text:
Penalty shoot-out (association football)

In association football, a penalty shoot-out (previously known as kicks from the penalty mark) is a tie-breaking method to determine which team is awarded victory in a match that cannot end in a draw, when the score is tied after the normal time as well as extra time (if used) has expired (for example, in a FIFA World Cup, penalties are used in elimination matches; the round of 16, the quarter-finals, the semi-finals, and the final). In a penalty shoot-out, each team takes turns shooting at goal from the penalty mark, with the goal defended only by the opposing team's goalkeeper. Each team has five shots which must be taken by different players; the team that makes more successful kicks is declared the victor. Shoot-outs finish as soon as one team has an insurmountable lead. If scores are level after five pairs of shots, the shootout progresses into additional "sudden-death" rounds. Balls successfully kicked into the goal during a shoot-out do not count as goals for the individual kickers or the team, and are tallied separately from the goals scored during normal play (including extra time, if any). Although the procedure for each individual kick in the shoot-out resembles that of a penalty kick, there are some differences. Most notably, neither the kicker nor any player other than the goalkeeper may play the ball again once it has been kicked.

The penalty shoot-out is one of the three methods of breaking a draw that are approved by the Laws of the Game; the others are extra time and, for two-legged ties, the away goals rule. A shoot-out is usually used only after one or more of the other methods fail to produce a winner. The method of breaking a draw for a specific match is determined beforehand by the match organising body. In most professional level competitions, two 15-minute extra time periods are played if the score is tied at the end of regulation time, and a shoot-out is held if the score is still tied after the extra time periods.

Although widely employed in football since the 1970s, penalty shoot-outs have been criticised by many followers of the game, due primarily to their perceived reliance on luck rather than skill and their dependence on individual duels between opposing players, which is arguably not in keeping with football as a team sport. However, some believe the pressure and unpredictability involved makes it one of the most thrilling finales to any sport.

Overview
During a shoot-out, players other than the kicker and the goalkeepers must remain in the centre circle. The kicking team's goalkeeper stands at the intersection of the goal line and the line marking the penalty area (16.5 m) near one of the assistant referees. Goals scored during the shoot-out are not commonly added to the goalscoring records of the players involved.

A draw is a common result in football. Shoot-outs are only used in competitions that require a match-winner at the end of the game – this is predominantly in knockout "cup" ties, as opposed to round-robin "leagues"; they decide which team progresses to the next round of a tournament, or wins it. Usually extra time has been played first, but this is not necessary; exceptions include the Copa Libertadores, Copa América (quarter-finals, semi-finals, and third-place game), FA Community Shield, the EFL League Cup, and the Football League Trophy, all of which use shoot-outs straight after the end of normal time.

The rules of some competitions provide that a shoot-out may be used to decide placings in a round-robin group, in the unusual event that two teams who have faced each other in a final-day match finish the group with identical statistics, and no other team has the same record. This was invoked in Group A of the 2003 UEFA Women's Under-19 Championship, in which Italy and Sweden held a shootout immediately after their drawn match. This rule is a relatively recent innovation, and for example did not apply in Group F of the 1990 World Cup, where the Republic of Ireland and the Netherlands were separated by drawing of lots immediately after drawing their final-day match, however, at the 1994 UEFA European Under-16 Championship, the penalty shoot-out was used in the last Group A match between Belarus and Austria.

Several leagues, such as the J.League, have experimented with penalty shoot-outs immediately following a drawn league match, with the winner being awarded an extra point. In the United States and Canada, Major League Soccer initially also had a shoot-out immediately following the end of full-time, even during league matches, although these shoot-outs differed from standard penalty shoot-outs (see below).

A team that loses a penalty shoot-out is eliminated from the tournament while the winning team in the shoot-out advances to the next round or is crowned champion but the match is classed as a draw by FIFA. For instance, the Netherlands are considered to have concluded the 2014 FIFA World Cup undefeated, despite being eliminated at the semi-final stage.

Procedure
The following is a summary of the procedure for kicks from the penalty mark. The procedure is specified in Law 10 ("Determining the Outcome of a Match") of the Laws of the Game (p. 71).

 * 1) The referee tosses a coin to decide the goal at which the kicks are taken. The choice of goal may be changed by the referee for safety reasons or if the goal or playing surface becomes unusable.
 * 2) The referee tosses the coin a second time to determine which team takes the first kick.
 * 3) All players other than the kicker and the goalkeepers must remain in the pitch's centre circle (see above).
 * 4) Each kick is taken in the general manner of a penalty kick. Each kick is taken from the penalty mark, which is 11 m from the goal line and equidistant from each touch line, with the goal defended only by the opposing goalkeeper. The goalkeeper must remain between the goal posts on their goal line until the ball has been kicked, although they can jump in place, wave their arms, move side to side along the goal line, or otherwise try to distract the shooter.
 * 5) Each team is responsible for setting the order in which its eligible players take kicks.
 * 6) Each kicker can kick the ball only once. Once kicked, the kicker may not play the ball again. The decision on a re-kick is solely at the referee's discretion.
 * 7) No other player on either team, other than the designated kicker and goalkeeper, may touch the ball.
 * 8) A kick results in a goal scored for the kicking team if, having been touched once by the kicker, the ball crosses the goal line between the goal posts and under the crossbar, without touching any player, official, or outside agent other than the defending goalkeeper. The ball may touch the goalkeeper, goal posts, or crossbar any number of times before going into the goal as long as the referee believes the ball's motion is the result of the initial kick. This was clarified after an incident in the 1986 World Cup shoot-out between Brazil and France. Bruno Bellone's kick rebounded out off the post, hit goalkeeper Carlos's back, and subsequently bounced into the goal. Referee Ioan Igna gave the goal to France, and Brazil captain Edinho was booked for protesting that the kick should have been considered a miss as soon as it rebounded off the post. In 1987, the International Football Association Board clarified Law 14, covering penalty kicks, to support Igna's decision.
 * 9) Teams take turns to kick from the penalty mark, until each has taken five kicks. However, if one side has scored more goals than the other could possibly reach with all of its remaining kicks, the shoot-out immediately ends, regardless of the number of kicks remaining; this basis is called "best-of-five kicks". In the 2006 World Cup final, for example, the shoot-out ended after Italy's Fabio Grosso had scored his team's fifth, despite the fact that France (on three) still had one more shot to take. Similarly, in the 2022 FIFA World Cup Final, Gonzalo Montiel's successful conversion of Argentina's fourth kick won the trophy, despite France and Argentina both having one kick left.
 * 10) If after five rounds of kicks, the teams have scored an equal number of goals (or neither team has scored any goals), additional rounds of one kick each are used until one team scores and the other misses. This is known as sudden death.
 * 11) The team that scores the most goals at the end of the shoot-out is the winner of the match.
 * 12) Only players who were on the pitch at the end of play or temporarily absent (injured, adjusting equipment etc.) are allowed to participate in the shoot-out. If at the end of the match and before or during the kicks one side has more players on the pitch than the other, whether as a result of injury or red cards, then the side with more players must reduce its numbers to match the opponents; this is known as "reduce to equate". For example, if Team A has eleven players but Team B only has ten, then Team A chooses one player to exclude. Players excluded this way may take no further part in the procedure, either as kicker or goalkeeper, except that they can be used to replace a goalkeeper who becomes injured during the shootout. The rule was introduced by the International Football Association Board in February 2000 because previously an eleventh kick would be taken by the eleventh (i.e. weakest) player of a full-strength team and the first (i.e. strongest) player of a sub-strength team. A rule change in 2016 eliminated the possibility of a team gaining such an advantage if a player is injured or sent off during the shoot-out.
 * 13) A team may replace a goalkeeper who becomes injured during the shoot-out with a substitute (provided the team has not already used the maximum number of substitutes allowed by the competition) or by a player previously excluded under the 'reduce to equate' provision.
 * 14) If a goalkeeper is sent off during the shoot-out, another player who finished the game must act as goalkeeper.
 * 15) If a player, other than the goalkeeper, becomes injured or is sent off during the shoot-out, then the shoot-out continues with no substitution allowed. The opposing team must reduce its numbers accordingly.
 * 16) Any player remaining on the pitch may act as the goalkeeper, and it is not required for the same player to have acted as a goalkeeper during the game.
 * 17) No player is allowed to take a second kick until all other eligible players on their team have taken a first kick, including the goalkeeper.
 * 18) If it becomes necessary for players to take another kick (because the score has remained equal after all eligible players have taken their first kick), players are not required to kick in the same order.
 * 19) Kicks from the penalty mark must not be delayed for a player who leaves the field of play. The player's kick is forfeited (not scored) if the player does not return in time to take a kick.
 * 20) The referee must not abandon the match if, during the kicks, a team is reduced to fewer than seven players.

Tactics
Defending against a penalty kick is one of the most difficult tasks a goalkeeper can face. Some decide which way they will dive beforehand, giving themselves time to reach the side of the goalmouth. A 2011 study published in the journal Psychological Science found goalkeepers dived to the right 71% of the time when their team was losing, but only 48% when ahead and 49% when tied, a phenomenon believed to be related to certain right-preferring behaviour in social mammals. Others try to read the kicker's motion pattern. Kickers may attempt to feint, or delay their shot to see which way the keeper dives. Shooting high and centre, in the space that the keeper will evacuate, carries the highest risk of shooting above the bar. If a keeper blocks a penalty kick during a match, there is a danger the kicker or a teammate may score from the rebound; this is not relevant in the case of a shoot-out.

Since the entire shoot-out is conducted at the same goal, the crowd behind the goal may favour one team and try to distract the other team's shooters. To forestall any potential advantage, in 2016 the Laws of the Game were modified to add a coin toss between the two teams prior to the shoot-out: the winner of the coin toss has the right to decide which goal is used for the shoot-out (previously, the decision was at the referee's discretion). The referee may change the goal only for safety reasons or if the selected goal or pitch are unusable.

A goalkeeper may not use distracting gamesmanship such as cleaning their boots or asking the referee to see if the ball is placed properly; this risks a caution for unsporting conduct. Bruce Grobbelaar's "wobbly legs" clowning distracted Francesco Graziani in the 1984 European Cup Final shootout. The keeper is forbidden from moving off the goal line to narrow the shooter's angle; the 2003 UEFA Champions League Final shootout caused controversy as replays showed that both keepers got away with this, as did Jerzy Dudek in the 2005 Champions League Final.

Origins
Between 1867 and 1970, the laws of association football did not provide for a method of breaking ties. The first association football tournament, the FA Cup, used extra time and replays to decide drawn games. This example was followed by other early knockout competitions. In the early 1920s, some charity matches began using corner-kicks as a tie-breaker in order to avoid replays. In response, the laws of the game were amended in 1923 to state explicitly that the goal was the only means of scoring, and that a match that ended with equal number of goals scored was drawn.

In major competitions, when a replay or playoff was not possible, ties were previously broken by drawing of lots. Examples include Italy's win over the USSR in the semi-final of the 1968 European Championship (the final, also drawn, went to a replay). However, variants of the modern shoot-out were used before then in several domestic competitions and minor tournaments. Domestic examples include the Yugoslav Cup from 1952, the Coppa Italia from 1958 to 1959, and the Swiss inter-regional Youth Cup from 1959 to 1960. International examples include the 1962 Uhrencup (at the suggestion of its founder Kurt Weissbrodt), the final of the 1962 Ramón de Carranza Trophy (at the suggestion of journalist Rafael Ballester), and a silver medal playoff match between amateur teams representing Venezuela and Bolivia in the 1965 Bolivarian Games. Pavllo Bukoviku took and scored all KS Besa's kicks in a 5–2 shootout win in the 1963 Albanian Cup Final, a format devised by Anton Mazreku, the Albanian FA president. Israeli Yosef Dagan is credited with originating the modern shoot-out, after watching the Israeli team lose a 1968 Olympic quarter-final game against Bulgaria by drawing of lots in Mexico. Michael Almog, later president of the Israel Football Association, described Dagan's proposal in a letter published in FIFA News in August 1969. Koe Ewe Teik, the FA Malaysia's member of the referee's committee, led the move for its adoption by FIFA. FIFA's proposal was discussed on 20 February 1970 by a working party of the International Football Association Board (IFAB), which recommended its acceptance, although "not entirely satisfied" with it. It was adopted at IFAB's annual general meeting on 27 June 1970. In 2006, Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported a claim by former referee Karl Wald from Frankfurt am Main, that he had first proposed the shoot-out in 1970 to the Bavarian FA.

The adoption of the penalty shoot-out by IFAB came too late for the 1970 World Cup, whose rules still prescribed drawing of lots for any knockout match other than the final which ended drawn after extra-time (FIFA refused to announce in advance what would happen if the final itself ended up drawn). The technical report for the 1970 tournament recommended that drawing of lots should be abandoned in future tournaments, noting that "this suggestion has, however, since been cut across by the decision of the International Board as to the taking of penalty kicks to resolve such a deadlock situation." In the event, drawing of lots was never required to decide the winner of a knockout match in any World Cup finals, although it was used in a 1969 qualification tie when Morocco advanced at the expense of Tunisia.

Development
In England, the first penalty shoot-out in a professional match took place in 1970 at Boothferry Park, Hull, between Hull City and Manchester United during the semi-final of the Watney Cup, and was won by Manchester United. The first player to take a kick was George Best, and the first to miss was Denis Law. Ian McKechnie, who saved Law's kick, was also the first goalkeeper to take a kick; his shot hit the crossbar and deflected over, putting Hull City out of the Cup.

Penalty shoot-outs were used to decide matches in UEFA's European Cup and Cup Winners' Cup in the 1970–71 season. On 30 September 1970, after a 4–4 aggregate draw in the first round of the Cup Winners' Cup, Honvéd won the first shoot-out 5–4 against Aberdeen, when Jim Forrest's shot hit the bar. Five weeks later, on 4 November 1970, the first ever European Cup shoot out took place between Everton F.C. and Borussia Mönchengladbach, with the side from England this time being the winners 4–3.

A friendly cup game between the Barcelona women's team and UE Centelles went to penalty shoot-out in December 1970. The format of this shoot-out had penalty kicks taken in sets of three, with Barcelona kicking three, then Centelles kicking three. After two rounds of this continued to produce matching results, the shoot-out was taken to sudden death.

In the first round of the European Cup 1972–73, the referee prematurely ended a shoot-out between CSKA Sofia and Panathinaikos, with CSKA leading 3–2 but Panathinaikos having taken only four kicks. Panathinaikos complained to UEFA and the match was annulled and replayed the following month, with CSKA winning without the need for a shoot-out.

The final of the 1973 Campeonato Paulista ended in similar circumstances. Santos were leading Portuguesa 2–0 with each team having taken three shoot-out kicks, when referee Armando Marques mistakenly (as each team still had two shots to take, and therefore Portuguesa still had a chance of levelling the scoreline) declared Santos the winners. Portuguesa manager Otto Glória quickly led his team out of the stadium; this was allegedly to ensure the shoot-out could not resume once the mistake was discovered, and that instead the match would be replayed, giving Portuguesa a better chance of victory. When Santos counter-objected to a replay, Paulista FA president Osvaldo Teixeira Duarte annulled the original match and declared both teams joint champions.

The first major international tournament to be decided by a penalty shoot-out was the 1976 European Championship final between Czechoslovakia and West Germany. UEFA had made provision for a final replay two days later, but the teams decided to use a shoot-out instead. Czechoslovakia won the shootout 5–3, with the deciding kick being converted by Antonín Panenka with a "chip" after Uli Hoeneß had put the previous kick over the crossbar.

The first penalty shoot-out in the World Cup was on 9 January 1977, in the first round of African qualifying, when Tunisia beat Morocco. The first shoot-out in the finals tournament was in 1982, when West Germany beat France in the semifinal. If the 1982 final had been drawn, penalties would not have applied unless the replay was also drawn; from 1986, penalties were scheduled after the final as for the earlier knockout rounds.

Internationals
The finals of nine FIFA 11-a-side tournaments, including three men's World Cups, have gone to penalty shoot-outs. Some of the notable matches are as follows.
 * The 1991 FIFA World Youth Championship final between Portugal and Brazil in Lisbon was decided on a penalty shoot-out which the Portuguese won 4–2, with the last shot coming from Rui Costa.
 * In the 1994 FIFA World Cup final at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California, the match between Brazil and Italy ended goalless after extra time. Brazil went on to win the shoot-out 3–2.
 * In the 1999 FIFA Women's World Cup Final, also held at the Rose Bowl, the match between hosts the United States and China ended goalless after extra time as well. The United States went on to win the shoot-out 5–4, becoming the first host country to win the tournament.
 * The 2006 FIFA World Cup final between France and Italy also went to a penalty shoot-out (after a 1–1 draw followed by a scoreless 30 minutes of extra time) and was won by Italy 5–3 against France in Berlin's Olympic Stadium.
 * In the 2011 FIFA Women's World Cup Final, held at Waldstadion in Frankfurt, the match between the United States and Japan ended 2–2 after extra time. This time, the United States ended up on the losing side. Japan won the shoot-out 3–1, thus becoming the first Asian country to win the senior—either men's or women's—World Cup.
 * The 2013 FIFA U-20 World Cup final in Istanbul went to a penalty shoot-out after a 0–0 draw after extra time. France won 4–1 over Uruguay. It was their first U-20 World Cup title, thus became the first nation to win all five FIFA 11-a-side men's titles (FIFA World Cup, FIFA Confederations Cup, FIFA U-20 World Cup, FIFA U-17 World Cup, and the Olympic football tournament).
 * The 2022 FIFA World Cup final between France and Argentina went to penalty shoot-out after the extra time ended with a 3–3 draw. Argentina won 4–2 against France in shoot-out to lift the World Cup trophy for the first time since 1986.

The first penalty shoot-out in a World Cup match was in the dramatic West Germany vs France semi-final match in 1982. After the penalty shoot-out ended equal, it went into sudden death.

Goalkeepers have been known to win shoot-outs by their kicking. For example, in a UEFA Euro 2004 quarter-final match, Portugal goalkeeper Ricardo saved a kick (without gloves) from England's Darius Vassell and then scored the winning shot. Another example is Vélez Sársfield's José Luis Chilavert in the 1994 Copa Libertadores Finals. (Chilavert had a reputation as a dead-ball specialist and scored 41 goals during his club career.). More recently, in the 2023 African Cup of Nations, DR Congo's Lionel Mpasi shot the ball into the top right-hand corner against Mohamed Gabaski, who had been a penalty-saving specialist in Egypt's run to the final in Cameroon two years prior.

Antonín Panenka (Czechoslovakia) decided the penalty shoot-out at the UEFA Euro 1976 Final against West Germany with a famous chip to the middle of the goal.

The England national team has lost seven (out of nine) penalty shoot-outs in major tournament finals, including losses to Germany in the semi-finals of the 1990 FIFA World Cup and UEFA Euro 1996 (the latter following a win over Spain by the same method in the previous round). After Euro 1996, England lost four more shoot-outs in a row in major tournament finals, losing to Argentina at the 1998 World Cup, Portugal at Euro 2004 and the 2006 World Cup and Italy at Euro 2012, before finally breaking their losing streak at the 2018 World Cup against Colombia; this shoot-out also allowed England to progress into the quarter-finals for the first time in twelve years. England again lost a penalty shoot-out to Italy in the UEFA Euro 2020 Final.

The Netherlands, meanwhile, lost four consecutive shoot-outs: against Denmark in Euro 1992, France in Euro 1996, Brazil in the 1998 World Cup, and Italy in Euro 2000, before finally winning one against Sweden in Euro 2004. In Euro 2000, the Netherlands had two penalty kicks during the match and four attempts in the shoot-out but only managed to convert one kick against Italian keeper Francesco Toldo. Frank de Boer had both a penalty kick and shoot-out kick saved by Toldo, who also saved from Paul Bosvelt to give Italy a 3–1 shoot-out victory. The Netherlands' fortunes seemed to improve during the 2014 World Cup, when they defeated Costa Rica on penalty kicks in their quarter-final match, only to lose their semi-final match against Argentina on penalties. The 2022 World Cup saw their losing a shoot-out against Argentina once again, but this time in the quarter-finals.

The Italians have lost six shoot-outs in major championships, notably being eliminated on penalties from three consecutive World Cups (1990–1998, including the 1994 final), the Euro 2008 quarter-finals, and the Euro 2016 quarter-finals. However, they have also won five shoot-outs, including the Euro 2000 semi-final against the Netherlands, the Euro 2012 quarter-final against England, the 2006 World Cup final against France, the Euro 2020 semi-final against Spain, and the Euro 2020 final against England.

On 16 November 2005, a place in the World Cup was directly determined by a penalty shoot-out for the first time. The 2006 FIFA World Cup qualifying playoff between Australia and Uruguay ended 1–1 on aggregate; Uruguay won the first leg 1–0 at home, and Australia won the second leg at home by the same score. A scoreless 30 minutes of extra time were followed by a shoot-out, which Australia won 4–2. This occurred again twice in qualifying matches for the 2022 FIFA World Cup, first on 29 March 2022 in the CAF third round between Egypt and Senegal, which Senegal won 3–1 on penalties after the two legs ended 1–1 on aggregate, and on 13 June 2022 in the AFC-CONMEBOL qualifying playoff between Australia and Peru, which Australia won 5–4 on penalties after the only fixture in the playoff went to a 0–0 draw. Delays due to the COVID-19 pandemic caused only one match to be played in neutral Qatar, rather than the traditional home-and-away playoff fixture.

During the 2006 FIFA World Cup in Germany, Switzerland set an unwanted new record in the round of 16 shoot-out against Ukraine by failing to convert any of their penalties, losing 3–0. The goalkeeper Oleksandr Shovkovskyi (Ukraine) became the first not to concede a single goal in the penalty shoot-out, saving two of the Swiss attempts, with another shot hitting the crossbar. The result meant that Switzerland became the first nation to be eliminated from the World Cup without conceding any goals (and, moreover, the only nation to participate in a World Cup finals tournament without conceding a goal). Despite this loss, Switzerland beat France 5–4 on penalties in the Euro 2020 round of 16.

The same competition featured a shoot-out between Germany and Argentina, the two most successful teams up to that point in terms of World Cup finals penalty shoot-outs: Each team had competed in three shoot-outs and won all of them. Germany won the shoot-out, leaving Germany alone with a 4–0 record in World Cup finals.

On 20 June 2007, a new UEFA record was established. The semi-final of the European Under-21 Championships in Heerenveen between the Netherlands and England team finished 1–1, and thirty-two penalties were taken before the tie was broken. The Netherlands eventually won the shoot-out 13–12.

Domestic cups
In the FA Cup, penalty kicks were used in the 1972 edition of the short-lived third-place playoff. They were introduced more generally in the 1991–92 season to decide matches still level after one replay and extra time. Previously there was no limit on the number of replays, which led to fixture disruption, especially disliked by the top clubs. Replays were often two or three days after the drawn match, which conflicted with the increased planning required after the Football Spectators Act 1989. The first team eliminated from the FA Cup on penalties was Scunthorpe United, beaten on 26 October 1991 by Rotherham United after a first-round replay. A shoot-out was first used in the FA Cup Final in 2005, when Arsenal beat Manchester United 5–4. The following year, Liverpool beat West Ham United in the FA Cup Final's second ever penalty shoot-out.

On 31 August 2005, a new English record was established when a shoot-out between Tunbridge Wells and Littlehampton Town in an FA Cup replay involved 40 kicks being taken, with Tunbridge Wells winning 16–15.

Shoot-outs have been used to settle six Football League Cup finals to date. The first was in 2001 when Liverpool beat Birmingham City 5–4 on penalties after a 1–1 draw after extra time in the match. The second was the 2009 final between Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur ended goalless and was won 4–1 on penalties by Manchester United. Then the 2012 final between Liverpool and Cardiff City finished 2–2 after extra time, Liverpool winning 3–2 on penalties. The 2016 final was won by Manchester City beating Liverpool 3–1 on penalties, after a 1–1 draw. Manchester City also won the 2019 final 4–3 on penalties after a 0–0 draw with Chelsea. Chelsea then went on to lose the 2022 final 11–10 on penalties to Liverpool.

Penalty shoot-outs have been used for many years to settle drawn games in the earlier rounds of the Football League Cup, the earliest example being August 1976 when Doncaster Rovers beat Lincoln City 3–2 on penalties after three drawn games in a row (1–1, 1–1, 2–2) in a first round match. Shoot-outs tend to be quite rare in the semi-finals due to the away goals rule applying after extra time. However, a shoot-out was used in the 2013–14 semi-final between Sunderland and Manchester United after both teams finished level over two legs; Sunderland won the shoot-out 2–1.

The Community Shield is also settled using penalties, following the normal 90 minutes of play, but no extra time. Manchester United have won the shield three times via a shoot-out, beating Arsenal in 2003, Chelsea in 2007, and Portsmouth in 2008. Manchester United lost the 2009 match on penalties to Chelsea.

In 2008, the Turkish Cup Final featured two clubs outside of Istanbul's Top Three for the first time in two decades, but penalty kicks decided the winner between Gençlerbirliği and Kayserispor, the latter having reached the final for the first time ever. After a scoreless 120 minutes, 28 penalty kicks were needed to decide the outcome, and Kayserispor, thanks to the goal scoring and goal saving heroics of Dimitar Ivankov, won its first Turkish Cup 11–10.

In the 2008–09 Greek Cup final AEK took a 3–2 lead at 89' with a goal by Scocco; however Olympiacos came back from the dead at the dying seconds of stoppage time (90'+6) with a goal by Derbyshire, to force an overtime. While Olympiacos took a 4–3 lead in overtime with a goal by Galletti, the scorer was sent off with a second yellow card for taking his shirt off while celebrating. Later on, Avraam Papadopoulos also got a second yellow leaving Olympiacos with 9 players. AEK managed to tie the game at 4–4 forcing a penalty shoot out.

AEK was shooting first. Both AEK and Olympiacos scored in the first 4 penalties. Majstorovic of AEK hit the horizontal crossbar in the 5th penalty giving the chance to Djordjevic (for whom it was the closing game of his career) to seal the victory for Olympiacos. However, his shot was blocked by AEK's Argentinian goalkeeper Saja. Hence, the shooting continued. Both teams scored their 6th and 7th penalties. Center-back Antzas was slotted to hit the 8th penalty for Olympiacos, but keeper Nikopolidis took the initiative and took the penalty instead tying the score to 7–7. Nikopolidis blocked the subsequent (9th) penalty by Georgeas for AEK but Antzas missed the penalty for Olympiacos (saved by Saha) and failed to finish the shoot-out.

Since Olympiacos had only 9 players in the field, the shooters had to rotate, going back to those that shoot the very first penalties. All 7 subsequent penalty takers for both teams scored, leading to a penalty shoot out that was at 14–14 with 32 penalty shots having been taken. However, Pelletieri of AEK had a bad penalty shot that was easily deflected by Nikopolidis, who then took the 34th penalty shot against the other goalkeeper, Saja, scoring, and ending this saga with a 15–14 win for Olympiacos in penalty shoot out and an overall score of 19–18. (2008–09 Greek Cup).

UEFA club competitions
The first penalty shoot-out in a European Cup final occurred in the 1984 European Cup Final as Liverpool defeated Roma. The match is best known for the antics of Liverpool keeper Bruce Grobbelaar. As Roma's Bruno Conti prepared to take his kick, Grobbelaar walked towards the goal smiling confidently at the cameras lined-up behind, then proceeded to bite the back of the net, in imitation of eating spaghetti. Conti sent his spot kick over the bar. Grobbelaar then produced a similar performance before Francesco Graziani took his kick, famously wobbling his legs in mock terror. Graziani duly missed and Liverpool went on to win the shootout 4–2.

In the 1986 European Cup Final between Steaua București and Barcelona, Steaua keeper Helmuth Duckadam saved all four of Barca's penalties, for which he was dubbed "the hero of Seville". Steaua also missed two, but still prevailed 2–0 in the shoot-out to become the only Romanian club side to win the title.

In the 2003 UEFA Champions League Final the penalty-shoot out has caused controversy among many fans as replays showed that Milan goalkeeper Dida was off his goal line when saving penalties from Trezeguet, Zalayeta and Montero. Juventus keeper Buffon was also off his goal line when saving penalties from Seedorf and Kaladze.

In the 2005 UEFA Champions League Final between Milan and Liverpool, Liverpool keeper Jerzy Dudek used tactics similar to Bruce Grobbelaar in 1984 (known as the "Dudek dance" in 2005) to distract the Milan shootout takers which resulted in a victory for his team.

The 2008 UEFA Champions League Final between Manchester United and Chelsea went to penalties, when John Terry missed a penalty which would have won Chelsea the match (and the Champions League). His standing leg slipped as he took his kick, and the ball hit the post. Chelsea lost the shoot-out 6–5, to which Terry reacted by breaking down in tears. Terry was not originally the penalty taker, however, striker Didier Drogba had been sent off shortly before extra time ended.

In the semi-finals of the UEFA Champions League between Real Madrid and Bayern Munich, Iker Casillas and Manuel Neuer each saved two spot kicks. Neuer kept out penalties from Cristiano Ronaldo (£80 million) and Kaká (£56 million), then the most expensive footballers in history from their transfer fees.

On 19 May 2012, Chelsea defeated Bayern Munich 4–3 on penalties in the 2012 UEFA Champions League Final. Chelsea had never previously won a shoot-out in the competition, and had lost the 2008 final and 2007 semi-final on penalties. Bayern had never lost a shoot-out in Europe; their wins included the 2001 final against Valencia and the 2012 semi-final against Real Madrid. Didier Drogba dispatched the winning penalty, having been unable to take the fifth kick (missed by Terry) in the 2008 final due to a red card in extra time. The following day, many British newspapers made reference to the fact that an English team had finally beaten a German team on penalties.

On 26 May 2021, Villarreal defeated Manchester United 11–10 on penalties in the 2021 UEFA Europa League Final, after the game ended 1–1 after extra time. Every player on the pitch took penalties – Manchester United goalkeeper David De Gea was the only one to miss, with his shot being saved by Gerónimo Rulli to hand Villarreal its first major title. The 21 penalties converted was a record for a shoot-out in a major UEFA tournament match.

Records
The world record for the most penalties scored consecutively in a shoot out stands at 29, in a Hampshire Senior Cup second-round game between Brockenhurst and Andover Town on 9 October 2013, in which the 30th penalty was saved, enabling Brockenhurst to win 15–14. This beat the previous record of 27, in a Football League Trophy first round match between Leyton Orient and Dagenham & Redbridge on 7 September 2011, in which the 28th penalty was saved, enabling Dagenham to win the shootout.

During the final of the 1992 African Cup of Nations played in Senegal, Ivory Coast won the penalty shootout 11–10. After the second set of five penalty kicks still being tied at 10–10, it went to sudden death, where the last penalty was missed by Anthony Baffoe, the stand-in Ghanaian captain. This is the most penalties in the final match of a major international tournament, and the last time a second set of five kicks was implemented in the rules. The penalty shootout was significant in that it was the first in the final of a major international tournament that every player on the pitch took a penalty.

Fourteen years later, the Ivory Coast and Cameroon needed 24 penalties to decide who would advance to the semi-finals of the 2006 African Cup of Nations. The Ivory Coast advanced by winning 12–11 after Samuel Eto'o missed his second attempt, as his was the only miss of the penalty shootout.

The world record for the longest penalty shoot-out in a first class match is 56 penalties during the 2023–24 Liga Alef (Israel's third tier) promotion play-offs when F.C. Dimona beat Shimshon Tel Aviv 23–22.

The longest FIFA World Cup penalty shoot-out, male or female, occurred in the 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup knockout stage match between Australia and France; the shoot-out saw 20 penalties taken, with Australia ultimately prevailing 7–6.

The record was then broken on 9 March 2022 when two non-league English sides, Washington and Bedlington Terriers took a remarkable 54 penalties after a 3–3 draw in the Ernest Armstrong Memorial Cup, which ended 25–24 in Washington's favour. Five penalties were missed.

This record was broken on 20 May 2024 in Israel when two Liga Alef teams, F.C. Dimona and Shimshon Tel Aviv F.C. took 56 penalties after a 2:2 draw in regular time, in a league semifinal playoff match. Dimona won the shootout 23:22

However, the record for the highest score in a penalty shoot out was set in the 1988 Argentine Championship, when Argentinos Juniors beat Racing Club 20–19 after 44 penalties.

On 3 June 2015, Sundsøre IF beat Nykøbing Mors 20–19 in a penalty shoot out in a preliminary round of the Danish FA Cup.

On 11 December 2012, Bradford City set the record for most consecutive penalty shootout wins. They won 9 penalty shootouts since 2009 and that included wins against Arsenal and local rivals Huddersfield Town.

The shortest possible penalty shootout consists of three kicks by each team, with one team scoring all its kicks and the other team failing to score any. An example of this occurred in the semi-final of the 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup, with Chile beating Portugal 3–0.

The NCAA women's college record number of penalties occurred on 30 October 2022 when the San Diego State Aztecs beat the Utah State Aggies 19–18 during the Mountain West Tournament after 22 rounds of penalties.

Statistical record
A shoot-out is usually considered for statistical purposes to be separate from the match which preceded it. In the case of a two-legged fixture, the two matches are still considered either as two draws or as one win and one loss; in the case of a single match, it is still considered as a draw. This contrasts with a fixture won in extra time, where the score at the end of normal time is superseded. Converted shoot-out penalties are not considered as goals scored by a player for the purposes of their individual records, or for "golden boot" competitions.

The NCAA rules book, which governs most college soccer in the United States, takes a similar approach. With the exception of the national championship game, if the score of any game remains tied following the sudden death overtime (or golden goal), the game is recorded as a tie, regardless of the result of the shoot-out tiebreaker. In a national championship game, the result of the shoot-out tiebreaker also determines the result of the game for statistical purposes. Until 2001, all NCAA games in which the shoot-out tiebreaker was used to determine advancement or a champion were recorded as a tie. In 2002, the rule was modified such that all games in which the shoot-out tiebreaker was used would also decide the winner of the game for statistical purposes. The rule was again changed in 2003 to match the pre-2002 rule with the newly added exception that a shoot-out tiebreaker in a national championship game would be decisive for all purposes, including the record.

In the calculation of UEFA coefficients, shoot-outs are ignored for club coefficients, but not national team coefficients, where the shoot-out winner gets 20,000 points: more than the shoot-out loser, who gets 10,000 (the same as for a draw) but less than the 30,000 points for winning a match outright. In the FIFA World Rankings, the base value of a win is three points; a win on penalties is two; a draw and a loss on penalties are one; a loss is zero. The more complicated ranking system FIFA used from 1999 to 2006 gave a shoot-out winner the same points as for a normal win and a shoot-out loser the same points as for a draw; goals in the match proper, but not the shoot-out, were factored into the calculation.

Criticisms
As a way to decide a football match, shoot-outs have been seen variously as a thrilling climax or as an unsatisfactory cop-out.

Paul Doyle describes shoot-outs as "exciting and suspense-filled" and the 2008 UEFA Champions League Final shoot-out as "the perfect way to end a wonderful ... final". Richard Williams compares the spectacle to "a public flogging in the market square".

The result is often seen as a lottery rather than a test of skill; managers Luiz Felipe Scolari and Roberto Donadoni described them as such after their teams had respectively won and lost shoot-outs. Others disagree. Mitch Phillips called it "the ultimate test of nerve and technique". Paul Doyle emphasised the psychological element.

Only a small subset of a footballer's skills is tested by a shoot-out. Ian Thomsen likened deciding the 1994 World Cup using a penalty shoot-out to deciding the Masters golf tournament via a minigolf game. The shoot-out is a test of individuals which may be considered inappropriate in a team sport; Sepp Blatter has said "Football is a team sport and penalties is not a team, it is the individual".

Inferior teams are tempted to play for a scoreless draw, calculating that a shoot-out offers their best hope of victory. Red Star Belgrade's performance beating Olympique Marseille in the 1991 European Cup Final is often condemned for having "played for penalties" from the kick-off; a tactic coach Ljupko Petrović freely admitted to. On the other hand, the increased opportunity for giant-killing may also be seen as an advantage, increasing the romance of a competition like the FA Cup. Some teams have regarded, or been accused of regarding, a loss on penalties as an honourable result or "no defeat at all".

The Economist reported on the advantage of the team kicking first usually winning and on the players aiming higher usually scoring a goal.

Advantage to team kicking first?
Ignacio Palacios-Huerta has suggested that the alternating kick sequence gives an unfair advantage to the team kicking first, with statistical evidence showing that the team kicking first wins in 60% of the cases, probably because the team kicking second is under more pressure when trailing in the shoot-out. As a remedy, he proposed using the Thue–Morse sequence to determine the kicking order. Another, more comprehensive, analysis by InStat looked at over 2,000 penalty kick shootouts the first to go won 51.48% of the time. However, in the academic literature, empirical support for the existence of such a first-mover advantage is ambiguous.

As part of a trial to reduce a potential first-mover advantage, the IFAB sanctioned in March 2017 to test a different sequence of taking penalties, known as "ABBA", that mirrors the serving sequence in a tennis tiebreak (team A kicks first, team B kicks second):
 * Original sequence
 * AB AB AB AB AB (sudden death starts) AB AB AB etc.

 * Trial sequence
 * AB BA AB BA AB (sudden death starts) BA AB BA etc.

The trial was initially scheduled at the 2017 UEFA European Under-17 Championship and the 2017 UEFA Women's Under-17 Championship in May 2017 if a penalty shoot-out would be needed. The trial was extended in June 2017 to include the 2017 UEFA European Under-19 Championship and the 2017 UEFA Women's Under-19 Championship.

The penalty shoot-out in the Women's Under-17 Championship semi-final between Germany and Norway was the first ever to implement this new system. It was also used in the 2017 FA Community Shield on 6 August 2017.

During IFAB's 133rd Annual Business Meeting in Glasgow, Scotland on 22 November 2018, it was agreed that due to the lack of strong support mainly because of its complexity, the ABBA option would no longer be used in future competitions.

Alternatives
Other tie-break methods have been proposed, both before and since shoot-outs were introduced.

Association football used the "touch down" (similar to a try in rugby) between 1866 and 1867. The touch-down was related to similar tie-breakers used in non-association football codes, such as the "rouge" in the Eton field game (and, from 1862 to 1868, in Sheffield Rules). In rugby itself, the try served as a tie-breaker between 1875 and 1886.

A drawn result may be allowed to stand, unless the fixture determines which team qualifies for a later round. Before 1993 (except in 1974) the FA Charity Shield was shared if the match was drawn. When the third place playoff of the 1972 Olympic tournament between the Soviets and East Germany ended 2–2 after extra time, the bronze medal was shared by the two teams.

During the qualification process for the 1962 World Cup, Morocco and Tunisia formed a two-team group. They both won 2–1 at home, so they played the third match at a neutral location. When this ended in a 1–1 draw after extra time, Morocco advanced on a coin toss to the next round of qualification. This scenario was repeated during the qualification process for the 1970 World Cup, when the same two teams were tied after three matches and extra time. Again, Morocco advanced on a coin toss. Tunisia did have better luck with the coin toss in the intervening years; during the 1965 African Cup of Nations, they reached the final at the expense of Senegal by winning a coin toss after three group matches had left Tunisia and Senegal tied with a win (over Ethiopia) and a draw (against each other).

Alternatives include replaying a match that has ended in a draw. In the 1974 European Cup final, the final score of the first match was a draw, leading to a replay being played two days later. This remains the only time it has happened in the competition. Replays still occur up to, and including, the fifth round (last 16) of the English FA Cup. Until 1991, any number of replays were permitted, with a record of five. (Since then, a draw in the [first] replay has been resolved by a penalty-shoot-out.) However, it was announced in April 2024 that replays would be scrapped from the first round onwards beginning with the 2024-2025 FA Cup season.

Other suggestions have included using elements of match play such as most shots on goal, most corner kicks awarded, fewest cautions and sendings-off, or having ongoing extra time with teams compelled to remove players at progressive intervals (similar to regular season play in the National Hockey League, where players play 3-on-3 in the extra time). These proposals have not yet been authorised by the International Football Association Board. However, after the 2006 World Cup, Sepp Blatter stated that he wants no more penalty shoot-outs in the Final of the World Cup, tentatively suggesting either a replay or "Maybe to take players away and play golden goal".

Henry Birtles' "Advantage" proposal is for the shoot-out to be held before extra-time, and only acting as a tiebreak if the game remains a draw after the full 120 minutes. Proponents of this idea state that it would lead to a more offensive extra-time as one of the teams would know they have to score and there would never be a match in which both teams are simply waiting for penalties. Another advantage is that players who have missed would have a chance to redeem themselves in extra-time. The obvious flaw is that the team that wins the penalty shoot-out would be inclined to play defensively in extra time in the knowledge that a draw would put them through. However, this flaw is not so clear because a single goal makes the difference between winning and losing, as opposed to a team that defends a single-goal lead more comfortably because a conceded goal is the difference between winning and drawing.

Another alternative is Attacker Defender Goalkeeper (ADG), which features a series of ten contests, in which an attacker kicks off from 32 yards and has 20 seconds to score a goal against a defender and goalkeeper. At the completion of the ten contests, the team with the most goals is the winner.

North American experiments
The North American Soccer League (NASL) in the 1970s and 1980s, then Major League Soccer (MLS) for its first four seasons (1996–1999) experimented with a variation of the shoot-out procedure.

Instead of a straight penalty kick, the shoot-out started 35 yd from the goal and having five seconds to attempt a shot. The player could make as many moves as he could in a breakaway situation in the five seconds, then attempt a shot. This procedure is similar to that used in an ice hockey penalty shot. As with a standard shoot-out, this variation used a best-of-five-kicks model, and if the score was still level, the tiebreaker would head to an extra round of one attempt per team.

This format rewarded player skills, as players were able to attempt to deceive goalkeepers and play the ball in an attempt to make the shot, as in a one-on-one skills contest, and goalkeepers could take on the attackers without restrictions that are normally implemented in penalty shootouts. Soccer Bowl '81, the NASL's 1981 championship final, was decided by this format.

From its inception in 1968, the NASL used an unconventional point system in determining the league standings. Teams were awarded six points for a win and three points for a draw. In addition, teams earned one bonus point for each goal scored in a game up to a maximum of three per game. Thus, a team that lost 5–3 would earn three points. However, a team that lost 1–0 would earn no points. Also, a team that won 5–4 would earn nine points (the same as a 3–0 win). But a team that won 2–0 would earn only eight points. In the league's second season (1969), the Kansas City Spurs were the league champions with 10 wins, 2 losses and 4 ties even though the Atlanta Chiefs had 11 wins, 2 losses and 3 ties, because Kansas City earned more bonus points. Starting with 1971 postseason playoff matches, the NASL used a golden goal rule, and every match had a winner decided from the run of play. Extra-time sessions were 15 minutes long before a brief break and change of ends. Game 1 of the 1971 NASL semifinal series between the Rochester Lancers and the Dallas Tornado went six extra-time periods with Rochester scoring the game-winning goal in the 176th minute. Game 3 of that same series went four extra time periods with Dallas scoring in the 148th minute to win the match and the series. In 1975, the NASL adopted a conventional penalty-kick shootout system for all regular-season and postseason playoff matches, and there were no longer any NASL matches that ended in ties. In the standings, a team that won in regulation time was awarded six points. A team that won in a penalty-kick shootout was awarded one point. Bonus points continued to be awarded for each goal scored up to a maximum of three per game. In 1977, the NASL adopted the experimental North American shootout procedure described above. If a match was tied after 90 minutes, a maximum of two golden goal extra time periods of 7.5 minutes each were played. If neither team scored, the shootout was held to determine the winner of the match. In the standings, a team that won was awarded six points whether the win came in regulation time, extra time or by shootout. Bonus points continued to be awarded for each goal scored up to a maximum of three per game. No bonus points were awarded for goals scored in extra time. Postseason playoff games were decided in the same manner. In 1981, the number of points awarded to a team that won a game in a shootout was reduced from six to four. This remained the system until the NASL's final season in 1984.

From its inception in 1996, MLS used the shootout system that had been used by the NASL to determine winners of matches. No regular-season or postseason playoff games ended in a tie. In general, no extra time was played; the shootout commenced immediately after 90 minutes had been played. The only exception was in the MLS Cup Final in which a match tied after 90 minutes would be followed by a maximum of two 15-minute extra time sessions on a golden goal basis. In the regular-season standings, a team that won a match in regulation was awarded three points. A team that won a match in a shootout was awarded one point. There were no bonus points or points awarded to teams that lost whether in regulation time or a shootout. In the playoffs, the conference semifinals and conference finals were organised as best-of-three matches series. A shootout win counted as a win. Thus, a team could win two of the three matches by shootout and lose the other match in regulation and still advance to the next round. This was inconsistent with how the teams were rewarded during the regular season when the team with one win would have earned three points, and the team with two wins would have earned only two points. In 1999, a maximum of two 15-minute golden goal extra time periods were added for matches that were tied after 90 minutes of regulation play. If neither team scored during extra time, the match was decided by a shootout. MLS abandoned the North American style shootout starting with the 2000 season. If penalties are required to determine a winner during the playoffs, MLS now uses the shoot-out procedure specified by the International Football Association Board.

In the MLS Next Pro development league, all draws are followed by a penalty shoot out. While both teams receive 1 match point for the draw, the team winning the penalty shootout gets an additional match point, resulting in draws giving 1 point to the loser of the shootout and 2 to the winner.


text:
Quadragesima

Quadragesima may refer to:

 * Lent, the Christian period of fasting, prayer and almsgiving
 * Quadragesima Sunday

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Quadragesima


text:
Thayer School of Engineering

Thayer School of Engineering at Dartmouth (Dartmouth Engineering) is the engineering school of Dartmouth College, an Ivy League research university, located in Hanover, New Hampshire, United States. Located in a three-building complex along the Connecticut River on Dartmouth's campus, Dartmouth Engineering offers undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in engineering sciences, and has partnerships with other liberal arts colleges throughout the US to offer dual degrees. The school was established in 1867 with funds from Dartmouth alumnus Sylvanus Thayer, also known for his work in establishing the engineering curriculum at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York.

In 2016, Dartmouth Engineering became one of the first comprehensive, national research university in the US, where more than 50 percent of the graduating class to earn undergraduate engineering degrees were women.

History
Thayer School of Engineering is named for Colonel and Brevet Brigadier Sylvanus Thayer, a Dartmouth College alumnus from the Class of 1807, who had developed an extensive engineering curriculum West Point's United States Military Academy unlike any other in the United States at the time and was known as the "Father of West Point" for his 16-year superintendency and leadership at the academy. In 1867, after 30 years of professional service in the Army Corps of Engineers, Thayer endowed Dartmouth with $40,000 (and increased the gift to $70,000 by 1871) for the establishment of a civilian school of engineering. Initially called the Thayer School of Civil Engineering, the school opened in 1871 with three students and with a young lieutenant named Robert Fletcher as its first dean and lone faculty. The curriculum borrowed heavily from the model that Thayer had developed at West Point—a two-year program that culminates in a degree in civil engineering (CE). Under Fletcher, the school's enrollment, endowment, faculty and student population, and facilities grew markedly throughout the late 1800s and early 1900s. Under the administration of Frank Warren Garran (dean of the School from 1933 to 1945), Thayer experienced extensive expansion and modernization. Thayer's curriculum expanded to incorporate mechanical engineering and electrical engineering, as well as a dual business/engineering administration degree from the Tuck School of Business. Garran also oversaw the establishment of Cummings Hall, the Thayer School's first dedicated physical plant, and the institution of the school's first major research program, which was in radiophysics. Dean William P. Kimball (1945–61) continued the school's growing emphasis on research and established the first master's degrees for students wishing to earn more than a Bachelor of Engineering.

In 1961, Myron Tribus became dean of the School, placing a heavy emphasis on the practical, problem-solving aspects of engineering as well as the traditional, theoretical base of the discipline. Tribus developed an integrated curriculum and introduced design courses to the school to provide Thayer students with real-life experience in creative applications of engineering. Under Tribus, the Thayer School offered its first doctorates in engineering.

From the 1970s to the first decade of the 21st century, the Thayer School saw expansion into new fields such as nanotechnology and biochemical engineering, as well as collaboration with such nearby institutions as Dartmouth Medical School, the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, and the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. In the early first decade of the 21st century, the core curriculum for undergraduates was revamped under Dean Lewis Duncan (1998–2004), making the school's offerings more accessible to non-major Dartmouth students. The MacLean Engineering Sciences Center (ESC), completed in 2006, was a $21 million project to expand the school's classrooms and research centers.

Campus

The Thayer School is located on the campus of Dartmouth College, which is situated in the rural, Upper Valley New England town of Hanover, New Hampshire. The campus of the Thayer School sits in a complex on the west side Dartmouth's campus near the Connecticut River. When classes first began in 1871, Sylvanus Thayer's endowment had not provided for a physical plant. Consequently, the school was an itinerant institution for many years, occupying parts of various College buildings and, at one point, a former structure of the New Hampshire College of Agriculture and the Mechanic Arts.

In 1938, Dartmouth president Ernest Martin Hopkins successfully lobbied the Board of Trustees to construct an independent facility for the school. $200,000 were spent to build Horace Cummings Memorial Hall, which with several major additions (built in 1945-46 and 1989) served as Thayer's only facility for nearly 70 years. In 2004, construction began on the MacLean Engineering Sciences Center (ESC), which was completed in 2006. At the cost of nearly $21 million, the new center adds both classroom and research space to the Thayer School.

The Thayer School shares the Murdough Center (containing the Feldberg Business & Engineering Library) with the adjacent Tuck School of Business.

The school doubled its current footprint in 2022 with the opening of the $150 million Class of 1982 Engineering and Computer Science Center, a 165,000-square-foot, four-floor facility that expanded Thayer's labs, classrooms, and office spaces, and brought computer science, entrepreneurship, and engineering under one roof. The building is certified LEED Platinum.

Academics
The Thayer School serves as both Dartmouth College's undergraduate department of engineering, as well as a graduate school offering advanced degrees. Undergraduate majors can receive their Bachelor of Arts degree in engineering at the school, and may choose to continue on to earn a Bachelor of Engineering (B.E.) degree in an additional year or less. Thayer also offers a dual-degree program for undergraduates at other colleges who wish to earn their bachelor's degree at their home institution and their B.E. at Thayer. As a college academic department, the school's undergraduate offerings are open to any Dartmouth student, including non-majors.

Thayer offers several graduate degree programs, including a Master of Engineering (M.Eng) in Biomedical Engineering, Master of Science (M.S.), and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in engineering. The school also offers a Master of Engineering Management (M.E.M.) degree in conjunction with the adjacent Tuck School of Business, and a combination Ph.D/Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) from Dartmouth Medical School. The school also has the United States' first engineering Ph.D. Innovation Program.

Research and entrepreneurship
The Thayer School emphasizes the cross-disciplinary nature of its research topics. In 2007, sponsored research at the school amounted to $16.2 million. Research at Thayer is divided into three general "focus areas": engineering in medicine, energy technologies, and complex systems. Projects within each focus area are divided by three "research categories": biomedical, biochemical, chemical & environmental engineering (BBCEE), electrical & computer engineering, & engineering physics (ECEEP), and materials & mechanical systems engineering (MMSE). The Thayer School promotes its connections to engineering entrepreneurship. The Cook Engineering Design Center, founded in 1978, acts to solicit industry-sponsored projects for degree candidates to work on. The school also offers a variety of conferences, programs, and internships to foster student connections to the professional world. Companies and products that have emerged from the Thayer School include emeritus professor Robert Dean's Creare, Inc. and Dartmouth music professor Jon Appleton's work on the Synclavier synthesizer. The school maintains a list of startup companies established by its current faculty.

Rankings and admissions
In 2007, the Thayer School was ranked 47th by U.S. News & World Report among American engineering schools. It was also included in BusinessWeek's unranked list of 60 "Best Design Schools in the World".

Admissions for undergraduate students are handled by Dartmouth College's Office of Undergraduate Admissions. Admission to graduate programs, including the B.E. degree, requires an undergraduate background in engineering and mathematics or science. In the fall of 2006, Thayer accepted 14.5% of applicants overall. Average Graduate Record Examination (GRE) test scores of applicants in verbal, quantitative, and analytical sections were 601, 778, and 695, respectively.

Students
As of the 2022–2023 academic year, Dartmouth Engineering enrolls about 445 students, with about 160 undergraduate engineering majors, including 55 Bachelor of Engineering students; 110 Master of Engineering Management students; 20 Master of Engineering students; 10 Master of Science students; 145 PhD candidates in engineering sciences.

Faculty
Dartmouth Engineering's faculty is composed of about 105 active researchers and instructors, including about 70 tenured or tenure-track faculty; about 20 research or instructional faculty; and about 35 adjunct or visiting faculty. Notable former faculty include Arthur Kantrowitz, emeritus professor of engineering, and Myron Tribus, the dean of the Thayer School for most of the 1960s. In 2020, the school introduced a new position, Associate Dean of Diversity and Inclusion, to help Thayer's current and future efforts in diversity and inclusion. Petra Bonfert-Taylor was named to this position in August 2020.

Alumni
As of 2007, Thayer has 4,046 engineering alumni in all 50 U.S. states and over 50 countries. Nearly 3,000 of the graduates received a B.E. or a graduate degree, with the remaining 1,000 earning only the undergraduate A.B. degree. The school claims that over 90% of graduates become employed within six months of graduation.

title: Thayer School of Engineering


text:
Quadrat

A quadrat is a frame used in ecology, geography, and biology to isolate a standard unit of area for study of the distribution of an item over a large area. Quadrats typically occupy an area of 0.25m2 and are traditionally square, but modern quadrats can be rectangular, circular, or irregular. A quadrat is suitable for sampling or observing plants, slow-moving animals, and some aquatic organisms.

A photo-quadrat is a photographic record of the area framed by a quadrat. It may use a physical frame to indicate the area, or may rely on fixed camera distance and lens field of view to automatically cover the specified area of substrate. Parallel laser pointers mounted on the camera can also be used as scale indicators. The photo is taken perpendicular to the surface, or as close as possible to perpendicular for uneven surfaces.

History
The systematic use of quadrats was developed by the pioneering plant ecologists R. Pound and F. E. Clements between 1898 and 1900. The method was then swiftly applied for many purposes in ecology, such as the study of plant succession. Botanists and ecologists such as Arthur Tansley soon took up and modified the method.

The ecologist J. E. Weaver applied the use of quadrats to the teaching of ecology in 1918.

Method
A quadrat can be used by researchers to methodically count organisms within a smaller, representative area in order to extrapolate to a larger habitat when comprehensive sampling is impossible or not practical. The quadrat's size corresponds to the size of the organism being sampled and the overall sampling area. To avoid selection bias, researchers will randomly distribute quadrats throughout the sampling area.

For long-term studies, the same quadrats can be revisited after their initial sampling. Methods of precisely relocating the area of study vary widely in accuracy and include measurement from nearby permanent markers, use of total station theodolites, consumer-grade GPS, and differential GPS.

title: Quadrat


text:
Quadrate bone

The quadrate bone is a skull bone in most tetrapods, including amphibians, sauropsids (reptiles, birds), and early synapsids.

In most tetrapods, the quadrate bone connects to the quadratojugal and squamosal bones in the skull, and forms upper part of the jaw joint. The lower jaw articulates at the articular bone, located at the rear end of the lower jaw. The quadrate bone forms the lower jaw articulation in all classes except mammals.

Evolutionarily, it is derived from the hindmost part of the primitive cartilaginous upper jaw.

Function in reptiles
In certain extinct reptiles, the variation and stability of the morphology of the quadrate bone has helped paleontologists in the species-level taxonomy and identification of mosasaur squamates and spinosaurine dinosaurs.

In some lizards and dinosaurs, the quadrate is articulated at both ends and movable. In snakes, the quadrate bone has become elongated and very mobile, and contributes greatly to their ability to swallow very large prey items.

Function in mammals
In mammals, the articular and quadrate bones have migrated to the middle ear and are known as the malleus and incus. Along with the stapes, which is homologous to some reptilian and amphibian columellae, these are known as the ossicles and are a defining characteristic of mammals.

Development
In pig embryos, the mandible ossifies on the side of Meckel's cartilage, while the posterior part of that cartilage is ossified into the incus. In later development, this portion detaches from the rest of the cartilage and migrates into the middle ear.

title: Quadrate bone


text: Template:Alien (franchise)

title: Template:Alien (franchise)


text:
Prince Nashimoto Morimasa

Morimasa, Prince Nashimoto (梨本宮守正王) was a member of the Japanese Imperial Family and a field marshal in the Imperial Japanese Army. An uncle-in-law of Hirohito (Emperor Shōwa), an uncle of his consort, Empress Kōjun, and the father-in-law of Crown Prince Euimin of Korea, Prince Nashimoto was the only member of the Imperial Family arrested for war crimes during the Allied occupation of Japan following defeat in the Second World War.

Early life
Prince Nashimoto Morimasa was born in Kyoto, the fourth son of Prince Kuni Asahiko and Harada Mitsue, a court lady. His father, a prince of the blood and one-time Buddhist priest, was the head of one of the ōke collateral branches of the Imperial Family created during the early Meiji period. Originally named Prince Tada, his half-brothers included Prince Kaya Kuninori, Prince Naruhiko Higashikuni (served as prime minister in 1945), Prince Yasuhiko Asaka, Prince Kuni Taka, and Prince Kuni Kuniyoshi.

On 2 December 1885, Emperor Meiji named him successor to the Nashimoto-no-miya, another cadet branch of the imperial family. He adopted the personal name "Morimasa" the following year.

Family
On 28 November 1897, Prince Nashimoto married Nabeshima Itsuko (2 February 1879 – 18 August 1977), the second daughter of Marquis Nabeshima Naohiro, a former Japanese ambassador to Italy and the son of the last feudal lord (daimyō) of Saga Domain. Itsuko was the maternal aunt of Setsuko, Princess Chichibu, Emperor Taishō's daughter-in-law.

The couple had two daughters and one adopted son.
 * 1) Princess Nashimoto Masako (方子), (4 November 1899 – 30 April 1989). Married the half-brother and heir of Korea's last monarch, Yi Un (Crown Prince Euimin) in 1920.
 * 2) Princess Nashimoto Noriko (規子), (27 April 1907 – 25 August 1985) married Count Hirohashi Tadamitsu in 1926.
 * 3) Prince Norihiko (徳彦), (22 November 1922 – 7 February 2007), son of Prince Kuni Taka, became Count Tatsuta Norihiko in 1943, adopted by Princess Nashimoto Itsuko to carry on Nashimoto family name on 28 April 1966. Married Princess Kuni Masako, daughter of Prince Kuni Asaakira, in 1945 but divorced her in 1980.

Military career
Like the other princes of the imperial blood at the time, Prince Nashimoto Morimasa pursued a military career. Educated at the Central Military Preparatory School and the Imperial Japanese Army Academy, he received a commission as a second lieutenant in the IJA 39th Infantry Regiment in 1899. In 1903, he went to the École Spéciale Militaire de Saint-Cyr at St. Cyr, France, but returned to Japan the following year and served with his regiment as a captain under General Oku Yasukata in the Russo-Japanese War. Prince Nashimoto then returned to France in August 1906 and remained until July 1909. The Prince rose to the rank of major of the Infantry in 1906, lieutenant colonel in 1908, and colonel in 1910. He was promoted to lieutenant general and commander of the IJA 16th Division in August 1917.

Prince Nashimoto became a member of the Imperial Japanese Army General Staff Office in November 1919 and was promoted to the rank of general in August 1922. On 8 August 1932, he was given the largely honorary rank of field marshal and became a member of the Board of Marshals and Fleet Admirals. However, the prince held no major military commands during the Pacific War (1941–1945). Unlike his younger half-brothers and Emperor Meiji's sons-in-law, Prince Yasuhiko Asaka and Prince Naruhiko Higashikuni (served as prime minister in 1945), he remained largely removed from the mounting radicalism within the army, which culminated in the February 26 Incident of 1936. In October 1937, he became chief priest (saishu) of the Ise Shrine, upon the death of his half-brother, Prince Kuni Taka.

Prince Nashimoto retired from the active list aged 70 in 1944. He served as president of the Imperial Association, the honorary president of the Franco-Japanese Society, the Japan Forestry Association, the Japan Agricultural Association, the Imperial Air-Association, the Japan Martial Arts Association, and the Italian Society of Japan.

Post war
On 2 December 1945, General Douglas MacArthur, the military governor of Japan during the American occupation, ordered the arrest of Prince Nashimoto as a "class A" war criminal, largely for his role in supporting State Shintoism (Prince Nashimoto was the chief priest of the Grand Shrine of Ise from 1937 until 1947). Prince Nashimoto was also the second most senior member of the Imperial Family (after Prince Kan'in Kotohito) during World War II.

The prince's arrest caused great consternation among the Japanese, as it opened the possibility that Emperor Shōwa and more senior members of the imperial household might also face prosecution for war crimes. Few people on either side regarded Prince Nashimoto as more than a symbol, but he was regarded more as a hostage to ensure Emperor Shōwa's compliance with American-directed political reforms. After four months' imprisonment in Tokyo's Sugamo Prison, American authorities released him without charges on 13 April 1946. By action of the reconstituted Imperial Household Council, Prince and Princess Nashimoto were divested of their imperial status and became commoners on 14 October 1947.

However, unlike other former members of the Japanese imperial family, the American Occupation authorities (SCAP) purged former Prince Nashimoto allegedly because of his military career, denying him any compensation for the loss of his title and properties. American bombing raids had already destroyed his Tokyo residence, and he was forced to sell his country villa to pay taxes. He spent his last years in poverty, unlike many other former nobles with more extensive war records.

The former prince died of a heart attack on 2 January 1951 at the age of 76. His widow, former Princess Nashimoto Itsuko, maintained close ties to the Imperial Household until her death in August 1976. She published her memoirs under the title Nashimoto-no-miya Itsuko-ohi Nikki (The Memoirs of Princess Nashimoto Itsuko) in 1972.

Honours

 * Qing dynasty: Order of the Double Dragon, Class I Grade II, 20 May 1903
 * undefined: Honorary Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order, 7 June 1909
 * undefined: Grand Cross of the Legion of Honour, 22 July 1908
 * undefined: Grand Cross of the Order of Charles III, July 1909
 * Austria-Hungary: Grand Cross of the Order of St. Stephen, 1909

title: Prince Nashimoto Morimasa


text:
Talk:Eochaid mac Áeda Find

Discussion moved from Eochaid mac Aed Find of Dalriada:
Some sense of the material, chronicle or epic or what? in which Eochaid was mentioned might enrich our idea of the context in this entry. I'm too ignorant to help. Wetman 21:51, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * There is an article at Eochaid of Scotland that I helped to write, there is also one at Eochaid II of Dalriada. This article should be merged with either of those and made into a disambig page.  I can't make out from the text however which one it should be... Graham  :) 21:56, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * erm, I didn't want to be a complainer... Wetman 21:59, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Page moved to new location, old one turned into a disambig. After a bit of buggering about. -- Graham :) 00:55, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this "Eochaid mac Aed Find of Dalriada" move is not in accordance to Wikipedia guidelines. Eochaid or Eocha) should be listed as Eocha I of Scotland (if anything). I've moved it back accordingly. Hopefully, Eocha will remove the disamibiguation business referred to above. Arno 07:17, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry, wrong Eochaid...Arno 07:18, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Well until someone can tell me who the figgins this Eochaid mac Aed Find of Dalriada actually is in context, I can't move it to the appropriate page. Eochaid wasn't the right page because there were others called Eochaid.  Tell me who it is in context and I'll move it. -- Graham  :) 13:29, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * How about Eochaid IV of Dalriada? Arno 06:00, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Problems
This article doesn't match the one of Aedh Finn (see Talk:Aed of Dalriada. Eochaid's wife's name is difficult, it's the same as his mothers. Is there a feminine form of Fergus attested in Irish material or is this a late monkish invention ? Angus McLellan 00:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Eochaid mac Áeda Find


text:
User:Sasvari~enwiki

de:Benutzer:Sasvari

title: User:Sasvari~enwiki


text:
Talk:Vyacheslav Molotov

“Butter churner”
For years this article has stated that Molotov was the son of a “butter churner”. According to (1) “Molotov Remembers,” by Felix Chuev, 1993, Molotov was the son of a merchant. (2) “Molotov: A Biography,” by Derek Watson, 2005, he was the son of a merchant in Vyatka. I have not found any sources for the “butter churner” father. What is a butter churner, anyway? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.118.149 (talk) 07:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

"Molotov Cocktail"
Shouldn't there be some information in the article about the improvised weapon named after Comrade Molotov?
 * There already is. See "Legacy" AxderWraith Crimson (talk) 11:20, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

And...?
In November 1940, Stalin sent Molotov to Berlin to meet Ribbentrop and Hitler.

We should know the purpose of this meeting and its results. I heard that Hitler and Molotov disliked each other on sight, and did not agree on anything. Valetude (talk) 17:38, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Molotov moderating the purges
The article claims "There is no record of Molotov attempting to moderate the course of the purges or even to save individuals, unlike some of the other Soviet officials." The next source is Felix Chuev's Molotov Remembers.

In this very source, one can read:

"MOLOTOV: A commission on Tevosian was set up after he was arrested. Mikoyan, Beria, myself, and someone else worked on that commission. Tevosian was a Central Committee member, a most upright man, an excellent specialist in metallurgy. An extremely competent man. A report came in that he was a saboteur and that he was working to damage our steel industry. He had intensive training in Germany with the Krupp works, and upon returning home he most perseveringly and effectively worked in our steel industry. But soon a lot of evidence given by specialists and managers was received. At Stalin’s initiative, a special commission was set up to review his case thoroughly. We went to the NKVD building to examine the evidence. We heard out one engineer, two, three. Each one insisted Tevosian was a wrecker because he had issued such and such instructions. Tevosian was in the same room and listened to all those accusations. He easily exposed and rejected all the charges. We compared the evidence with the facts and concluded that the charges were absurd. Sheer slander. Tevosian was acquitted. He remained a member of the Central Committee, and then he continued to do his job. We reported to Stalin, and he agreed with our conclusion." Chuev, Feliks. Molotov Remembers. Chicago: I. R. Dee, 1993, p. 294

There are other records of Molotov moderating the purges:

"Beginning in the summer of 1938 a coalition of Politburo members, reportedly consisting of Zhdanov, Andreev, Kaganovich, Mikoyan, and Molotov, worked to limit Yezhov’s and the NKVD’s powers." Chase, William J., Enemies Within the Gates?, translated by Vadim A. Staklo, New Haven: Yale University Press, c2001, p. 306.

And this, technically before the height of the Purge in 1936:

"The next day [May 8, 1933] a document carrying the signatures of Stalin for the Central Committee and Molotov for the government ordered a drastic curtailment of arrests and a sharp reduction in the prison population. Half of all prisoners in jails…were to be released. The power to arrest was sharply restricted to police organs, and all arrests had to be sanctioned by the appropriate judicial procurator." Getty & Naumov, The Road to Terror. New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press, c1999, p. 113

These works were cited in https://espressostalinist.com/the-real-stalin-series/yezhovshchina/.

There is more from Russian historian Yuri Zhukov:

[Molotov:] "There's no point in searching for people to blame, comrades. If you prefer, all of us here are to blame, beginning with the Party's central institutions and ending with the lowest Party organizations." (Inoy Stalin, p. 349)

[Peskarov:] "They condemned people for petty stuff . . . illegally, and when we . . . put the question to the C.C., comrades Stalin and Molotov strongly supported us and sent a brigade of workers from the Supreme Court and Prosecutor's office to review these cases. . . . And it turned out that for three weeks' work of this brigade 56% of the sentences in 16 raiony were set aside by the brigade as illegal. What's more, in 45% of the sentences there was no evidence that a crime had been committed." (Tayny Kremlia, p. 43)

Cited in Grover Furr, Stalin and the Struggle for Democratic Reform. https://web.archive.org/web/20071214155423/http://clogic.eserver.org/2005/furr.html

The sentence about Molotov's record should be removed and maybe something of Molotov's role relating to Tevosian and Peskarov could be mentioned.

Wiki user wiki (talk) Wiki user wiki (talk) 05:29, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Zinnober9 engaging in non-constructive behavior
Zinnober9 reverted my edit, which would have been fine, but they then brought a patently and obviously false charge of vandalism against me that cannot be sustained in any reading of my edit. This suggests that Zinnober9 is biased and is engaging with ulterior motives. 203.192.209.6 (talk) 20:17, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Is Special:Diff/1208748242 vandalism? No. Is it supported by the provided reference? Also no. It's a fine sentiment and I can see why you would put it there, but without a reference to support it (somewhere in the body of the text) we can't be adding superlatives like "greatest" so I can also see why it was removed. Please assume good faith and don't immediately assume that anyone who has a different opinion that you is somehow biased or out to get you. Primefac (talk) 07:18, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Dear IP:
 * I do not appreciate your making these claims of me and my character based on our one and only interaction prior to your posting this. Other than your reply on your IP's talk page (which you posted immediately prior to this) you made no attempt to discuss with me any issues between us before you made these claims of me here. I would have appreciated a chat on your (or my) talk page with us each replying at least once prior to this public thread being started so that we might have worked things out before sharing our disagreement publicly.
 * While I admit I was in error in choosing to leave the warning message that I left on your talk page instead of leaving a message stating I'd reverted you for lack of a reliable source. Sorry for that; I've struck the warning message as a gesture of good faith. As for my revert, I was correct in reverting as the use of a puffery statement without any clearly understood, Reliably Sourced reference to support the claim is a generally a remove on sight issue as puffery is not permitted phrasing (unless it is part of a reliably sourced quote).
 * "Anderson" is not a valid, reliable source because it is not clear who Anderson is, or what the sourced work reference is. If that is fixable, and meets reliable sourcing criteria, I won't have any objections.
 * Best wishes, Zinnober9 (talk) 05:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I am very confused. Have you actually read the article before engaging in this? The Anderson reference that so puzzles you was not originated by me, but was already present in the article.
 * What you are reverting is not addition of new content/"puffery" but simply surfacing (already referenced) material from the body of the article into the lead. If you have any concerns regarding the citations in the pre-existing content then let's talk about that, otherwise I don't see any grounds to oppose this material being significant enough to mention in the lead. 203.192.209.6 (talk) 00:51, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, as for working things out, you opened our interaction by slapping a vandalism notice so I really don't see how I was the escalating party here. Nevertheless, you apologised and struck out your notice, and I appreciate that. 203.192.209.6 (talk) 00:55, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Vyacheslav Molotov


text:
PayPoint

PayPoint plc is a British business offering a system for paying bills in United Kingdom, Ireland and Romania. It is listed on the London Stock Exchange.

History
The PayPoint network was set up in 1996 with the aim of enabling customers to load gas and electricity onto their pre-paid energy meters in cash at their local convenience store. Prepayment meters are intended to help customers to manage energy use, thereby helping the environment, and control their spending, thereby enabling to live within their limited means. Typically about 40% of customers use prepayment meters for their electricity and gas: this percentage has remained roughly constant over the last five years. First tested in Northern Ireland, the system was expanded to London in 1997 and in 1998, British Gas prepayment meter customers were able to charge their Quantum smart cards at PayPoint retailers.

Following continued growth and public listing, in 2006, the company became the exclusive cash payment network for the BBC's TV Licence fee. In November 2006 and February 2007, PayPoint acquired online payment service providers Metacharge and SECPay respectively. In September 2010, PayPoint completed the acquisition of Verrus, a pay-by-phone parking payment provider and re-branded in North America and Europe under the brand name, PayByPhone. In May 2014, PayPoint.net and PayByPhone were merged under a single identity, PayPoint Mobile and Online.

In March 2024, PayPoint partnered with Lloyds Bank. It was announced that Lloyds Bank would be the main card acquiring partner for PayPoint.

Operations
PayPoint allows cash payments at any one of 28,200 United Kingdom PayPoint outlets, 500 in Ireland and 9,000 in Romania. It also provides multi-channel payment for retailers – desktop, laptop, tablet, mobile, mPOS. In most cases, PayPoint's fees are usually paid by the payee organisation rather than by the payer, the notable exception being deposits into Monzo bank accounts, for which Monzo deducts a £1 fee from the deposited amount.

Collect+
In February 2011, Collect+ a parcel sending and collection service, was launched as a joint venture between PayPoint and Yodel. This service is available through almost 6,000 of the PayPoint retail network in the United Kingdom and allows customers to collect and send packages at their local convenience store.

On 6 April 2020, PayPoint announced an agreement with Yodel to take full ownership of Collect+.

In February 2024, PayPoint partnered with Royal Mail and its Collect+ service.

title: PayPoint


text:
International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations

International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations (IFATCA) unites the professional associations of air traffic controllers from around the world. In total, it represents over 130 of such organisations, with a combined membership of over 50,000 air traffic controllers.

The Federation is registered in Switzerland, but maintains a permanent office in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

The goals of the Federation include promoting safety, efficiency, and regularity of international air navigation, aid in the development of air traffic control systems, procedures and facilities and promote knowledge and professional efficiency among air traffic controllers.

They do this by closely cooperating with national and international aviation authorities, and as such are represented in a large number of bodies that are looking at the present and future developments in air traffic control.

Their ultimate goal is a worldwide federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations.

The Federation publishes a quarterly, called "The Controller".


text:
Talk:Race card

German translation
To the bender who keeps putting it back in, if you have a reasonable argument for its place in the article please say so — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.179.199.136 (talk • contribs) 23:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Not entirely accurate depiction of offending TV ad in Helms campaign.
Strange that I would remember this so vividly perhaps, but I was in North Carolina during the 1990 election and was a supporter of Harvy Gannt, whom Helms defeated. The TV ad in question showed a man's white hands holding a letter of rejection from an employer. A voice-over asked, (I'm paraphrasing) what you would do if you were told that you were the best candidate for a job, but you were not going to be hired because the employer had to hire a minority instead.

There was no black man in the ad.

title: Talk:Race card