first_img0Shares0000SUNDERLAND, November 28- Jose Mourinho will attempt to overturn a landmark defeat when Premier League leaders Chelsea visit Sunderland this weekend.The last time the two clubs met was in April when Gus Poyet’s Sunderland’s side –- then rooted at the foot of the table — pulled off a shock win at Stamford Bridge. Defeat brought an end to Mourinho’s 77-game unbeaten home league run in two spells as Chelsea manager and helped derail the Blues title bid.Mourinho’s side have not lost in the league since and last weekend’s one-sided dismissal of West Bromwich Albion helped extend the club’s lead at the head of the Premier League to six points after just 12 games.The 5-0 victory at Schalke in midweek confirmed Chelsea’s place in the knockout stage of the Champions League and extended the Blues’ unbeaten start to the season to 19 games in all competitions.A demanding schedule between now and the turn of the year will test Mourinho’s squad, but with their main rivals regularly dropping points, it is hard to see their commanding lead being whittled away in the foreseeable future.Unlike other leading Premier League clubs, Chelsea have managed to negotiate the opening months of the campaign without losing key players to long-term injury.And defender Branislav Ivanovic said: “We are playing as a team at the moment. It’s still an early stage of the year and we know how many games we have to play until the end of the season to win trophies. We have games every three days now.“At the moment we are very calm and everyone is thinking in the same direction,” he added.Cesc Fabregas had a hand in four of the goals that crushed Schalke and the Spain midfielder said he was playing the best football of his career following his close season switch from Barcelona.“I am playing next to great players and they are playing very well and are helping me,” the former Arsenal playmaker said. “We have a young, talented team and the mood at the training ground is great.”– Great escape –Connor Wickham scored in Sunderland’s 2-1 win in west London seven months ago that helped them pull off their escape from relegation, and the former England Under-21 international insisted another surprise result shouldn’t be ruled out.Poyet’s mid-table Black Cats face a tough run of fixtures heading into December, with defending champions Manchester City following the leaders in visiting the Stadium of Light.“We know we can do it from our performances last year,” Wickham said. “We just need to play the way we have been playing, and hopefully it’ll happen again.“We had the same situation last season when we faced Manchester City, Chelsea and Manchester United in quick succession, but we managed to pull off something remarkable then.”Sunderland have lost just three times in the league this season. But seven draws leaves them too close to the relegation zone for comfort.Wickham added: “We’ve probably had too many draws which we could have won.”Former Chelsea midfielder Poyet is relishing his latest meeting with the Blues after helping the club lift the FA Cup and European Cup Winners’ Cup during a successful four-year spell following his arrival at Stamford Bridge in 1997.The Sunderland head coach said: “I had a great time there, but my focus is fully on Sunderland. It will be nice to catch up with a few old friends, but as soon as the game kicks-off, I won’t see anything other than our red and white.”0Shares0000(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)last_img read more

first_imgThe union says the deal, announced on 12 December, is the first of its kind in the world. It also includes an agreement for the union and government departments to work together to develop broader science integrity policies and guidelines. It will include rules to protect government scientists from political interference in their work, and from having their findings manipulated to support a particular political position.The union began pushing for the provision in 2014, in response to the restrictive communications policies of the previous Conservative government led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The policies left many researchers feeling they had been muzzled, unable to speak about even the most uncontroversial aspects of their work. A report by the union in 2013 found that 86% of federal scientists felt that they could not publicly share concerns about government policies that could harm public health, safety, or the environment without facing retaliation from their department leaders.The broader scientific community has welcomed the deal, says Kathleen Walsh, executive director of the scientific advocacy group Evidence for Democracy in Ottawa. “It’s a signal of the change in science in Canada in the past year,” she says. Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government, which came to power last year, has reversed many of the Harper government’s communication policies, and stated that federal researchers are free to speak about their work. Scientists working for the Canadian government have successfully negotiated a clause in their new contract that guarantees their right to speak to the public and the media about science and their research, without needing approval from their managers.“Employees shall have the right to express themselves on science and their research, while respecting the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector … without being designated as an official media spokesperson,” the new clause states. The ethics code says that while federal employees may talk about their own work, they should not publicly criticize government policy.“This agreement was extremely important in order to ensure that Canadians could trust public science and the decisions that governments make with that science,” says Debi Daviau, president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, the Ottawa-based union representing about 15,000 federal scientists. “The Institute is proud to be able to be in a position to ensure that no government will be able to take this away from Canadians again.”Sign up for our daily newsletterGet more great content like this delivered right to you!Country *AfghanistanAland IslandsAlbaniaAlgeriaAndorraAngolaAnguillaAntarcticaAntigua and BarbudaArgentinaArmeniaArubaAustraliaAustriaAzerbaijanBahamasBahrainBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBeninBermudaBhutanBolivia, Plurinational State ofBonaire, Sint Eustatius and SabaBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswanaBouvet IslandBrazilBritish Indian Ocean TerritoryBrunei DarussalamBulgariaBurkina FasoBurundiCambodiaCameroonCanadaCape VerdeCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChadChileChinaChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombiaComorosCongoCongo, The Democratic Republic of theCook IslandsCosta RicaCote D’IvoireCroatiaCubaCuraçaoCyprusCzech RepublicDenmarkDjiboutiDominicaDominican RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEquatorial GuineaEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Faroe IslandsFijiFinlandFranceFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabonGambiaGeorgiaGermanyGhanaGibraltarGreeceGreenlandGrenadaGuadeloupeGuatemalaGuernseyGuineaGuinea-BissauGuyanaHaitiHeard Island and Mcdonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)HondurasHong KongHungaryIcelandIndiaIndonesiaIran, Islamic Republic ofIraqIrelandIsle of ManIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJerseyJordanKazakhstanKenyaKiribatiKorea, Democratic People’s Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwaitKyrgyzstanLao People’s Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanonLesothoLiberiaLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtensteinLithuaniaLuxembourgMacaoMacedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascarMalawiMalaysiaMaldivesMaliMaltaMartiniqueMauritaniaMauritiusMayotteMexicoMoldova, Republic ofMonacoMongoliaMontenegroMontserratMoroccoMozambiqueMyanmarNamibiaNauruNepalNetherlandsNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaraguaNigerNigeriaNiueNorfolk IslandNorwayOmanPakistanPalestinianPanamaPapua New GuineaParaguayPeruPhilippinesPitcairnPolandPortugalQatarReunionRomaniaRussian FederationRWANDASaint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da CunhaSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Martin (French part)Saint Pierre and MiquelonSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSao Tome and PrincipeSaudi ArabiaSenegalSerbiaSeychellesSierra LeoneSingaporeSint Maarten (Dutch part)SlovakiaSloveniaSolomon IslandsSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSouth SudanSpainSri LankaSudanSurinameSvalbard and Jan MayenSwazilandSwedenSwitzerlandSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwanTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailandTimor-LesteTogoTokelauTongaTrinidad and TobagoTunisiaTurkeyTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUgandaUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited KingdomUnited StatesUruguayUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofVietnamVirgin Islands, BritishWallis and FutunaWestern SaharaYemenZambiaZimbabweI also wish to receive emails from AAAS/Science and Science advertisers, including information on products, services and special offers which may include but are not limited to news, careers information & upcoming events.Required fields are included by an asterisk(*)last_img read more

first_imgThe ousted Kochi team of Indian Premier League (IPL) has challenged the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) decision in the Bombay High Court.The battle between Kochi Tuskers management and the BCCI entered the legal space two days after the team’s termination from the IPL.The high court was expected to pass an order on the case later on Wednesday.The BCCI had on Monday terminated the contract with Kochi Tuskers for non-payment of dues and citing violation of terms by the franchise. However, the Kochi team maintained they were unfairly treated by the BCCI.Co-owners of the Kochi Tuskers cried foul saying that the BCCI jumped the gun, especially since the deadline for payment of dues ends on September 30.Kochi Tuskers have become the third IPL franchise to take the BCCI to court after the Rajasthan Royals and Kings XI Punjab challenging the board’s order of termination late last year.last_img read more