爱上超模
中超从第11轮起恢复主客场制_我的网站

A | A piece of cotton fabric, an AI supply-chain map, a "human rights" report and an electronics certification document appear to have little in common.
Behind them, however, are the US entities that have helped build and operate Washington's machinery of restrictions against China - tracing materials linked to Xinjiang region, mapping supply chains for enforcement, producing reports used to advance "forced labor" allegations, converting those allegations into corporate compliance pressure, and lobbying to exclude Chinese laboratories from the US market.
On August 5, China responded.
China's Ministry of Commerce announced the countermeasures against Applied DNA Sciences, Inc., Stratum Reservoir, LLC., Altana Technologies, Inc., Responsible Business Alliance, Verite Group, Inc. and Human Rights in China, the Xinhua News Agency reported.
These countermeasures, which took effect on Wednesday, were adopted in response to the US sanctions against Chinese companies under the pretext of "forced labor" in Northwest China's Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, according to the ministry.
In a separate decision, Compliance Testing LLC was listed over its support for restrictive measures taken by the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC), according to Xinhua. Compliance Testing LLC assisted and supported the FCC in taking these measures, which endanger China's sovereignty, security and development interests.
Chinese organizations and individuals are prohibited from conducting relevant transactions or cooperation with these entities.
Public filings and company disclosures point to a more complicated picture: The seven US entities listed by China occupy different points along a chain extending from research and laboratory testing to AI-powered supply-chain mapping and compliance services, while some have changed their core business or retained operations linked to China.
Who are these entities, who pays them and what exactly have they done to Chinese companies? GT found more behind the names through an investigation into corporate filings, government contracts, funding records and public statements.

Photos: VCG
Tests, data and algorithmsThe path from the US government's Xinjiang-related allegations to enforcement actions runs through laboratory testing, supply-chain data and algorithmic screening. Three of the entities targeted by China's latest countermeasures have served as "hired guns" along that path.
Back to May 2024, Applied DNA Sciences and Stratum Reservoir drew international attention with a study of 822 cotton-containing products collected from major retailers and e-commerce platforms between February 2023 and March 2024. According to Reuters, 19 percent contained traces of cotton from Xinjiang region. Among the positive samples presented as having a single origin, 57 percent were labeled as containing only US cotton. The two companies declined to identify the retailers and brands involved.
But the test itself identifies a probable geographical origin: It does not examine recruitment, wages or conditions at a workplace. Those geographical findings acquire legal consequences through the US' prevention act on "forced labor" in Xinjiang, under which goods produced wholly or partly in Xinjiang face a rebuttable presumption.
According to an Applied DNA announcement republished by NASDAQ, the company received a subcontract from LRQA (Lloyd's Register Quality Assurance) in 2024 for an isotopic-testing pilot involving Pakistan's cotton sector. Under the subcontract, Applied DNA and its traceability partner Isotech, a Stratum Reservoir company, were to conduct isotopic testing and analysis. The pilot formed part of the US Department of Labor-funded Global Trace Protocol project, whose overall budget was $4 million.
By the time China announced its countermeasures, however, Applied DNA had undergone a striking corporate transformation. A May 2026 filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission identifies the company as BNB Plus Corp, formerly Applied DNA Sciences, and describes it primarily as a digital-asset treasury company holding BNB cryptocurrency. The filing says it stopped providing textile isotopic-testing services during the previous fiscal year and was exiting its DNA tagging and security business.
The same filing recorded a net loss of $25.27 million for the six months ending March 31, 2026, as well as an accumulated deficit of $404.45 million.
Stratum Reservoir followed a different path into cotton traceability. The company was formerly the laboratory-services arm of oilfield-services group Weatherford. In 2019, Weatherford sold the business to an investor group led by CSL Capital for $206 million in cash, according to the Weatherford's website.
Stratum's own company profile still centers on reservoir characterization and laboratory analysis of rocks and fluids. Through Isotech, however, expertise developed for analyzing natural resources was extended to cotton-origin testing.
According to an Applied DNA announcement republished by NASDAQ, Applied DNA and Stratum Reservoir's Isotech division signed a memorandum of understanding in December 2021 to use isotopic analysis as a confirmatory test for determining cotton origin.
If Applied DNA and Stratum work from physical samples, Altana Technologies operates at the level of data networks.
In 2023, Altana announced that US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) had awarded it a multi-year contract to provide what the company called a "foundational map of the global supply chain." Its Atlas platform applies artificial intelligence to public, non-public and proprietary data.
According to Altana's announcement, thousands of Customs and Border Protection users would be able to conduct network analysis, screen value chains and compile evidence supporting enforcement actions.
That government relationship continued to expand. Records from the US government show that the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) awarded Altana another contract in July 2026, with nearly $7.5 million obligated for a forced-labor tool and trade-compliance modules through June 2029.
Altana's personnel structure further reflects its focus on government enforcement. Its leadership page lists government affairs chief Scott Friedman as a former DHS assistant secretary for trade and economic security. Its advisory board includes a former CBP commissioner and several former customs, intelligence and national security officials.
Altana also markets compliance services to companies facing the same enforcement system. In joint promotional material, Altana and Kharon say CBP analysts use their platforms to enforce the US forced labor import ban framework, while businesses can screen shipments through the "exact lens" used by regulators - placing Altana on both the enforcement and corporate-compliance sides of the market.
Together, the three companies illustrate how a technical chain can acquire enforcement power: A laboratory assigns a probable origin to a physical sample; a data platform connects companies, products and shipments across borders; government agencies use those findings to prioritize investigations or support enforcement.
Roles in a false narrative chain
"Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth" is a maxim of propaganda often attributed to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. In the US' fabrication of the false narrative of "forced labor" in Xinjiang region and its effort to construct a complete chain of policies aimed at suppressing China, certain actors have repeatedly spread lies that smear China through softer means such as agenda-setting, report manufacturing, industry standard-setting and rule-based lobbying.
Among the seven US entities countered by China's Ministry of Commerce this time, some have played precisely such a role.
"Human Rights in China (HRIC)" is likely one of the key actors directly supplying the "ammunition" in this chain. Based in New York and long active on Xinjiang-related accusations, the NGO has even funneled disinformation, acting as a lobbyist and relentlessly pushing for the passage of more restrictive anti-China legislation, the Global Times found.
For years, HRIC's website has published large volumes of disinformation and allegations of "human rights abuses" targeting Xinjiang region, including the content that was plainly fabricated. The organization has also long maintained close ties with certain parts of the US government. In an early transcript of a Joint House and Senate hearing from February 2002, the Global Times found there were extensive sections detailing HRIC's "recommendations" to the US government's "Congressional-Executive Commission on China," including, but not limited to, exploiting the human rights narrative to urge the US government to adopt restrictive regulations and rules targeting "China's WTO accession obligations" and the "Beijing Olympics 2008."
US labor-rights nonprofit Verite played the role of a fabricator of "evidence." This organization was once invited by the Switzerland-based Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) to join an investigation into whether "forced labor" was being used in cotton-related industries in the Xinjiang region. The budget for the project was $88,200, including $51,950 for Verite US headquarters and $18,250 for the Shenzhen Verite, a company affiliated to the organization, the Global Times learned.
However, there was no record in the Shenzhen Verite's financial reimbursement records of any employee going to Xinjiang to conduct a field survey on this BCI project. Worse still, employees from Shenzhen Verite told the Global Times that they did not go to Xinjiang for field surveys when putting together the draft report, but relied on online materials. They even referred to a report by the infamous anti-China "scholar" Adrian Zenz on "forced labor" in Xinjiang. Clearly, Verite's "investigation" was in fact a performance serving anti-China political purposes.
The next step in the fabrication chain of false narratives about China is to turn accusations into enforceable industry standards. The Responsible Business Alliance (RBA) has likely played a pivotal role in that process.
As a global coalition of major electronics companies, the RBA's Validated Assessment Program (VAP) and Responsible Labor Initiative (RLI) are widely regarded as gold-standard benchmarks for supplier screening by many multinational corporations. Yet on Xinjiang-related issues, RBA has allegedly issued supply-chain compliance guidance grounded in a predetermined position, indirectly aligning itself with US sanctions policy and pressuring many multinational firms to sever ties with China-linked industries.

Photos: VCGIn a statement posted on its website in March 2020, for instance, the RBA cited a report released by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), an anti-China think tank. The RBA-cited report alleged that "forced labor" involving Uygur minority citizens in China "has been introduced into the supply chains of international brands across multiple industries," and said that it "has been closely following developments." This presumption of guilt has absurdly transformed a fabricated claim into a de facto compliance threshold in corporate operations.
Compliance Testing LLC took a more direct approach. In 2025, it called for Chinese laboratories to be banned from participating in US regulatory testing, arguing that the move would protect US' test labs and US engineer's jobs, the company's website showed. Its CEO, Michael Schafer, even declared on the website that "China is out."
The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently took negative measures against China, including barring devices with components from Chinese firms, which severely infringed upon the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises.
"Compliance Testing LLC assisted and supported the FCC in taking these measures, which endanger China's sovereignty, security and development interests," Xinhua reported on August 5. Compliance Testing LLC is a driving force behind the anti-China measures issued by the FCC, state broadcaster CCTV News said on August 9.
US' deepening 'China anxiety'There is no evidence showing that the seven entities operate as a unified organization, and their businesses and methods differ widely. What has connected them is not organizational affiliation but function: They occupy different points in a broader system that turns Xinjiang-related allegations into technical tests, supply-chain data, corporate compliance pressure and, eventually, government action.
Applied DNA and Stratum provide tools for tracing the origin of raw materials; Altana maps supply chains for regulators and businesses; HRIC and Verite produce and circulate reports and allegations; the RBA carries such claims into corporate compliance practices; and Compliance Testing has lobbied the US government to restrict Chinese laboratories. Their roles are distinct, but these functions can reinforce one another as allegations move from advocacy and research into commercial screening and regulatory enforcement.
Chinese economist Bai Ming told the Global Times that, viewed together, the pattern resembles what he described as a "package deal," with different actors providing mutually reinforcing elements for accusations and sanctions against China.
"The ever-lengthening US trade restriction lists actually reflect the US' deepening 'China anxiety,'" Xiang Ligang, director-general of the Zhongguancun Modern Information Consumer Application Industry Technology Alliance, told the Global Times.
Gao Lingyun, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, noted that in recent years, the US has frequently invoked the "forced labor" rhetoric to restrict and suppress Chinese enterprises and curb the country's industrial development. China's countermeasures, he said, are not indiscriminate but are precisely calibrated to respond to specific US actions, reflecting a balance between defending national interests and preserving openness to cooperation.
Xiang argued that unilateral restrictions will not strengthen the US economy but will raise costs for American companies.
"These measures are driven by industrial competition and fear of losing dominance in the coming era of embodied intelligence," he said. "But they will backfire, increase global supply-chain costs and hinder cooperation."
Gao noted that if the US government continues its discriminatory policies, China may take further action.
"A healthy China-US economic relationship requires mutual respect and equal benefit. Unilateral pressure and 'decoupling' will only raise costs on both sides and destabilize the global economy," he noted.
。
2022赛季中超联赛第二阶段赛事开赛时间由原定的7月21日延至8月5日。赛事将从本阶段,也就是第11轮开始重新恢复主客场赛制。

B | 在相关计划获得有关方面批复后,中国足协、中足联筹备组于7月6日下午召开联赛工作会议暨中超俱乐部负责人会议,向各家俱乐部通报具体方案。据了解,受客观因素暂无法在属地承办主场比赛的俱乐部,可寻求备选主场,亦可赴赛事主办方提供的第三方赛地进行主场比赛,还可以放弃主场赴对手主场参赛。此外,考虑到部分俱乐部面临的实际运营困难,赛事主办方计划为参赛各队先行支付参加主客场比赛所需要的城际交通费用。

C | 启动“恢复主客场”筹备工作 据了解,作为赛事主办方的中国足协、中足联筹备组多日前就已启动“中超恢复主客场制”的各项筹备工作。而从目前各方反映的情况看,相关方案已经获得有关部门的批复。接下来,赛事主办方将携手俱乐部及各有关方面落实具体工作细节。在确认联赛恢复主客场制后,一些现实难题摆在了各方面前。其中,首要的问题就是,在赛制调整大方向确定后,各俱乐部在承办主场赛事的问题上能否获得属地政府部门的支持。据悉,中国足协已准备了一份有关联赛拟恢复主客场制的意见征集函,计划通过俱乐部提交给地方体育管理部门、运动协会,并最终提交给各地政府相关部门审批。

D | 城际交通费用由主办方先行支付 受疫情及场地条件等各类客观因素影响,不同俱乐部“备战”主场比赛的情况有所不同,面临的难题也各有不同。因此对于部分俱乐部可能暂时无法承办主场比赛,赛事主办方做了充分的应对预案。

E | 举例来说,如某一家俱乐部暂时或者短期内无法在俱乐部属地原主场承接主场比赛,那么可寻求备选主场。如仍无法落实主场,那么俱乐部可选择赴主办方提供的第3方场地参加主场比赛,如不愿前往,俱乐部可选择放弃当轮比赛主场权利,转赴对手主场参赛。

F | 参加主客场比赛产生的费用,无疑是当下部分深受财务危机困扰的俱乐部所头疼的问题。对此,某俱乐部代表向北青报记者透露,赛事主办方已经承诺帮助各俱乐部先行支付主客场比赛所需的城际交通费用。至于抵达赛区后的食宿及其他相关费用如何落实,则有待赛事主办方进一步沟通确认。3个赛区因赛制也需相应调整 因赛制面临调整,中超联赛的总体运营工作也将面临相当大的困难。原计划承接赛会制比赛的3个赛区也需要相应调整工作内容。由于梅州市、大连市分别拥有一支中超球队,因此两城市赛区接下来仍可按部就班落实各项赛事组织或接待工作。至于海口赛区,其对中超联赛甚至中国足球的支持力度也很大,该赛区及大连赛区大概率将成为中超联赛余下赛事可供俱乐部选用的“第三方赛地”。对于余下24轮赛事的赛程周期,目前赛事主办方倾向于在年内打满全季比赛。

G | 因国家队本年度内不再安排集训,因此中超余下赛程的安排将相对比较连贯。中超联赛将在12月内结束,这意味着其赛程将与卡塔尔世界杯赛程“撞车”。聚焦 为确保比赛顺利进行 极端情况有“熔断”机制 7月6日,中国足协、中足联筹备组通过线上、线下方式召集中超各俱乐部负责人参加联赛工作会议。会上中足联筹备组组长史强对赛制调整的背景做了一番介绍,同时表示,赛事主办方将根据各俱乐部主场赛区属地政府的意见,尽可能有序、适度向现场观众开放中超赛事。对于联赛恢复主客场制后可能出现意外,史强表示:“应该说恢复主客场,符合社会期待,符合俱乐部、球员及其他各方的整体利益。目前,对比赛最主要的影响还是疫情防控工作。我们针对疫情防控工作,研究制定了一份疫情防控工作指南,设计了各种应对预案。比如说,某球队所在城市一旦出现疫情怎么办?球队本身出现疫情怎么办?将前往的客场城市出现疫情怎么办?对此类情况,首先我们要严格执行国家防疫政策,要积极在当地防疫部门指导下,做好疫情防控工作,推出各种有针对性的预案措施。为确保比赛进行顺利,各俱乐部在紧急情况下可选择备用主场。甚至,我们还会准备中立赛场等措施。对于极端情况,我们还将推出熔断机制。

H | 也就是说,赛事主办方会在什么情况下停止比赛,把比赛赛制由主客场制调整回赛会制。” 关于球迷关注的能否入场观赛问题,史强解释说:“恢复主客场制,其中一个重要因素,便是观众回到比赛现场,比赛离不开球迷。在今年中超开幕式期间,我们曾做过一些尝试。对现场观众的有序开放,我们做了评估。对于开放观众后如何采取防疫措施,我们也在当地防疫部门指导下,取得了一些经验,这些也都是为后面比赛进一步开放观众做积累。” 延伸 7月20日前中超球队需确认能否主场作战 在7月6日下午中超联赛工作会议及俱乐部老总峰会结束后,中足联筹备组竞赛工作负责人、中超联赛组委会执行副主任郭炳颜表示,鉴于部分俱乐部受疫情等因素影响可能暂不具备主场作战的条件,赛事主办方也推出了各种主场预案,并要求各俱乐部在征得地方体育管理部门、当地人民政府同意后,最晚于7月20日回复中国足协,明确能否承办主场比赛。按照计划,由中足联筹备组选派的考察团队将从7月7日开始兵分多路,赴各俱乐部备选主场赛地进行实地考察。郭炳颜强调,“从7月7日开始,将选派两三个工作组,去各个赛区主场、酒店检查。” 对于部分无法向中国足协出具其属地政府同意函的俱乐部,赛事主办方也将推出应对预案。郭炳颜透露,“我们允许俱乐部异地选择主场。但如果这样的主场参赛条件还不能满足,那么俱乐部可以去指定的赛区场地参加主场比赛或被安排到客场比赛。如果主、客两队同时无法在各自主场比赛,那么他们之间的比赛就必须在指定主场进行。

I | ” 本组文/本报记者 肖赧 统筹/王咏
。
Current article:http://w8e.chengjuecannaobianmouqueduoyu.shop/m2l/fuiyx6.html
Published on:07:14:11