Tag: 上海威士忌酒吧前十名

GroundUP Music Festival Announces Snarky Puppy, Béla Fleck, Victor Wooten, Robert Glasper & More

first_imgEnter T0 Win A Pair Of 3-Day Passes & Late Night Tickets:<span data-mce-type=”bookmark” style=”display: inline-block; width: 0px; overflow: hidden; line-height: 0;” class=”mce_SELRES_start”></span> Today, Snarky Puppy & their associated label, GroundUP Music, have announced the lineup for the second edition of GroundUP Music Festival, an intimate and eclectic musical experience set to take place in Miami Beach, FL from February 9th-11th, 2018. Hosted by three-time Grammy-winning Snarky Puppy, the festival will feature a special set from Snarky each day along with performances from an eclectic list of international superstars including: The Wood Brothers; The Flecktones Trio feat. Béla Fleck, Victor Wooten and Futureman, Robert Glasper, Lionel Loueke (artist at large), Joshua Redman, Michael League, & Larnell Lewis; Eliades Ochoa (Buena Vista Social Club great); Kitailo feat. Buika; JoJo Mayer/Nerve; Knower; Mark Guiliana’s BEAT Music; Under One Sun; Weedie Braimah & the Hands of Time; Paris Monster; C4 Trio; Harold López-Nussa Trio; and GroundUP artists Charlie Hunter & Silvana Estrada; Banda Magda; Becca Stevens; FORQ; Roosevelt Collier; Breastfist; Sirintip; and Alina Engibaryan.“After an incredible first year of the GroundUP Music Festival — dubbed by some as the Art Basel of Music — where attendees traveled to Miami Beach for the festival from 37 states and 34 countries, our goal is to continue to create a transformative annual event for South Florida and worldwide audiences,” says Miami Beach native and GroundUP Music CEO Paul Lehr. Adds Snarky Puppy bandleader and GroundUP Music founder Michael League, “our focus is not to expand, but to build the most ideal experience for both artist and audience while continuing even farther down the road of musical diversity in our programming.” Two-time Rock and Roll Hall of Famer and 2017 GroundUP Music Festival performer David Crosby urges, “I don’t think you’ll get a better shot at hearing real music than at this festival. It will knock your socks off.” Check out our interview with Michael League about GroundUP Music Festival ahead of last year’s event here.Watch the official reap video from the inaugural GroundUP Music Festival in 2016 below:The North Beach Bandshell’s Amphitheater and sprawling adjacent Palm Grove Park and beachfront complex will once again host the festival during the three-day festival with intimate master classes and workshops and personal interactions with the artists, and top local chefs including Michelle Bernstein serving inspired food and libations in the park. Partner hotel the Deauville Beach Resort–site of the Beatles’ first U.S. appearance after the Ed Sullivan Show–will serve as the venue for late night concerts on two stages featuring new artists and surprises.With room for only about 1500 people a day, tickets will go fast. The intent is to keep the space comfortable and intimate in order to create an optimal experience for both the audience and artists.For ticket and information about the event, head to the festival website.last_img read more

Read More

PricewaterhouseCoopers report contains unfounded allegations — CAF

first_imgRelatedPosts CAF ready to support Egypt with missing AFCON trophy Reopening of international flights: Full list of barred, approved airlines for Lagos, Abuja CAF, NFF celebrate Enyeama at 38 The Executive Committee of the Confederation of African Football has dismissed allegations against its leadership as contained in a report by PricewaterhouseCoopers, describing them as unfounded. The committee at its meeting on Friday in Doha, Qatar devoted the first part of the session to examining the PwC report. The report, titled: “CAF Organisational Review,” for 2015 to 2019 was carried out in the past three months. CAF, in a report on the committee’s report, placed on its website, claimed that officials of PwC were invited to the meeting but failed to make it. It said: “The CAF Executive Committee disputes unfounded allegations contained in the report, particularly regarding the following points: Support for funerals, FIFA FORWARD funds and Tactical Steel. “The support for funerals are acts of solidarity in support of families of individuals who have served African football, including the family of the late Hussein Swaleh, who passed away in a plane crash. “The use of FIFA FORWARD funds is strictly governed by procedures set by FIFA. As a reminder, the periods —- 2015, 2016 and 2017 —- were the subject of a FIFA audit by international firms, including PwC. “Regarding ‘Tactical Steel’, the procedures are before various jurisdictions.” CAF however stated that it was ready to provide the relevant justification for the matter as previously authorised by the CAF Executive Committee. According to the website, the second part of the meeting was devoted to the presentation of “Transform CAF 2021”, being the roadmap for the period 2020-2021. It said the plan was aimed at spearheading the transformation of CAF in two years, and transforming CAF into an organisation managed (and) bounded by the best international standards. It said: “This roadmap will focus on structural reforms, some of which started in 2019, whilst others have already yielded dividends.” CAF went further to say “Transform 2021” was based on four main pillars. It said: “These are organisation and governance, competitions, refereeing, and infrastructure development. “These four pillars will be implemented though 122 measures of which 17 have been deemed of the highest urgency and should be completed by June 2020. “The roadmap will be governed by a steering committee at the Executive Committee level and monitoring committee at the administration level. “A dedicated `Project Management organisation’ unit has been put in place to coordinate all the efforts and ensure the roadmap follow-up.” CAF went on to assure that a quarterly “Transform CAF 2021” progress report would be published on the CAF website starting in June 2020.Tags: cafFIFA FORWARD funds and Tactical SteelPriceWaterhouseCoopersQatarlast_img
Read More

Kotoko responds to GFA – read full letter

first_imgAsante Kotoko have written a long riposte to the Ghana Football Association in response to the decision to ban them from playing at the Baba Yara Stadium in Kumasi following acts of hooliganism.Below if the full letter to the GFAWe refer to your letter of 15th May, 2013 on the above subject and with reference number GFA/PLC/AK/VOL 161.Our understanding of your letter is that the Executive Committee of the GFA purports to ban our club from using the Baba Yara Stadium until such a time that the Executive Committee decides otherwise, for alleged acts of violence and misconduct perpetuated by its supporters on 8th May, 2013 at the venue in question.The Executive Committee seeks to invoke the powers vested in it by Article 15 (2) of the GFA Regulations and has then requested the Premier League Board to determine alternative venues for our home matches in accordance with article 15 (3) of the GFA Regulations. It also seeks to refer the misconduct of the club to the Disciplinary Committee as the club is being held liable for the conduct of its supporters per Article 35 (4) of the same regulations.We would like to point it out to the Executive Committee that a true, uncolored and proper interpretation of Article 15 (2) would show the Executive Committee acted beyond the powers vested in it by the said Article. By purporting to ban Kotoko from using the stadium they have attempted to usurp the powers of the Disciplinary Committee of the FA to punish clubs for misconduct or violence as foreseen by Article 39. Article 15 (2) states that:“The GFA may order the closure of any league center where the safety of clubs, match officials or spectators cannot be guaranteed”This regulation anticipates a situation where either due to structural deformities to the stadium or an inability to arrange adequate security means that participants in football matches organized at this center cannot be assured of their safety. In such a situation closure of a league center means it is closed to all football related activities, no matter which club is involved.The GFA can close a venue without recourse to a club based on Article 15 (2) since it is the safety of everybody using a particular ‘unsecured venue’ that the GFA seeks to protect. Closure of a stadium on safety grounds is not meant to be the punishment or part of the punishment for the misconduct of supporters and that is why there is no link between Article 15 (2) and Article 35 on Offences or Article 39 on punishment. Any attempt to link Article 15 (2) and Article 35 (4) would be a misinterpretation of the GFA Regulations.It needs to be pointed out that closure of a league center is not the same as banning a club from playing its home matches at a particular league center. The GFA cannot ban a club from using a venue without finding them liable for an act of misconduct by the club, its officials or supporters as provided for by Article 35 (4) and following the steps outlined in Article 35 (8) stated below: “Any club, Director, Official, Referee, Assistant Referee, player or Member charged with any act of violence or misconduct under this Article shall be furnished with details in writing of such act of violence or misconduct at least three (3) days before the date the Club, Director, Officials, Referee, Assistant Referee, Player or member is requested to appear before the Disciplinary Committee or any special Committee set up for that purpose of answering charges(s) relating to the act of violence or misconduct.A letter delivered to the accredited representative of a club or any official of the club shall be deemed to have been served on the club or official or player thereof”. (Article 35.8)A club can only be found liable for an act of misconduct or violence after being duly charged with these acts and being found liable by the Disciplinary Committee or a Special Committee as provided for under Article 35 (8) and given the punishment in article 39 (1) (d).The Emergency Committee cannot be considered as a Special Committee in this instance since it is a Statutory Committee of the FA and it was not set up to investigate individual instances of misconduct or violence as foreseen by Article 35 (8). Even if it were to act as a Special Committee to investigate the incidence it would have to give the affected club a right of hearing before it can pass its judgment.In this particular instance the Executive Committee can order that matches involving Kotoko be shifted to other venues only if the stadium is closed to all football related activity (as foreseen by article 15 (2) and which the same committee purported to have done in the case of Robert Mensah Stadium in March 2012). This would include matches involving all teams that use the Baba Yara stadium as their match center. Otherwise the Baba Yara Stadium can be considered to be safe for the playing of football matches and Kotoko is being banned from using the place only because of the misconduct of their fans. The right to punish Kotoko for the misconduct of their supporters lie solely within the purview of the Disciplinary Committee or any other Committee provided for under Article 35 (8). The framers of the regulations anticipated that the GFA Executive Committee could be made up of people with self-interest in the punishment meted out to one club based on competition for league positions, reason why it does not give the power to punish clubs to the Executive Committee. The current composition of the Executive Committee does not give us any comfort that the framers of the regulations were wrong.By choosing to exceed its powers and purporting to ban Kotoko from the use of the Baba Yara Stadium without due process the Executive Committee has buckled under pressure from the public and self-centered individuals who are focused on ensuring that Kotoko fails in its attempt to defend its league title. Their calls for Kotoko to be banned should have been considered alongside what the regulations of the FA provide for. The Executive cannot re-write the regulations because it suits the interest of some people.We are by this letter indicating to the Executive Committee that it was wrong in exceeding the powers vested in it by Article 15 (2) based on wrong advice from people with little or no understanding of the letter and spirit of the specific FA Article. We would not be part of an attempt by the Executive Committee to undermine the powers conferred on the Disciplinary Committee or prejudice the outcome of the Committee’s investigation. If the Executive Committee cannot close the stadium to football related activities, they need to wait for the outcome of the Disciplinary process, just like they did in the recent Berekum Arsenal case. By banning us for the alleged misconduct of our supporters and asking the Disciplinary Committee to also ‘hear the case’ of alleged misconduct amounts to double prosecution, leading to the possibility of double punishment for the same offence.We are in no way, by this response justifying hooliganism of any form perpetuated by any set of fans, being it ours but we believe that the right process must be followed so that justice is not only done but is seen to be done. In effect the Executive Committee should either close the stadium to all football related activity in accordance with article 15 (2) or allow Kotoko to use the stadium pending the outcome of the Disciplinary process. The Executive Committee at this stage should be collaborating with the clubs in seeking alternative solutions to incidences of violence as its current strategy of ‘educate your supporters’, ‘shifting of match venues’, ‘closure of stadia’ and ‘fining clubs’ seems not to be working. The Executive Committee should lead this crusade for more effective solutions.We await your response. Yours faithfully,Benjamin NtiKotoko Administrative ManagerFor: Executive Chairmanlast_img read more

Read More