LeBron James to join 76ers for record-extending 24th NBA season

BECKENHAM: England Test captain Joe Root has removed the midnight curfew previously imposed on the team, signalling a shift towards greater personal responsibility ahead of the three-match Test series against Pakistan. Root, speaking to Sky Sports, said he did not believe strict curfews were necessary and instead wanted England players to behave like adults and take responsibility for their actions both on and off the field. “There’s not going to be a curfew. I don’t think this needs to be a big deal, to be honest,” Root said. The experienced batter explained that players needed the freedom to make sensible decisions without constant supervision. In his view, responsibility away from the cricket field should go hand in hand with the standards expected from players representing England. Root said the team would focus on managing itself effectively, with players expected to “self-police” and look after one another. He also stressed that everyone in the squad understood the responsibilities that come with playing international cricket. The decision marks a notable change from the approach taken under former captain Ben Stokes, when a midnight curfew was introduced as part of the team’s discipline and culture. For Root, however, the priority is creating a strong environment rather than enforcing rigid rules. He said England should be remembered for their performances on the field rather than stories about incidents away from cricket. The captain also acknowledged that players should be able to celebrate victories, enjoy themselves and have a drink when appropriate, provided they understand their responsibilities. “Let’s be adults. Look after yourselves, look after each other,” Root said, emphasising the importance of a healthy team culture. England are now preparing for a challenging Test series against Pakistan, with Root and head coach Stephen Fleming expected to establish clear standards for the squad. The message from Root is straightforward: England’s players will have more freedom, but with that freedom comes accountability. The captain hopes the approach will strengthen team unity while keeping attention firmly on cricket.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino is facing renewed criticism after three major football confederations jointly challenged his leadership and decision-making. UEFA, CONCACAF and the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) issued a strongly worded letter on Monday. They stressed that football is a collective institution and should not be controlled by any single individual. The latest criticism follows Infantino’s controversial proposal to allow private investment in FIFA competitions, including the World Cup. The plan was withdrawn only days after it was announced following strong opposition from several football bodies. The three confederations had previously criticised the proposal. Their latest statement indicates that tensions with FIFA’s leadership have not eased despite the withdrawal of the plan. The organisations argued that leadership in football should be based on responsibility, transparency and collective decision-making. They accused FIFA’s leadership of failing to meet those standards. The dispute could become particularly significant ahead of next year’s FIFA presidential election. Infantino is expected to seek a fourth and final term in office. The election is scheduled to take place in Rabat next March, while candidates must declare their intentions by November 18. CONCACAF President Victor Montagliani is considered a potential challenger to Infantino. Infantino had previously appeared likely to face little opposition after FIFA oversaw a successful 2026 World Cup in the United States, Mexico and Canada. However, the private investment controversy has changed the political landscape within world football. UEFA played a major role in forcing the proposal off the table. European football officials had warned that they could consider boycotting World Cups if the investment plan went ahead. Such a move could have seriously affected the tournament because it could have involved major football nations, including Spain, France and England. The three confederations said FIFA’s own explanation of the controversy had focused too heavily on communication problems. They argued that the issue was more serious and reflected what they described as a failure of judgment. They also questioned an emergency meeting in Morocco where senior FIFA officials expressed support for Infantino. According to the confederations, the meeting did not adequately address their concerns because only selected members of FIFA’s management leadership were involved. They argued that FIFA’s leadership should engage directly with its wider institutional structure and staff. Infantino still retains support in several parts of the football world. The Confederation of African Football has backed him, while South American football’s governing body CONMEBOL remains broadly supportive. Support for him also exists within CONCACAF and the AFC, although the confederations do not vote as unified blocs in the FIFA presidential election. The dispute comes after Infantino spent a decade at the helm of FIFA and oversaw major changes to the World Cup and the organisation’s distribution of financial resources. The three confederations acknowledged that football had experienced significant growth during the past decade. However, they stressed that these developments were achieved through cooperation between FIFA, continental confederations, national associations and thousands of people involved in the sport.