Follow the news on China China’s Cyber Censorship Figures ChinaAsia – Pacific Organisation RSF_en April 27, 2021 Find out more ChinaAsia – Pacific June 2, 2021 Find out more China: Political commentator sentenced to eight months in prison March 12, 2021 Find out more Democracies need “reciprocity mechanism” to combat propaganda by authoritarian regimes Receive email alerts News Help by sharing this information News Two young Tibetans, identified as Gyaltsing and Nyima Wangdu, have just been given three-year jail sentences for posting photos of the Dalai Lama online. The exact date of their conviction is not known but it is believed to have been three or four days ago. They were convicted on charges of “communicating information to contacts outside China.”They have been detained in Lhassa since 1 October. Their families, who have not been able to visit them in prison or obtain any information about them, are concerned for their health.Three other Internet users, identified as Yeshi Namkha, Anne (a pseudonym) and Thupten, were arrested for similar reasons on 1 December but have not yet been tried. It is not known where they are being held.“All these young Tibetan Internet users did was exchange photos of Tibet’s spiritual leader,” Reporters Without Borders said. “We call for their immediate release and the withdrawal of all the charges. These convictions are absurd. These young people should not be made to pay for the tension between the Chinese authorities and the Dalai Lama.”———————————22.10.2009 – More Tibetans arrested in connection with Internet activitiesReporters Without Borders calls for the release of three young Tibetans from the village of Dara who have been held in Nagchu county since 1 October, when they were arrested in nearby Sogdzong county for allegedly sending information about Tibet to contacts abroad via the Internet. The police have not allowed the three – identified as Gyaltsing, 25, Nymia Wangchuk, 24, and Yeshi Namkha, 25 – to have any contact with their families since their arrest.“The Internet is monitored, censored and manipulated more in Tibet than in other Chinese provinces,” Reporters Without Borders said. “Despite the risks, Tibetan Internet users continue to transmit information, especially to the diaspora and human rights groups. It is deplorable that the Chinese police devote so much energy to identifying and arresting ordinary Internet users.”The three young people allegedly used QQ, a Chinese instant messaging service, to send photos of the Dalai Lama and speeches by him. It appears that the Bureau of Public Security had been monitoring their online activities for some time. The population of Sogdzong country complain of police harassment, including frequent ID checks.The monks in Sog Tsandan monastery, for example, were forced by the police to attend patriotic meetings with the authorities and were forbidden to observe their end-of-summer retreat (in which they stay within the monastery to avoid harming the insects that emerge at that time of the year).Several bloggers and other Internet users have been arrested in Tibet in recent months. They include Pasang Norbu, arrested in Lhasa on 12 August for looking at online photos of the Tibetan flag and Dalai Lama, and Gonpo Tserang, a guide sentenced to three years in prison in June on charges of inciting separatism and “communicating outside the country” for sending emails and SMS messages about the March 2008 protests in Tibet. News News December 4, 2009 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Three years in jail for posting Dalai Lama photos online to go further
Delighted West Ham boss Sam Allardyce felt Diafra Sakho’s second-half goal effectively ended any prospect of a QPR comeback in the derby at Upton Park.Bottom-of-the-table Rangers were dealt an early blow when Nedum Onuoha scored an own goal after only five minutes.Charlie Austin missed a good chance for the visitors before Sakho scored the Hammers’ second goal just before the hour mark.And Allardyce said: “The second goal was a big moment. Even though we dominated the game there was a period where QPR were trying to get back into it and we then scored the second.“At 2-0 up at that stage, I think in the end that killed QPR’s spirit. It was difficult for them.“The lads stepped up and gave a very good performance and came out with a very good result.”Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
Michael Doughty, whose late father Nigel was Nottingham Forest’s owner, says it was a “really great feeling” to play for QPR at the City Ground on Saturday.Nigel Doughty, a lifelong Forest fan, bought the club in 1999 and took over as chairman three years later. He died suddenly in 2012 at the age of 54.Michael Doughty told QPR Player: “I had a lot of good memories there growing up, a place that I visited a lot with my old man.“So it was a really great feeling to run out at the City Ground, but obviously disappointing that we didn’t win.”Rangers’ 1-0 defeat meant another swift exit from the FA Cup and leaves them still waiting for their first win since Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink took over as manager.“I felt as if there wasn’t much between the two sides,” midfielder Doughty, 23, said.“In the first half we didn’t really take the game to them but in the second half we really did.“We need to start games much better and need to be a little bit more proactive in our approach to the games.”See also:Forest send toothless QPR out of FA CupQPR boss refuses to discuss Green situationHasselbaink ‘very proud’ of QPR’s second-half displayFollow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
The hardest substance in your body is your teeth. The varieties of teeth among vertebrates is astounding, from the tiny incisors in a mole to the bone-crushing scimitars on a T. rex. Many fossils are known only from their teeth. One would think teeth are the best-studied objects in evolutionary theory, but a recent paper uncovers a near absence of explanation about how they arose. Soukup et al started the confession with a paper in Nature that essentially falsified the two leading theories for the origin of teeth.1 Georgy Koentges (U of Warwick) followed up in the News and Views section of Nature by almost throwing his hands up.2 First, he said that the development of teeth in the embryo is a “contentious question” about which “we know too little”. It might be surprising to layman that something observable in the lab – the development of teeth in the embryo – remains obscure. The subjects of tooth embryology and tooth evolution are related, because evolutionists look where teeth develop for clues about tissues that natural selection might have co-opted for the first teeth. But if tooth development is obscure, theories of tooth evolution stand on shaky gums.In evolutionary terms, tooth-like structures – such as the denticles that appear as a ubiquitous feature on the body armour of early vertebrates – might have preceded the advent of jaws proper. The staggering histological diversity of such structures has led to byzantine systems of classification of vertebrate hard tissues, and in turn to serious differences of opinion. The acrimony of these debates has scaled linearly with the lack of experimental embryological evidence about the underlying process.Debate has squared off over two opposite opinions that were either coming or going:The presence of denticles on the body of early jawed vertebrates led to speculation that, early in vertebrate evolution, embryonic ectoderm moved into the mouth and initiated organized tooth rows there. In contrast to this ‘outside-in’ view of events is the ‘inside-out’ theory. This theory holds that the evolutionary origins of teeth started in the mouth or pharynx and are linked to the presence of embryonic endoderm. An outward migration of cells, or a co-option of a pharyngeal tooth-forming program in a part of the outer body surface, would have to occur to explain the presence of denticles on the outer covering of sharks and other more basal vertebrates. Both theories hinge on the idea that there is an inherent difference in the inductive power of ectoderm and endoderm, and that migration of one or the other is the crucial factor in tooth formation. Implicit in this is the notion that tooth and denticle anatomy reflects embryonic origins – that is, that actual tooth or denticle histology can reveal which embryonic tissue was the key source.Well, that “notion” has been shot down, Koentges continues: “Soukup et al. now provide experimental grounds to debunk such ideas by testing the spatial distribution of ectoderm and endoderm in relation to erupting teeth.” They found in certain amphibians that it doesn’t matter whether the teeth emerge from mesoderm or ectoderm: somehow the resulting teeth end up just the same. Notice the evolutionary implications of this “dramatic finding” –….the authors show that there is no relationship between ectodermal and endodermal origin and the shape or nature of the resulting teeth – at least at the point when such teeth become visible. The enamel of teeth can be of ectodermal, endodermal or mixed origin. This is a dramatic finding. It means that one cannot infer relative distributions of ectoderm and endoderm from tooth or denticle anatomy even in a living species, let alone in a fossil.Did he have any good news to come to the rescue? If so, it’s in future tense. All he left were a pile of more questions:Nonetheless, Soukup and colleagues’ study removes the basis for theories depending on ‘co-option’ processes that would require migration of epithelial cells, and redirects future research. We need to study the molecular co-option of tooth or denticle genetic programs, a process that might have occurred several times independently in the history of jawed vertebrates. Which gene-regulatory regions are involved in switching on key regulators of tooth or denticle initiation in both epithelial and mesenchymal tissue? How, where and when did these genomic regions evolve? Are the same regions driving expression in ectoderm and endoderm? Are the regions involved in patterning denticle fields also used for organizing feathers and hair? And where are the ‘atoms of information’ that initiate, position and shape a tooth or denticle, and make its internal structure different from that of a dermal bone?There won’t be any simple answers, he continued: only combinations of factors. That concept of information cropped up again: finding the answer will require “new experimental and bioinformatics approaches.” Koentges ended by distracting attention from his embarrassment with a few mixed metaphors: “Cracking such hard technical nuts will require strong intellectual teeth as well as robust body armour, given the vigour of opinion on this subject.”1. Soukup et al, “Dual epithelial origin of vertebrate oral teeth,” Nature 455, 795-798 (9 October 2008)| doi:10.1038/nature07304.2. Georgy Koentges, “Developmental biology: Teeth in double trouble,” Nature 455, 747-748 (9 October 2008) | doi:10.1038/455747a.Ha! This is rich. Look carefully: did you find any explanatory power for evolution in this story? No; it was all hand-waving and misdirection. He waffled: it might be outside-in, it might be inside-out, but whoa! The paper found both are wrong, so maybe it’s downside-up, upside-down, or over the rainbow. For all this time, we listened to those grandiose tales of How the T. rex Got Its Teeth and other fables, and they never told us there was nothing empirical to back them up. They can’t even look down in the mouth and find out what’s going on in a developing salamander right now. How many years has it been since Charlie proposed natural selection as the explanation of all explanations? All we see are questions and empty speculations. Making up words is not explanation. Look at what Georgy did. He’s got miracle-words everywhere. He spoke of the “advent” of jaws. That sounds downright churchy. Jaws became flesh, and dwelt among fish. It’s surprising the Darwin Party doesn’t celebrate Bite-mas in their Byzantine classification temple. It must be hard to celebrate when “the acrimony of these debates scales linearly with the lack of experimental embryological evidence about the underlying process” of evolution. Since the acrimony requires robust armor, you can bet the lack of evidence must be huge. This is an inverse relationship: less evidence, more acrimony. Do the new math. In the set of scientific explanations, this means evolution is the empty set. There’s plenty more miracles in their story. While divining the pudding (10/09/2008), they see the ectoderm moving into the mouth, where “it initiated tooth rows there.” Well, great. Who did the initiating? Did it initiate the program on purpose? Was it following a master plan? No; they would say. It was just another miracle of chance that worked. Isn’t scientific explanation wonderful; the Stuff Happens Law is always there when you need it. Next, we are told that the “evolutionary origins of teeth started in the mouth… and are linked to the presence of embryonic ectoderm”. It evolved because it evolved. Then, as part of the hand-waving calisthenics, “An outward migration of cells, or a co-option of a pharyngeal tooth-forming program” would have to occur because, according to the puddingoscopy readout, evolution needs to explain both shark skin and shark teeth. Tooth-forming program? Who was the programmer? Whence come the “atoms of information” that flow into teeth or into denticles? Does information have any meaning without an observer? The workout turns intense with extreme jawboning exercises: “We need to study the molecular co-option of tooth or denticle genetic programs, a process that might have occurred several times independently in the jawed vertebrates.” Wow; that’s real miracles fer ye, o ye of little faith. What is co-option, if not a sleight-of-mind personification of intelligent design? It’s the old the Tinker Bell defense. The evolution fairy decided that jaw ectoderm needed a little bite, so zap! a tooth was born. Do you have any idea how complex a mouth full of teeth is? Each tooth has roots, blood vessels, dentin, enamel, a precise shape for its function, and a matching tooth on the other jaw, to say nothing of genetic programs to assemble them at the right time and replace baby teeth with permanent teeth. To assume that they will just “occur” (note the miracle word) not once but several times independently is absurd. Since Georgy needed every trick in the evolutionary explanation cookbook, he even threw in a little Haeckel recapitulation theory for taste: “Implicit in this is the notion that tooth and denticle anatomy reflects embryonic origins – that is, that actual tooth or denticle histology can reveal which embryonic tissue was the key source.” That’s ontology recapitulates phylogeny, in case you missed it. But Mr. Scientist, Sir, we’re kind of tired of “notions.” When are we going to get your scientific explanation? (Notions are found in fabric stores near the sewing machines. If you use notions without strong empirical fabric, whatsoever you sew you shall also rip.) The real howler of miracle-words was mentioned so surreptitiously you might have missed it. He spoke of the “inductive power of ectoderm and endoderm”. Clearly, Georgy was not talking about logical induction here. He was talking about some mystical power in tissue cells that could induce them to evolve into teeth. If there is a more blatant case of pulling a rabbit out of a hat (in this case, a hard tooth out of squishy cells), then clap wildly for the magic show. This is circumlocution pretending to be scientific explanation. It’s as comical as Moliere’s satire on Aristotelian explanations when the doctor in one of his plays explains why opium induces sleep – because it has a “dormitive virtue.” In the same way, this Doctor Koentges put his readers to sleep by hypnotizing them to envision tooth evolution occurring as a result of the “inductive power” of ectoderm or endoderm cells. To put it simply, he is saying, “evolution occurs because of the evolution-inducing power of material substances.” Pray tell how this improves on animism. The Darwinists are so clever. They hide their miracles in highfalutin words. They shield their faith with cryptic jargon. These are the same people who turn around and accuse religious people (especially the dastardly creationists) of using God-of-the-gaps logic whenever they can’t explain something. Creationists and ID advocates, we are told, bring science to a halt by just appealing to faith and saying, “God did it, I believe it, that settles it.” Come now. Let’s play “find the hypocrite.” Reality check time. Turn off the reruns of the Darwin Charade Parade, stop looking at the cheerleaders (09/29/2008 commentary), and examine what’s left. Speculation. Dramatic findings that long-held theories are falling by the wayside. New unanswered questions. Byzantine systems of classification (is this the Dark Ages?). A rare honest admission that “one cannot infer relative distributions of ectoderm and endoderm from tooth or denticle anatomy even in a living species, let alone in a fossil,” meaning that any hope of reconstructing the evolution of teeth is doomed from the start. More vaporware. More futureware. This, folks, is the magic of evolutionary explanations: it’s all bombastic oratory about change we can believe in, without a plan or a policy that will work in the hard, cruel world of reality. That’s why you have to believe in it. Wishful thinking, if strong enough, eases the pain when you hit bottom. When in doubt, look tough. “Cracking such hard technical nuts will require strong intellectual teeth as well as robust body armour,” Koentges said, “given the vigour of opinion on this subject.” He hasn’t seen anything yet. Just when he thought this was only intramural warfare, the Visigoths showed up over the horizon (05/09/2006) Unlike the obese and lazy Darwin Party animals, they don’t use plastic teeth and cardboard armor. They look disciplined, determined, and armed to the teeth. For combat over the truth of the tooth, they’re prepared for a bite to the finish. General Dawkins rallies his troops out of their drunken stupor, bluffing that the Visigoths are a pushover because they trust in “faith” instead of “science.” Better have some bite behind the bark; and remember, let not the one who puts his armor on boast like the one who takes it off.(Visited 15 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced the 2016 sign-up period for the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), the nation’s largest working lands conservation program. CSP supports farmers and ranchers as they introduce and expand conservation on their land in agricultural productionFarmers and ranchers have until March 31 to complete the initial CSP application, which consists of a simple form that asks for basic information regarding land ownership, type of production, and contact information. While applicants can sign up for CSP anytime throughout the year, those who miss the March 31 deadline will not be considered until 2017.This year’s sign-up deadline carries particular significance, as a major program overhaul is scheduled for 2017. In order for producers to enroll in CSP under its existing structure, ranking process, and current conservation activities, they must apply by the March 31 deadline.Existing CSP participants with contracts set to expire later this year also have until March 31 to apply to renew their five-year contracts. All CSP contracts last for five years and are renewable; hence farmers who signed contracts in 2012 must renew them this year to remain in the program for the next five years (2017-21).“The 2016 CSP sign-up window has direct implications for more than 20 million acres of land in agricultural production, including 10 million new acres to be enrolled and an additional 12 million acres that were enrolled in 2012 and are now up for renewal,” said Alyssa Charney, Policy Specialist at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC). “CSP supports advanced stewardship of farm and ranch lands, but farmers and ranchers must get their applications in on time to make this possible.”CSP offers payments to farmers and ranchers for actively managing, maintaining, and expanding advanced conservation activities.“CSP supports a wide variety of conservation practices including cover cropping and crop rotation, managed rotational grazing, ecologically-based pest management, conservation buffer enhancement, and transitioning to organic cropping or grazing systems,” Charney said. “By rewarding the introduction and ongoing management of these advanced conservation practices, CSP helps farmers and ranchers address the critical resource concerns in their watersheds or regions while also profitably producing food, fiber, and energy.”While the 2016 enrollment period and program structure mirrors the 2015 sign-up period in terms of the application ranking process, payment rates, and available conservation activities, this year’s announcement does include one important change that benefits smaller acreage farms. In order to improve access for small acreage, high value operations, USDA will now set a $1,500 annual minimum contract payment floor.This represents an increase of $500 over the previous $1,000 annual minimum. The $1,000 annual minimum floor moreover, was only available for beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, whereas the new $1,500 annual minimum is now available to all farmers. Hence the new range for CSP payments per farm per year is between $1,500 and $40,000.“NSAC applauds NRCS for making this change to more appropriately reward superior environmental performance for all operations, regardless of their size,” Cha rney said. “It is important that all of agriculture has a fair opportunity to be part of the solutionto critical environmental issues.”In order to support producers going through the application process, the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition has released its CSP Information Alert with step-by-step sign-up and enrollment details, including a complete list of all conservation activities that enrollees will have to choose from as they consider their CSP options.In addition to the Information Alert, NSAC has also published a more detailed Farmers’ Guide to the Conservation Stewardship Program, which includes enrollment guidance, key definitions, explanations of the ranking and payment system, and helpful hints for accessing the program.The CSP Information Alert and The Farmers’ Guide to the Conservation Stewardship Program are available for free download on the NSAC website at: http://sustainableagriculture.net/publications.Printed copies of the Farmers’ Guide can also be purchased. To inquire about ordering printed copies, email NSAC at [email protected]
Real Betis defender Bartra blasts Vinicius Jr: He remembered my mother three times…by Paul Vegas9 months agoSend to a friendShare the loveReal Betis defender Marc Bartra has hit out at Real Madrid attacker Vinicius Junior after yesterday’s clash.Madrid won 2-1 with former Barcelona defender Bartra having a running battle with the Brazilian teen.He barked: “Vinícius was on the ground for longer than he was standing, I asked him not to dive and he called me a son of … well, he has remembered my mother three times.”Bartra offered Vinicius some advice: “He has a lot to learn, I do not think they are the right actions for a Real Madrid player.”He added: “The points escaped us, but at the level of sensations we have been very superior, that gives us a lot of confidence, it is a good line for the future.” About the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say
Ohio State offensive junior Claudia Kepler (24) controls the puck during a game against Bemidji State University on Nov. 6 at St. John Arena. OSU lost 2-1. Credit: Eileen McClory | Senior Lantern ReporterThe Ohio State women’s ice hockey team split its series at the Windjammer Classic in Vermont over the weekend to conclude out-of-conference play.OSU defeated Vermont 5-2 on Friday and fell to Boston University 5-3 on Saturday. After the split, the Buckeyes (6-10-0) have one series remaining in 2015 before they resume play on Jan. 2.“It was a good experience for our kids, it was a little bit out of excitement playing out of conference opponents in a new environment and new building,” assistant coach Carson Duggan said. “But it was a lot of fun to coach in today.”On Friday, OSU fell behind early with Vermont’s sophomore defender Taylor Willard‘s third goal of the season, but OSU junior forward Katie Matheny’s second and third goals of the season powered the Buckeyes past the Catamounts in the first game of the inaugural tournament.The next day, OSU again fell behind when Boston senior forward Kayla Tutino scored on the power play at 3:58 into the game. The Terriers would score again on a buzzer beater at the end of the first, which was reviewed to determine if the puck crossed the line before time expired. “That’s why you don’t stop playing,” Duggan said. “It’s a little frustrating when you think the video says something different, but that’s why you play.”Despite dropping the second game of the invitational, the team held its collective head high after an emotional weekend. “We went in there knowing we play in the best conference out of the three in the NCAA, and we wanted to show that,” senior forward Julia McKinnon said.McKinnon, who played with fellow forwards freshman Maddy Field and sophomore Lauren Spring this weekend after playing 12 games on the blue line for the first time in her life, feels this weekend was a positive step.“Just getting our lines together and making sure that we communicate better has been huge,” McKinnon said. McKinnon, who recorded one of the first shots on goal for OSU on Saturday, said she feels the team is cycling from defense to offense with greater efficiency than it was early in the season.“Everyone is buying into the system we’ve put in place here,” McKinnon said. “And getting back on back-checking is so important, so it’s good to have some success at it.”Losers of five of six entering the weekend, the team was in agreement that the weekend away from physical conference opponents was good to assess its performance thus far.“It’s a little different playing the teams out of conference,” senior forward Kendall Curtis said. “There are some different things you see and we were switching things up today.”Curtis, along with the coaching staff, was happier with the team’s effort despite trailing early both games.“They left it all out there,” Duggan said. “They knew they weren’t going to get to play again for another two weeks or so, so they played with reckless abandon. I think they’ve come along way.“I told them after the game today I thought they played with a lot of grittiness. It was a lot of fun to be a part of and watch.”Despite scoring eight goals and splitting its series, OSU did not find its unfamiliar opponents any easier than its conference ones.“I didn’t notice a difference,” Curtis said. “I think we still really try to focus on our game, and these teams this weekend showed us something different to work on, but it didn’t really challenge us any differently than a team in our league.”Stat sheetWith two goals on Saturday, Matheny has tied her career-high of three, set last year. She has also established a new career-high in points with six so far in 2015-16.With two goals this weekend, Curtis leads with team with nine. She has eclipsed her previous career-high of eight in 2013-14.The team will return to Columbus for practice on Monday and will have its second off-week of the season. The Buckeyes are then scheduled to return to the Ice Rink for their final series of 2015 against Minnesota-Duluth on Dec. 11 and 12. Puck is scheduled to drop at 7:07 p.m. and 4:07 p.m., respectively.
Freshman guard D’Angelo Russell (0) drives the lane during a game against Morehead State on Dec. 13 at the Schottenstein Center. OSU won, 87-71.Credit: Muyao Shen / Lantern photographerIn his 500th game as a collegiate head coach, Thad Matta led the No. 12 Ohio State men’s basketball team to a 16-point victory over Morehead State for his 385th career win.Matta is 282-84 in his 11 seasons at OSU and 385-115 overall. He’s just 15 wins away from tying Fred Taylor for the most wins in program history.After the game, Matta said he feels like he’s coached even more than those 500 games over his career.“Yes it does, maybe a 1,000,” Matta said. “I didn’t know that (it was 500 games) until yesterday. I was joking when I gave the pregame speech today, I walked out and I said ‘god, it feels like the 500th time I have done that.’”After taking a 19-point lead at halftime, the Buckeyes (8-1) polished off a 87-71 victory over the Eagles (4-8) on Saturday afternoon at the Schottenstein Center.“We jumped out quick, got a quick lead on the team,” senior center Amir Williams said after the game. “And I think we just didn’t look back from there.”OSU turned the ball over six times in the first 8:13 of the second half, allowing Morehead State to cut the deficit to 14. By that time, the Eagles were still shooting 50 percent from 3-point range and 54.5 percent overall.Going into the game, OSU opponents had averaged a .359 shooting percentage this season.A layup from freshman guard Jae’Sean Tate followed by a jumper from senior guard Shannon Scott stopped the Eagles’ run, giving the home team a 66-48 lead with about nine minutes to play.With 6:51 to play, the Buckeyes held an 18-point advantage when Williams left the game with an injury before heading back to the locker room. At the time, Williams had registered 12 points on five-of-six shooting and nine rebounds.Williams returned to the OSU bench with 5:31 left in the game but didn’t re-enter the game.After the game, Williams said his injury was just a rolled ankle, and nothing he hasn’t gone through in the past.“A little sprain, nothing serious,” Williams said. “It’s nothing I haven’t dealt with before, so I’ll be practicing tomorrow.”Morehead State cut the lead to 78-65 with 2:26 to play, partially because of sloppy play from OSU. After turning the ball over just three times in the first half, the Buckeyes had turned it over 14 times in the final 20 minutes.Senior forward Sam Thompson said OSU’s mindset in the second half and increased intensity from the Eagles led to the higher number of turnovers.“They definitely turned up their pressure, that was big-time pressure,” Thompson said after the game. “But our minds just weren’t right. I think that they just didn’t press us much in the first half, and then we sort of came out with the first half mindset in the second half.”The teams traded baskets as the clock ticked past two minutes, and the Buckeyes extended the lead to 18 points with just 38 seconds remaining.Morehead State shot 62.5 percent in the second half, and ended up outscoring the Buckeyes, 43-40, after the break.Thompson said Matta was “not too happy” after the Eagles shot such a high percentage, and outscored his team, in the second half.“First of all, Morehead State’s a really good team, not taking anything away from them,” Thompson said. “We had a really good first half, and we sort of let our guard down in the second half. We didn’t have that same type of energy and intensity and execution in the second half on both sides of the floor.”Matta stressed that his guards have to take better care of the ball, and added the Buckeyes’ play in the second half wasn’t up to the standard that he expects.“D’Angelo (Russell) and Shannon can’t combine for 10 turnovers in a game and only nine assists. We were sloppy. We weren’t as sharp as we needed to be on really both ends,” Matta said. “We did some things that lead one to believe that we weren’t as tuned in as we needed to be.”OSU jumped out to an early 12-2 lead, but Morehead State kept it close for much of the first half, partially because of the play of redshirt-sophomore guard Corban Collins.Collins started off five-for-five from the field, including a four-of-four mark from beyond the 3-point line. He finished the first half with a game-high 14 points, but a late OSU run helped the Buckeyes to their big halftime lead.The Buckeyes’ leading scorer — freshman guard D’Angelo Russell — didn’t register a point through the first 16:31 of the game as OSU held just a nine-point advantage with 3:29 on the clock. Russell followed up two free throws with a 3-pointer just over a minute later before closing out the half with a mid-range jumper with just three seconds to play.Russell’s seven-point burst helped OSU to a 47-28 lead at the break as the Buckeyes opened and closed the first half with 12-2 runs.When the teams entered the locker room, Thompson had 11 points to lead OSU while Williams had 10 points and four rebounds.Williams said he has room to improve, but added that he came into the game hoping to help spark the Buckeyes from the start.“Still some errors to be corrected, but I just tried to get out to a good start,” he said. “Coach always tells me, and the players tell me as well, if I come out with energy it gets my teammates going as well, so I try to come out and play with as much energy as I can.”Russell and Thompson led OSU with 15 points apiece, while Tate and Williams each finished the game with 12 points. Russell led all players with seven assists and Williams’ nine rebounds were a game high, as were his five blocks.Thompson said Williams’ play inside helps set the tone for the rest of the team, especially on defense.“Amir does such a great job blocking shots, and we put a lot of pressure on him because our zone really funnels everything to him,” he said. “He’s always a big force in the middle, he’s always blocking shots and getting rebounds.”Collins led all players with 22 points as he made six of seven 3-point attempts.OSU is scheduled to return to the court on Wednesday against North Carolina A&T. That game is set to be played at Nationwide Arena in downtown Columbus at 7 p.m.
The teenage Southampton striker is still eligible for Nigeria and England but he says he’s faithful to the Republic of Ireland18-year-old Michael Obafemi is eligible to play for Ireland, England, and Nigeria.But the Southampton striker has said he wishes to be in the Irish national team and is waiting for a chance to debut.“I really don’t know why we’re going into this,” said Ireland manager Martin O’Neill to The Dublin Live.Report: England’s Rice gets death threats George Patchias – September 9, 2019 England International Declan Rice has received death threats.Rice a one time Ireland International, switched allegiances only this year. The West Ham United man played for…“He has made the decision. I didn’t force him whatsoever.”“It seems to be my issue every single time. It’s the players’ decision. So I’ll clear this up,” he added.“When he first came into camp, I said to him ‘We’d love to have you but it’s your decision. You’re under no pressure to make that decision in the next 10 minutes’.”“I didn’t pursue it. I just left him to think about it,” he explained.