Liverpool may have to double £4m offer for Blackpool's Adam

Blackpool's Charlie Adam scored against Liverpool at Anfield in October. Photograph: Joe Giddens/Empics

Liverpool have joined Aston Villa in the pursuit of the Blackpool captain, Charlie Adam, but may need to double an offer of £4m before Ian Holloway considers allowing his prize asset to leave Bloomfield Road. The influential midfielder is considering submitting a transfer request after his employers rejected the third bid made for his services this month.

Fenway Sports Group, Liverpool's owner, made an official move as it seeks to strengthen Kenny Dalglish's squad in several departments. Damien Comolli, the club's director of football strategy, has confirmed Liverpool are interested in Luis Suárez of Ajax and Aston Villa's Ashley Young, although both deals are fraught with difficulty in this transfer window.

The same applies to Adam, with Blackpool rejecting bids of £2.5m and £3.5m from Villa and now £4m from Liverpool, and with Holloway adamant Premier League survival is worth far more than any offer lodged for the midfielder so far.

Liverpool would have no trouble improving Adam's £8,000-a-week contract, which has a season and a half to run. A bigger problem is meeting Blackpool's valuation of a player instrumental in their outstanding transition to the Premier League, which is closer to £8m. Holloway has conceded that a sizeable offer would be considered. Rangers, who sold Adam for £500,000 in 2009, are entitled to a 10% sell-on fee.

"Realistically, with the choice he [Adam] might have in the summer, our heads might be turned by a huge offer which is so ridiculous we'd have to accept it," said Holloway. "Every day that comes closer to the end of the season, Charlie's contract is ticking, so it's all quite simple for me."

Adam took Blackpool to court last year over a £20,000 unpaid bonus, winning the case, and is contemplating demanding a transfer after the club blocked moves to Villa Park and Anfield. Blackpool's stance is unlikely to change without a significantly improved offer from a major club.

Speaking after completing a league double over Liverpool last week, Holloway said: "My goal is to get him to a top-four or five club, and I would still include Liverpool in that bracket despite where they are this season. Why should he go anywhere else? As our captain I'll ask him to help us stay up, which would be unbelievable, and then he can go. But if Manchester United made a fantastic offer for him then I'll have to consider it."

One player who is leaving Blackpool is the Israeli international Dekel Keinan, who has joined Cardiff for an undisclosed fee.

The 26-year-old, who arrived on a free transfer from Maccabi Haifa in the summer, made only five starts for the Tangerines.

Water Polo Big 5 Sports

Water polo was developed in Europe and the United States as two differing sports. When water polo first began, fighting between players was common, if not the norm.

In 1897, New Yorker Harold Reeder formulated the first American rules for discipline, which were aimed at curbing the sport’s more violent tendencies.
Ultimately, the faster, less dangerous European style predominated, and today this is the form of the game practised universally.

In the early days, the players rode on floating barrels that resembled mock horses, and swung at the ball with mallet-like sticks. This made it similar to equestrian polo, hence its name.
Water Polo at the Games

Men's Water Polo made its debut at the 1900 Paris Games. Since then, by far the greatest exponents of the sport have been the Hungarians. Between 1928 and 1980, Hungary never failed to win a medal at the Olympic Games, and took home six of 10 possible gold medals between 1932 and 1976.

The newest Aquatics event in the Games is women’s Water Polo, which was introduced in Sydney after the first men’s competition took place in Paris 1900.

Water polo is a water-based version of handball. Players use a ball weighing between 400g and 450g. They aim to score goals in a three-metre wide, 90-centimetre high net that sits on top of the water.

Each team only has 30 seconds to score before the ball is passed to the opposition. As well as ball skills, players need stamina: you are not allowed to touch the bottom or the side of the pool during a match, which lasts for four periods of seven minutes each. Top water polo players swim five kilometres (three miles) in each match.

Handball Big 5 Sports

Handball has elements of both football and basketball – but it’s probably older than both. There are references to a sport very similar to handball in ancient Greek literature.

The game was developed in Europe in the late 19th century, in Denmark, Sweden and Germany. Originally played as 'field handball' on a football pitch and 11-a-side, handball was based on the games of 'Raffball' and 'Königsbergerball'.

An indoor seven-a-side version of the game was also very popular, with world championships taking place regularly since 1938 (men) and 1957 (women).

During the 1960s, despite numerous rule changes intended to make the 11-a-side game more attractive, the faster, seven-a-side indoor version of handball dominated. The last world championship for field handball was played in Austria in 1966.

Today, fast-moving, high-scoring matches make Handball one of the most popular Olympic sports.

Harrington disqualification is a farce

Padraig Harrington was disqualified from the Abu Dhabi Championship for signing for a 65, a score he and the marker thought he had taken. Photograph: Mike Egerton/Empics Sport

The Byzantine Empire has nothing on the Rules of Golf. If that hasn't been clear over the past few weeks, which have seen Camilo Villegas thrown out of a US PGA Tour event for flicking a divot away as his ball rolled towards it and Elliott Saltman banished to golfing Elba (incorrectly replacing ball on green by a less than half-an-inch equals a three-month ban and permanent character stain), then it surely is now after Padraig Harrington's disqualification from the Abu Dhabi Championship.

The Irishman will spend the next three days on the practice range here after yet another rules imbroglio likely to have the layman (and probably the weekend player) scratching his head. Dumber than carrots, the great American writer Dan Jenkins once described the rules. He was too kind.

But more of that later. First a public service announcement: contrary to what some people might think, Harrington was not disqualified because he inadvertently moved his ball a fraction on the 7th green (a breach of rule 20-3a which should have incurred a two-shot penalty) during the first round in Abu Dhabi. He was disqualified because he signed his scorecard without adding the two-shot penalty (the one he didn't know he had incurred) to his score of 65 (a breach of Rule 6-6d).

Got that? If so, the European Tour is always on the look-out for some fresh blood in its rules department. If not, don't worry because this is one of the marvellous occasions when all that is required to make sense of a seemingly complicated subject is common sense. It is common sense, is it not, that if someone does not know he has broken a rule and behaves accordingly, then that person should not be subjected to the penalty far harsher than that which would have been imposed on the original breach of the rules.

It is common sense, is it not, that in this era of high-definition television and super slow-motion, of social media and couch-bound vigilantes who want to, and can, make their voices heard, that rules which might have made sense 30 years ago might not make sense now.

Harrington moved his ball on the green. He did not mean to do it, he didn't know he had done it. The rules say a two-shot penalty. He should have received a two-shot penalty. Instead, he has been thrown out of the tournament.

Let's not get carried away. "Millionaire golfer denied the chance win another half-a-million" is not a headline that will unduly disturb the good people at Amnesty International. However, it should be enough to rouse from its slumber the R&A, the game's so-called governing body and, along with the US Golf Association, the organisation charged with drawing up the Rules of Golf.

Apparently, the R&A believes that the scorecard, once it is signed, it a sacred document, one that cannot be revisited. How quaint. How ridiculous. Dumber than carrots? You bet.

Here's what should have happened to Harrington – and here's what will happen once common sense prevails. He should have been assessed a two-shot penalty, he should have been allowed to "re-sign" his scorecard, this time for a 67, and he should have been allowed to go out and spend his weekend trying to win the Abu Dhabi Championship.

'It was a very poor day,' admits Strauss

Shaun Marsh's century for Australia left a sluggish England with too much to do in the second match of the one-day series in Hobart. Photograph: Gareth Copley/PA

England's past two weeks in Australia will feel like a couple of aeons if they lose again in Sydney on Sunday to go 3-0 down in this seven-match one-day series.

A scoreline of 6-1 would feel more appropriate at the Rod Laver Arena but already some here are predicting that may be the cricket score too by the time this tour ends in Perth on 6 February (6-1 was the margin of England's defeat by Australia in the anticlimactic ODI series in 2009, again after they had won the Ashes).

The players arrive in Sydney tomorrow with much to think about. In the first match, in Melbourne, they were 20 to 30 runs short of the total they should have achieved but it still took one of the great one-day innings, played by Shane Watson, to overhaul them. Here, well though Shaun Marsh played for his century (he was not considered good enough to make Australia's World Cup squad), it should not have been a match-winning innings. Andrew Strauss, the England captain, was hardly over-stating the case when he said: "It was a very poor day."

England would look a more balanced team in Sydney if Jonathan Trott made way for Paul Collingwood or even Luke Wright; Collingwood has not played yet so is likely to feature soon. But one player cannot lift the side out of their current malaise.

Two Australia bowlers, Nathan Hauritz (who will miss the rest of the series after he dislocated his shoulder sliding to field a ball) and Shaun Tait (injured thigh) limped from the field but England's batsmen were still not good enough to capitalise.

After a gruelling and heroic Ashes series it was almost inevitable there would be some falling away, mentally and physically, but especially mentally. The players, particularly those who have been here from the start (which is nine of this team) will be thinking of home, even if the thoroughness of their preparation has pushed such pleasant notions deep into their subconscious.

It is all very well talking up the contextual importance of this one-day series, because it is followed, almost immediately, by the World Cup. But since that competition does not reach its climax until April, by which time the domestic season in England will be in full swing, it does not quite wash with the grimly pragmatic mind of the professional cricketer.

That does not excuse performances as insipid as this. England were heavily beaten, even though they were chasing a modest target. They got it wrong in the field and again when it was their turn to bat. However, their biggest mistake was made before a ball was bowled when they decided to go into the game with two spinners instead of the extra seamer.

Strauss gauged the conditions sufficiently well to choose to bowl when he won the toss following substantial morning rain. And there was a desire to have a look at James Tredwell, who will be England's spare spinner in the World Cup. But Chris Woakes or Wright should have played here at the expense of Tredwell or Michael Yardy. Strauss admitted the error.

"In hindsight we probably should have got the fourth seamer in our side, and that was our mistake," he said. "We didn't think it would have been that stodgy a pitch so a Wright or Woakes would have been a good addition."

Even so, Australia should not have been allowed to reach 230 after being 142 for eight but Strauss had probably missed a trick or two before then. Ajmal Shahzad, seaming the ball into the right-handers at a nippy pace, and Chris Tremlett, the pick of the bowlers, finding steep bounce even on this sullen surface, had bowled so well that Australia were floundering at 33 for four in the 13th over. Australia were still in deep despair at 50 for four when Strauss introduced Trott and immediately brought on Tredwell at the other end.

Marsh and Cameron White could hardly fail to prosper as England relaxed their grip so completely, though White, when three, was missed by Matt Prior after a long sprint and dive when the fine-leg and midwicket fielders were better placed to take the catch.

The stand of 100 in 20 overs between Marsh and White stabilised the innings and a more improbable alliance between Marsh and Doug Bollinger yielded 88 from 70 balls. In 27 previous ODIs Bollinger had never scored more than three.

When England batted Prior, making his ODI comeback, made a three-ball duck, edging Brett Lee to slip. In eight ODI innings against Australia he has made 112 and after replacing the dropped Steven Davies he is immediately under pressure to produce.

The only batsmen to establish themselves were Ian Bell and Trott, and both were out for 32, dismissals as soft as a goose-feather pillow.

"It was a poor performance with the bat," Strauss said. "Chasing that sort of score you need one guy to get 80-odd and none of us did that. There were too many 20s and 30s and too many early wickets. Ultimately it just wasn't a good performance.

"It was just one of those bad days on a sluggish wicket and I thought we didn't go about our batting as well as we should have done. We're going to have to sit down and chat through it so we don't make those mistakes again.

"A lot of us made poor decisions and we had quite a few softish dismissals. We're not in the business of handing out huge recriminations to batsmen. The last thing we want to see is batsmen going into their shells. But we have to play smarter cricket."

Another defeat, though, and the game will be almost up.

How To Hold A Table Tennis/Ping Pong Paddle

Table tennis, or ping pong, is one of the most widely played sports in the world. And like any other sports and games, it has a rich history of its own – and so are ping pong paddles, which are very important equipments of the game. In fact, its beginnings and developments dated more than 100 years ago.

The way that you hold your table tennis/ping pong paddle can dramatically alter your performance based on what type of game you are seeking to play (whether professional or recreational), what strokes you will be predominantly using, and the like. There are three basic ways to hold or grip your table tennis or ping pong paddle: the shakehands, penhold, and seemiller grips. The shakehands grip is the most commonly used, both in family rec rooms and professional matches, as it allows for strong mobility in both forehand and backhand strokes. The penhold grip is a more antiquated grip for table tennis players, used more often by professional players seeking to surprise their opponent with a different grip. This grip affords the table tennis player a much stronger forehand predominant stroke, and disables the ease of a backhand because of grip position. Lastly, the seemiller grip was developed by 5 time US Table Tennis champion, Dan Seemiller. This grip is hardly ever used as it is considered disruptive to form, as it employs only one side of the paddle for both forehand and backhand strokes. It is a slight variation from the shakehands grip, allowing for strong control of both forehand and backhand strokes.

Ping Pong (Table Tennis) Table Dimensions

Ping Pong Table Dimensions

A ping pong table is made from Masonite which is a hardboard made of wooden chips. The wooden chips used for making such hardboards are treated beforehand with steam in order to form long fibers. These fibers are in turn used for making boards. The dimensions of ping pong table are provided below.

* Length: The length of ping pong table should be 9 feet. In terms of metric system of measurement, the length is 2.74 m. It is the standard length as specified by the International Table Tennis Federation (ITTF). Length of the table is divided into two halves by a net.
* Width:The width of ping pong or table tennis table should be 5 feet. It becomes 1.525 m in metric terms. Width-wise, a white line divides the table in 2 parts. The two sections created by the white line prove to be useful when a doubles game is played on the table.
* Height: The ping pong table has be 30 inches or 2 feet 6 inches above the ground level.
* Net: Height of the net should be 6 inches or 15 cm. Assembly of the net consists of supporting posts and clamps which help in attaching net to the table. A cord is used for suspending the net from supporting posts; the net is made of nylon.

Surface of the table should be such that when a ping pong ball is dropped on it from 12 inches height, a 8¾ inch bounce should be attained. The ball should attain a uniform bounce throughout the surface of table. It is advisable to have a dark colored surface for the ping pong table. Colors that are generally used to paint the table surface are green or blue. The white line which divides each half of the table in 2 sections need to be 3 mm in thickness. Lines which act as a border along the table surface should be 2 cm in thickness. Although, the white lines serve as a border of the table surface, the playing area extends up to the edges of the table and includes the 2 cm thickness of lines.