to beat him. He leaves himself open.”But Groves countered: “I think he’s saying that to use it as motivation for himself because he knows he’s in for a tough night.“He also knows that after losing his title last year, he’s not going to get too many opportunities to get back to where he wants to be.“For that reason it’ll be a tough fight and he’ll be up for it, but I know what I need to do.”
SAinfo reporter “The title means a lot to me because I’ve worked so hard, to finally win one is really rewarding.” Before her win on Saturday, Coetzer was the last South African to win a WTA trophy, way back in 2003 in Acapulco, Mexico. “In my junior days, when I lived in Harrismith in my native Free State, Amanda invited and sponsored Karin Coetzee and Noleen Uys, mother of former Pro Player Rene Uys, to go with me on a trip to the USA where I went to train at her training base, the Dennis van der Meer Academy. I was 12 and will never forget the influence that had on my young career.” Would you like to use this article in your publication or on your website? See: Using SAinfo material “My congratulations go out to Chani on winning her first title,” said Coetzer, from Los Angeles. ‘Really happy’“I’m really happy to have won my first WTA Tournament. It meant even more, because every match on route to the final I had to fight back from behind to win it. “I will definitely take a lot of confidence out of this tournament. Nothing changes next week, though. I will still go out and compete for every point win or lose. I’m also really excited at this stage of my life to find out what I am truly capable of. “It’s great that a South African has once again taken the podium on the WTA Tour,” she concluded. Easiest matchScheepers had her easiest match of the week in disposing of the eighth-seed Rybarikova in the final. ‘Everything seemed to click’“All of my other matches were really tough, but today was the day everything seemed to click,” Scheepers said after her victory. Prior to that, she had battled through each round with three-set victories on every occasion, including having to fight back from 4-1 down in the deciding set to beat top seed Maria Kirilenko in the semi-finals. Scheepers also saved match point in her second round match against Hsieh Su-Wei. Scheepers took just under an hour-and-a-half in beating her under-par opponent, who had won her previous two WTA finals. Her reward, on Monday, was a career-best singles ranking of 41. At the end of 2010, her ranking was 107. Former world number three Amanda Coetzer has praised Chani Scheepers after the current South African number one claimed her maiden WTA Tour title in the Wanlima International Women’s Open in Guanzhou, China on Saturday. “She has proved to us all and herself her capabilities and now she has to prove to us all and herself that she can consistently compete at the top and win more titles. “Being the first [South African] since Amanda Coetzer [to win a WTA Tour title] is the cherry on the cake.” Scheepers’ 6-2, 6-2 victory over Magdalena Rybarikova in the final ended an eight-year title drought for South Africa. Previously, Scheepers had not been beyond the quarterfinals of any WTA tournament. “I thought I was hitting my groundstrokes well today. I was really consistent and tried to move her around. I didn’t give her a lot of mistakes. I played well. “I don’t remember much about the match point. I was so in the moment. I know it was a long point, but it seemed so long ago. “I have always believed Chani has these capabilities and have watched her progress with interest. I wish her all the best going forward and congratulate her on this important breakthrough. 26 September 2011 “Every match before the final was difficult. It seemed like I was fighting every match and all of them were hard in their own way. ‘Congratulations’ Emulating CoetzerScheepers said to emulate Coetzer was really special. “Amanda has always been a player I have looked up to.
“We need to make a profit.”I’ve heard salespeople say these words countless times when negotiating or when dealing with a price objection. They believe that, somehow, their prospective client is worried about making sure that they are profitable. They think that the customer is seeking a win-win, which is true when dealing with mature clients and not so much when you aren’t.But the statement, “We need to make a profit,” or one of it’s many variations, like “We aren’t a charity,” or “We aren’t a non-profit,” is self-oriented. It informs your prospective client that you are worried most of all about your profit.Before we go any further, let me be clear that you do have to worry about your company’s profitability. No business is better than business that causes you to lose money. Losing money can cost you the whole game. But you do have to be skillful in how you have conversations about money—and specifically your pricing.The right answer is, “I am afraid that reducing the price puts the outcomes you said you needed at risk. Can I explain why this is and how we need to make sure we don’t do anything that hurts your results?”“We need to make a profit” isn’t “other-oriented” language. It is language that suggests that by reducing your price, you have less money to invest in helping your client achieve the improvements they need. And the best part of all this? It’s true.When you allow your client to underinvest, you do have less money to invest in producing the results they need. Without being profitable, you can’t easily make the investments your client wants, needs, or expects you to make. Right now we face an epidemic of companies underinvesting and failing to generate the results they need.If you want to protect the margins you need to deliver for your clients, you need to remind them of the risk they take by underinvesting with you—or with your competitors. Essential Reading! Get my 2nd book: The Lost Art of Closing “In The Lost Art of Closing, Anthony proves that the final commitment can actually be one of the easiest parts of the sales process—if you’ve set it up properly with other commitments that have to happen long before the close. The key is to lead customers through a series of necessary steps designed to prevent a purchase stall.” Buy Now
The Canadian PressBISMARCK, N.D. — A federal judge will hear arguments Tuesday about whether to stop the final bit of construction on the disputed Dakota Access pipeline, perhaps just days before it could start moving oil.U.S. District Judge James Boasberg in Washington will consider a request by the Standing Rock and Cheyenne River Sioux tribes to order the Army Corps of Engineers to withdraw permission for developer Energy Transfer Partners to lay pipe under Lake Oahe in North Dakota.The stretch under the Missouri River reservoir is the last piece of construction for the $3.8 billion pipeline that’s to move oil through the Dakotas and Iowa to a shipping point in Illinois.The tribes argue that the mere existence of an oil pipeline under the reservoir that provides water to the neighbouring reservations violates their right to practice their religion, which relies on clean water.“The granting of the easement and resulting construction activity violates the tribe’s and its members’ constitutional rights, and will result in immediate and irreparable harm to the tribe and its members before this court will be able to rule on the merits of this claim,” tribal attorney Nicole Ducheneaux said in court documents.When they filed the lawsuit last summer, the tribes argued that the pipeline threatens Native American cultural sites and their water supply. Their religion argument is new, however, and both the Corps and Energy Transfer Partners argue that the delay in raising it is a reason for Boasberg to reject the argument.Company attorney William Scherman also said the tribes’ claim is suspect based on other man-made infrastructure under the lake, and that the company respects the tribe’s religious beliefs but has no legal duty to make concessions for them.Corps attorney Erica Zilioli said the government’s permission for the company to lay pipe under the lake “does not substantially burden the exercise of the tribe’s religious beliefs.”Earlier this month, Boasberg declined the tribes’ request to order an immediate halt to the pipeline construction, ruling that as long as oil wasn’t flowing through the pipeline, there was no imminent harm to the tribes.In a court filing Friday, Ducheneaux argued the claim is “about the religious harm arising from the mere siting of this pipeline under the tribe’s sacred waters.”Boasberg’s decision on the matter won’t be the end of the court battle. Both tribes have asked him to overturn the federal permission for the Lake Oahe crossing and to bar the Corps from granting permission in the future. The judge won’t rule until at least April.Hundreds and sometimes thousands of pipeline opponents who sided with tribal opposition to the pipeline camped on federal land near the drill site for months, often clashing with police.There have been about 750 arrests in the region since August. Authorities last week closed the camp in advance of spring flooding season and set up roadblocks to prevent protesters from returning.Work under Lake Oahe had been held up in the courts until President Donald Trump last month instructed the Corps to advance construction.The Army is involved because its engineering branch manages the river and its system of hydroelectric dams, which is owned by the federal government.Texas-based Energy Transfer Partners began drilling under the lake Feb. 8. The pipeline could be operating as early as Monday and no later than early April, according to [email protected]
Related Items: Facebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsApp Facebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsAppProvidenciales, TCI, June 6, 2016 – The PDM deputy leader is bullish on the bill to bring greater prominence to the country’s coat of arms and flag. He agrees with the bill to raise their profile as symbols of national pride. Hon Sean Astwood, as the member for Five Cays in the House of Assembly today said if there was anything to be changed it would be that the country’s flag would definitely be required to be flown at all government buildings and all schools, public or private and not that it ‘may’ as the current bill suggests.Hon Astwood called for training and retraining in use of the flag and coat of arms with special emphasis on children understanding the importance of the country’s flag. The member said while the bill itself is insightful, the government administration is not as he slammed the PNP for what he called a lack of funding for the entity which would have to police how the flag and coat of arms are used. He called for dignity and respect during the singing of the National Symbol, the country’s National Song – citing that there is too much movement, people chewing gum and the like during the singing or playing of the song written by the Late Rev Dr Conrad Howell. Hon Astwood said he would move to see some of the wording in the proposed policy changed.