Sydney, Sep 18 (ANI): The Indian Premier League would be benefited after Andrew Flintoff rejected the ECB contract, said Chennai Super Kings, the team the England all rounder plays for in the IPL.
Chennai Super Kings manager VB Chandrasekhar said Flintoff’s decision to reject the contract would greatly benefit Chennai, but only if he was fit.
“But the thing is,” he said, “it’s not just about what a cricketer can give on the field. ‘Fred gives us a full package – in terms of marketing he is very valuable. Last time he was of great value to our dressing room, even when he wasn’t playing; someone of that aura can lift the team,” The Sydney Morning Herald quoted him, as saying.
The development comes amid bizarre reasoning by his manager, Andrew Chandler, that Flintoff rejected the ECB contract because he might have to go “bungee jumping”.
With Flintoff’s troubled injury history and the unproven results of his radical treatment in Dubai, any further damage to his knee could be career-threatening and he may be forced to pay for his own treatment.
The Super Kings pay Flintoff 1.55 million dollars a season and expressed sympathy with his plight, saying they may pay for rehabilitation depending on the circumstances, but did not guarantee it.
“There is a rule that says if it is a pre-existing injury, then the IPL team is not liable,” Chandrasekhar said.
“If you have taken a player in and if it is a serious injury and has occurred during the IPL, sometimes you have to weigh that up. We pay him on a match-to-match basis,” he added.
Under the IPL regulations, players must declare previous injuries, but Chennai is fully aware of the well-publicised knee problem that kept Flintoff out of the fourth Ashes Test.
Flintoff’s IPL future after 2010 is also in doubt, as he requires a No-Objection Certificate from the ECB. Granting him one would set a dangerous precedent for the board, as other players could follow his lead – precisely what the certificate is designed to prevent. (ANI)
Spanking found to have negative effects on low-income toddlers
Washington, September 16 (ANI): Spanking negatively affects the behaviour of toddlers in low-income families, according to a new study.
Published in the journal Child Development, the longitudinal study looked at how low-income parents discipline their young children.
It showed that spanking 1-year-olds leads to more aggressive behaviours and less sophisticated cognitive development in the next two years.
Verbal punishment, however, was not found to be associated with such effects, especially when it was accompanied by emotional support from mothers.
Besides, 1-year-olds’ fussiness predicted spanking and verbal punishment at ages 1, 2, and 3.
The study explored whether mothers’ behaviours lead to problematic behaviour in children, whether children’s challenging behaviours elicit harsher discipline, or both.
It looked at more than 2,500 exclusively low-income White, African American, and Mexican-American mothers and their young children, interviewing and observing them at home when the children were 1, 2, and 3 years old.
All participants’ family incomes were at or below the federal poverty level.
Using their own interpretations of spanking, mothers reported how often anyone in the home had spanked their children in the past week.
The study also looked at how often mothers verbally punished-scolded, yelled, or made negative comments-their children.
It showed that African American children were spanked and verbally punished significantly more than the other children in the study.
The authors speculated that that might be due to cultural factors, such as belief in the importance of children’s respect for elders and in the value of physical discipline to instil that respect.
Moreover, some African American mothers said that in preparing their children for a harsh, physically dangerous, and racially discriminating world, there was little room for error in their childrearing.
The study also shed light on information about the effects of such types of discipline.
“Our findings clearly indicate that spanking affects children’s development,” said Lisa J. Berlin, research scientist at the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke University and the study’s lead author.
Specifically, children who were spanked more often at 1 behaved more aggressively when they were 2, and had lower scores on tests measuring thinking skills when they were 3.
Similar findings were made even after taking into consideration such family characteristics as mothers’ race and ethnicity, age, and education; family income and structure; and the children’s gender.
The study also found that children who were more aggressive at age 2, and had lower cognitive development scores at ages 1 and 2, were not spanked more at ages 2 and 3.
“So the mothers’ behaviours look more influential than the children’s,” said Berlin.
Unlike spanking, however, verbal punishment alone didn’t affect either children’s aggression or their cognitive development.
Interestingly, when verbal punishment was accompanied by emotional support from moms, the children did better on the tests of cognitive ability. (ANI)