Story Highlights Bank of Jamaica (BOJ) Governor, Brian Wynter, says the rate of inflation is projected to remain within the range of four to six per cent over the next 12 months. Noting that the Jamaican economy’s recovery has been “sluggish”, Mr. Wynter said the BOJ anticipates that growth will “remain below the economy’s capacity in the near term”. “The trajectory reflects the rise and then the fall in agricultural food prices as the impact of flood rains in the year started to dissipate and agricultural supplies improved. Over the course of the year, the Bank expects inflation to continue to track around the lower half of the four to six per cent target before rising to around five per cent,” the Governor said. Bank of Jamaica (BOJ) Governor, Brian Wynter, says the rate of inflation is projected to remain within the range of four to six per cent over the next 12 months.This comes in the wake of data from the Statistical Institute of Jamaica (STATIN), which show the out-turn falling from 5.2 per cent in December 2017 to 4.8 per cent in January.“The trajectory reflects the rise and then the fall in agricultural food prices as the impact of flood rains in the year started to dissipate and agricultural supplies improved. Over the course of the year, the Bank expects inflation to continue to track around the lower half of the four to six per cent target before rising to around five per cent,” the Governor said.Mr. Wynter said the projection took into consideration factors such as adverse weather “that is beyond anybody’s control”.He was speaking at the BOJ’s quarterly media briefing at the Bank’s auditorium in downtown Kingston on Wednesday (February 21).Noting that the Jamaican economy’s recovery has been “sluggish”, Mr. Wynter said the BOJ anticipates that growth will “remain below the economy’s capacity in the near term”.As such, he said the BOJ is of the view that this, along with continued fiscal consolidation and low-inflation expectations anchored around the Bank’s target, “calls for a more accommodative monetary policy stance”.Against this background, Mr. Wynter highlighted the BOJ’s first monetary policy decision under the new schedule, lowering of the policy rate by 25 basis points to 2.75 per cent, which was announced on Tuesday (February 20). The policy rate is the interest rate paid by the Bank on overnight deposits.The Governor explained that this adjustment reflects the BOJ’s assessment that inflation for the next eight quarters will remain within the target of four to six per cent, with the risks “slightly skewed to the downside”.Tuesday’s announcement is the first of eight monetary policy decisions that Mr. Wynter said the BOJ has scheduled for 2018 and is committed to making public.“This commitment is an important part of the Bank’s plan to improve the transparency of the monetary policy framework,” he added.
Don’t let the UConn women’s one-loss record fool you: The Huskies are the most dominant college basketball team on Earth. Aside from that two-point November loss to Stanford, the Huskies have won every game they’ve played by double digits — since March 12, 2013. In that period, they’re 83-1 with an average margin of victory of 38 points.On Tuesday night, those Huskies take on the Notre Dame Fighting Irish, with the NCAA women’s basketball national championship up for grabs. The UConn team features three freshmen and eight players returning from last year’s championship squad, five of whom are looking for the three-peat. And let’s just say, they have a pretty good chance.Their biggest star and leading scorer is forward Breanna Stewart, a 6-foot-4-inch junior who, in addition to having already won the NCAA player of the year award as a sophomore, averages 1.9 steals and 2.6 blocks per 36 minutes.1All stats as of the start of the Final Four. Senior Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis — the only player other than Stewart to start for both title teams — has a whopping 68.4 effective field goal percentage2A field goal measure that takes into account the extra points awarded for 3-pointers. (good for second-highest of 1,827 qualifying players). This may be due to her nation-leading 50 percent shooting from 3-point range — on 6.6 attempts per game.3Her teammate Moriah Jefferson shot a slightly higher 50.5 percent but did not have enough attempts to qualify for NCAA 3-point leaderboard. Even the Huskies’ “role-players” get it right — like Kiah Stokes, a senior non-starter who averages only 4.5 points in 18.6 minutes per game but makes those minutes count by averaging 7.5 blocks and 13.3 rebounds per 36.In other words, when the Huskies have the ball, they’re pretty good at putting it into that net hanging from the rim. And when they don’t have the ball, they’re pretty good at stopping their opponents from doing the same. No, really:That cloud in the middle is the other 348 NCAA women’s basketball teams. Teams want to be on the lower-right of the plot, and if you look deep in the lower-right area, you may be able to find Connecticut (highlighted in red so that you don’t mistake it for a flea on your monitor). Yes, that means UConn has — by far — the best offense in the country (even though many of its competitors play in weaker conferences), as well as — by far — the best defense in the country.On average, every trip up and down the floor nets the Huskies more than half a point (0.58 points on average). That’s an insane reciprocal advantage. The next-best are Princeton (who went undefeated in the Ivy League), South Carolina and Notre Dame at +0.33, +0.32 and +0.29 points per possessions exchanged, respectively.In sports, it’s common for the best to be relatively much better than the second-best and for the gap between the first and second-best to be bigger than the gap between the second-best and the third-best, and so on. In other words, it’s pretty normal for the best team in a league or sport to be really, really good. But this UConn team is better.We can line up each team’s reciprocal advantage from worst to best like so:4Small gaps and darker points are the result of ties. This kind of sideways/backwards S-shape distribution is common in sports, and you can see how the vertical distances between points get larger on the ends. This is one reason that great players and teams seem so amazing.But this UConn team takes it to a new level. The distance between it and the next-highest team is 0.25 points, and the distance between it and Notre Dame is the same as the distance between Notre Dame and the average team. You might even say — without being hyperbolic — that UConn has been twice as good as its championship rival.A few more fun facts before we look at the bigger picture:Unsurprisingly, UConn scored the most points per game overall this season (90). Normally, teams that score that much play a fast up-and-down game, so regardless of how good their defenses are, the extra possessions mean their opponents are going to score more points. But UConn isn’t normal, and still managed to allow the fewest points per game (48) of anybody.UConn’s offense led the nation in both 2-point (60.6 percent) and 3-point (40.9 percent) shooting.The Huskies are way down the charts in rebounds per game, but this is pretty much because they don’t miss enough shots to get enough chances. When there was a rebound to get, they nabbed it 58.2 percent of the time — good for the fourth-highest rebounding rate of all 349 teams.They led the NCAA with 8.0 blocks per game.Oh, and the Huskies managed to win by scores in the form of 80-something to 20-something (their 87-24 romp over Memphis, for example) four times.Of course, college basketball seasons are only 40ish games (including tournaments) long, which is less than half of an NBA season. So perhaps this year’s Connecticut team is just having the run of its life.This is at least partially true. The 2014-15 Huskies are an anomaly among anomalies — this year’s squad has been more efficient both offensively and defensively than either of their championship-winning predecessors (including last year’s unbeaten team). But, taken together, this three-year run is even more amazing. If you thought Connecticut’s 2015 offense/defense chart was crazy, here’s something crazier:Each V-shaped line in that tangle shows a team’s three-year performance on offense and defense. The side with a dot is how the team did in 2014-15, the “kink” in the middle is how it did in 2013-14, and the open end is how it did in 2012-13. At the center of the chart, note the chaotic 348-team jumble — if you can’t find, say, McNeese State, that’s the point. Most teams vary a lot from year to year. And when a team strays very far from the league’s center of gravity, it is likely to come crashing back.Except UConn. Once again, while it may look like someone accidentally took a red Sharpie to your monitor, that little red brush stroke is actually the Huskies. And not only are they nowhere near the pack, they appear to be running away from it.Indeed, each of UConn’s points scored per possession in the past three seasons is higher than any other team’s, which means that the other teams had a combined 1,044 chances to match UConn’s worst offensive season, and none could. Similarly, no other team has ceded fewer points per possession over a season than UConn’s 0.68 in 2012-13 — its worst season of the past three by this metric (though kudos to Hampton for matching it).Connecticut’s three-year performance is impressive not only for being extreme, but also for being extremely consistent. Sure, this year’s squad had even better efficiency stats than the previous two, but way out in space like that, such distinctions mean little. Some of their statistical improvement in the past two years may stem from their 2013 move from the Big East conference into the weaker American Athletic Conference. For example, my homebrew-version of SRS (Simple Rating System) — a stat that adjusts team strength to account for strength of schedule — slightly prefers the 2012-13 squad.5FYI, UConn has a history of cleaning up in this stat, posting eight of the top 12 seasons of the past 15 years. But because UConn is so good and its games are often decided by halftime or earlier, exactly how much it’s going to dominate is practically a coaches’ decision. (My colleague Carl Bialik found that its average lead at the half this year was 25 points.)So instead of looking at fancy small-scale possession-based stats and the like, let’s step back and look at the big picture. Here are the basic cumulative tallies of UConn’s points scored and points allowed after each game for the past three years:The dots represent where the Huskies stood after winning each championship. If you look incredibly carefully, it looks like the yellow “defense” line trends downward a tiny bit this year, but for the most part, it’s pretty remarkable how flat each is and how constant the ratio between the two lines is. Note that those lines don’t represent trends or a local regression or anything fancy — only consistency.And this is nothing new during coach Geno Auriemma’s reign. Whether it’s his schemes, his managerial style, his training or just his uncanny ability to recruit (or poach) all the best female basketballers to the Nutmeg State, Auriemma is on the threshold of yet another amazing accomplishment.It’s hard to believe that the great Geno toiled with this program for 10 years before it even sniffed a chance at a championship in 1995. But since then, wow. Connecticut has reached nine NCAA tournament finals and has won each time. This year gives Auriemma the chance to match John Wooden’s 10 national championships.6Note Wooden didn’t have to deal with a 64-team tournament, but that cuts both ways: The larger field means a team has to win more games, but it also makes it a bit more likely to face weaker opposition from “Cinderellas” that make it into later rounds. And to get there, all the Huskies need to do is beat archrival Notre Dame.In this season’s only meeting between the two, the Huskies beat the Fighting Irish in South Bend by (a mere) 18 points. But while Connecticut has lost only five games in the past three seasons, three were against Notre Dame — all in early 2013. Unfortunately for Notre Dame, the fourth time was the charm that year, as the Huskies beat the Fighting Irish in the Final Four en route to the title. They’ll have to take down a juggernaut to return the favor.
2TennesseeJacksonville32:49190.05 1JacksonvilleHouston20:49180.29 Times when teams clearly should have gone for 22017 NFL season through Week 2 2New OrleansNew England45:04-170.10 2DallasDenver414:24-190.05 Magnitude is the amount that a team’s expected win percentage is improved by making the right decision.Source: ESPN Stats & Information Group. Teams made the correct decision in four of those 16 cases, for a 25 percent rate. (For comparison: Since 2015, regular season and playoffs combined, teams have gone for 2 points 27 percent of the time in “clear go” scenarios.)Of course, a decision being clear-cut doesn’t mean that it matters a whole lot, but note that even among the decisions with the most significant consequences, teams are still making the wrong choices regularly (most likely because of adherence to Dick Vermeil’s rigid and outdated system that leads them to repeat the same mistakes over and over). In particular, the aforementioned scenarios of being down 4, 8, or 11 points late are both quite clear and quite important.Another significant case is when a team scores to pull within 2: Go for 2! This may seem like an obvious one, but since 2015, teams in this situation have chosen to kick the extra point as late as the fourth quarter (once, which is way too many times), and they’ve done so half the time in the third quarter (6 of 12, and still very bad) and 77 percent of the time in the second quarter (10 of 13, and still pretty bad, especially for such an early decision).This season, teams down 4, 8 or 11 late are holding steady at a 0 percent correct rate, having attempted extra points five out of five times when they “clearly” should have gone for it. That means that over the past three season, they’ve gotten these right exactly zero times in 105 chances.On a slightly brighter note, teams have been down 2 points after a touchdown twice this season — both in the third quarter — and they’ve correctly tried to tie the game both times! It’s not quite the revolution — it isn’t really even shots fired. But maybe, just maybe … 1DetroitArizona33:07-21.28✓ 1L.A. ChargersDenver47:00-41.62 2ClevelandBaltimore24:56-80.24 1ClevelandPittsburgh43:36-52.23✓ 1DetroitArizona49:2740.43✓ Before the Super Bowl in February, we published a fairly comprehensive guide for when to go for 2, simplified into one slightly complicated (but very easy to use once you get the hang of it!) chart. In addition to hopefully demystifying how to judge a lot of borderline situations, we identified some fairly clear-cut cases in which NFL coaches should choose to go for 2 but don’t. Ever.My hope, of course, was that teams would read this (or figure it out on their own) and that we’d see an immediate and cataclysmic shift in 2-point strategy — like going for it when down 4, 8, or 11 after scoring a touchdown late (which are not only real cases, but ones that are usually clear-cut and significant). But, alas, no such luck.The logic is pretty simple: If you can estimate your team’s chances of winning with an X point lead/deficit (X points being how many points you are up or down following a touchdown) and your chances of winning with X+1 and X+2, the decision follows from simple arithmetic. In fact, given that 2-point attempts and extra-point attempts taken from the 15-yard line (under the new rules implemented in 2015) now have roughly the same expected point value (both around 0.95 points), the choice is easier than ever. Simply calculate (or estimate):The improvement in win percentage if your point margin changed from X to X+1.The improvement in win percentage if your point margin changed from X+1 to X+2.If the first number is greater, kick the extra point. If the second is, go for 2.Now, you can estimate or intuit these differences on your own on the fly, or you can use a fancy win probability model like we have,1Specifically, a version of the model built by Brian Burke of ESPN’s Stats & Information Group. but the logic is the same.Of course, we’ve taken it a bit further — our chart uses multiple sets of assumptions to create a range for each scenario covering teams that are relatively better or worse at 2-point conversions than our baseline. In case you missed it, here’s the chart:2You should be able to use this chart to pretty accurately assess most decisions you see. If you’re skeptical of the chart, you could intuit your own using the method outlined in that article. 1ChicagoAtlanta47:26-41.33 2PhiladelphiaKansas City40:08-80.05 2ArizonaIndianapolis47:38-41.28 A quick note on reading this chart: It may look a little “loud,” but that’s a feature for looking up scenarios lightning-fast. For a quick approximation, you first look at the minichart corresponding to the point spread (after the touchdown). If the quarter you’re in is shaded bright purple, you probably want to kick; if it’s bright orange, you should probably go for it. If you’re in a rush, you could stop there and be in pretty decent shape.Through the first two weeks of this NFL season, teams have gone for 2 (from the 2-yard line) eight times overall. More importantly, of the 30 times that the numbers say they should have gone for 2, they did so just four times, for a rate of 13 percent. Since 2015, in the regular season and playoffs, teams that should have gone for 2 have done so around 15 percent of the time.Now, of course it’s possible that some teams are better or worse at going for 2 than average, but it isn’t possible that 85 percent of teams are worse than average. I’ve also calculated how often teams should “clearly” go for 2 — meaning situations in which they should go for it even if they are relatively quite bad at 2-point attempts3I set this threshold at a 40 percent expected conversion rate (the same as the bottom of the range lines in the chart above). Or 7.5 percentage points lower than the baseline conversion rate assumption of 47.5 percent. This is a rough best estimate (after discussion with Burke, among others) for how bad teams who are very bad at 2-point conversions actually are). — and there have been 16 such cases through Week 2:4For this season’s scenarios, I’ve analyzed each attempt individually (down to the second), while the chart above is calculated minute by minute, so there may be slight variations between the two. WEEKTEAMOPPONENTQUARTERTIMESCORE AFTER TDMAGNITUDEWENT FOR IT 1N.Y. JetsBuffalo32:00-21.24✓ 1HoustonJacksonville39:09-130.24 1L.A. ChargersDenver48:10-110.43 1BaltimoreCincinnati21:28160.29
The Italian Lega Serie A club, together with legendary goalkeeper Francesco Told, is working towards the prevention of violenceWith the presence of legendary goalkeeper Francesco Told, Inter Women’s captain Regina Baresi and WeWorld Onlus, Internazionale Milan is launching a campaign to “Show Violence The Red Card.”The initiative is being promoted together with the Italian Lega Serie A, to combat violence against women in the world.“Violence is a cultural problem. In order to solve this problem, our sons need to be taught the right values and that they need to show respect,” the retired Inter keeper told the club’s official website.Capello calls Lukaku “a modern striker” Manuel R. Medina – September 14, 2019 The former Italian manager believes Romelu Lukaku is perfectly suited for Antonio Conte’s Internazionale Milan in the Serie A.“Youth academies can contribute to shaping athletes and men, but what they learn from their families should underpin everything.”“Violence against women is something I feel strongly about,” Regina Baresi, captain of Inter Women’s first team added.“I’m happy to be here again this year and in particular to be able to make my own contribution in highlighting such an important campaign.”
Posted: July 9, 2018 Judge denies United States claim on 2 of 3 California immigration laws July 9, 2018 SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) – A federal judge has dismissed the federal government’s claim that U.S. law trumps two California laws intended to protect immigrants who are in the country illegally.The ruling by U.S. District Judge John Mendez follows his ruling last week that found California was within its rights to pass two of the three sanctuary laws.He ruled Monday that the federal government could proceed with its attempt to block part of a third California sanctuary law.Mendez rejected the U.S. government’s argument the U.S. Constitution gives the federal government pre-eminent power to regulate immigration. The Trump administration argued that California is obstructing its immigration enforcement efforts.He ruled last week that California cannot enforce a third law that prohibits employers from allowing immigration officials on their property without warrants. Categories: Local San Diego News, Politics FacebookTwitter KUSI Newsroom KUSI Newsroom,