More than 200 inmates escape Pakistan jail after earthquake
More than 200 prisoners escaped from a jail in Pakistan’s largest city following an earthquake in the early hours of Tuesday, police said.
Thousands of inmates broke down doors and the locks of their cells and shattered windows after they felt tremors shake the walls at Malir Jail in Karachi.
Of those who escaped the prison, police said 80 inmates had been recaptured and searches were ongoing for more than 130 still at large. One prisoner was killed in the operation and two prison officers injured.
A prison superintendent told the BBC inmates began shouting from their cells and barracks around midnight as they were terrified the building would collapse on top of them.
After the frenzy turned violent, police said they responded with warning shots, firing guns into the air.
While many returned to their cells, others stormed the main gate in panic – with 216 inmates using the opportunity to escape the prison altogether.
Police are now going door-to-door, visiting past residences to arrest those who are still on the run.
The facility in the Malir district is Sindh province’s second largest prison, and is over capacity. While it can accommodate up to 2,200 prisoners, there are at least 5,000 inmates there currently.
The minister for prisons in the province, Ali Hassan Zardari, has ordered an investigation and warned any officers at fault will be disciplined.
The prison’s superintendent told the BBC the incident is “not a security lapse, it’s all due to a natural disaster”.
He said security teams at the prison were on high alert, and responded to the incident throughout.
Families have been protesting outside the jail’s main gates, and police said relatives of other inmates are frustrated that visits have been postponed.
Why monsoon rains wreak havoc annually in India’s cities
“Who is responsible for this mess?”
The question recently echoed across India’s financial capital Mumbai as thousands of residents once again found themselves stranded, soaked and frustrated.
Heavy rains brought the city to a standstill, and this was before the monsoon had even begun in full swing. Roads turned into rivers, vehicles broke down mid-commute and low-lying neighbourhoods were waterlogged within hours.
Even a newly-built underground metro station could not withstand the heavy downpour as photos and videos of the station flooded with muddy water went viral.
The pre-monsoon deluge once again exposed the city’s fragile infrastructure and sparked widespread outrage on social media.
The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), one of India’s richest civic organisations responsible for maintaining Mumbai’s infrastructure, initially blamed the problem on rubbish clogging the drains and debris from metro construction, The Hindustan Times newspaper reported.
Following criticism, the BMC installed de-watering pumps in flood-prone areas and began manually clearing waste from drains to prevent further waterlogging. But for many residents, the action came too late.
The crisis is neither new – nor is it unique to Mumbai.
From Delhi in the north to Bengaluru in the south, India’s biggest cities flood every monsoon season. Roads collapse, drains overflow, infrastructure is overwhelmed and traffic grinds to a halt.
Experts blame rapid unplanned urbanisation, poor infrastructure and years of environmental neglect as the root causes of this problem.
“The pace of urban expansion has far exceeded the evolution of supporting infrastructure, particularly in water and drainage systems,” says Dikshu Kukreja, an architect and urban planner based in Delhi.
“Many cities rely on outdated systems designed decades ago. And in the process of unchecked expansion, natural drainage channels, wetlands and water bodies that once absorbed excess rainwater have been built over or neglected,” he adds.
Experts say there’s no one-size-fits-all solution as each city faces unique challenges and factors such as geography, population and climate must be considered when designing effective responses.
India receives 80% of its annual rainfall during the monsoon season, which usually starts from June and continues until September.
The monsoon is crucial for agriculture and the livelihoods of millions of Indian farmers. They rely on seasonal showers in parts of the country where proper irrigation channels are absent.
But experts say climate change has made erratic weather – such as unseasonal rains, flash floods and droughts linked to extreme heat – a more regular phenomenon, directly affecting millions of people.
This year the monsoon arrived a week early in parts of southern India, catching authorities unprepared.
“A depression developed over the eastern central Arabian Sea which was instrumental in pulling up the monsoon current,” says Mahesh Palawat, vice-president of meteorology and climate change at weather forecasting company Skymet.
In Delhi, the Minto bridge has become a symbol of the city’s annual monsoon chaos. Almost every year, after heavy rain, a bus or lorry gets stuck under the bridge – an image that highlights the city’s struggle with urban flooding.
This year, Delhi recorded its wettest May since 1901, with more than 185mm of rainfall, according to the Indian weather department.
Many residents reported damage to their property.
At least four people were killed and dozens more were injured in one of the two heavy storms that hit the city in May, according to media reports.
Meanwhile, in Bengaluru, more than 2,000kms (1,240 miles) from the capital, the problem looks different but its root cause is the same.
Once known for its network of lakes that helped manage excess rainwater, Bengaluru has seen many of these water bodies encroached upon. In their place now stand apartment complexes, business hubs and roads – leaving the city vulnerable to flooding.
“Bengaluru is made up of three major valleys through which water naturally flows. Most of the city’s lakes are located in these valleys,” explains Ram Prasad, a lake conservation activist.
These valleys were originally designated as no-construction zones but over the years, encroachment has taken place and later changes in the law permitted infrastructure projects to be built in the area, he says.
“When you convert lakes – which traditionally act as flood buffers – into built-up areas, the water has nowhere to go. So, what we’re seeing in Bengaluru today is the result of poor urban planning.”
Mr Prasad points out that Bengaluru, which sits atop a hill, was never meant to flood and the current situation is entirely man-made.
Violations of building norms, especially construction that narrows stormwater drains or builds directly over them, have only made things worse, he says.
Meanwhile, Mumbai faces natural challenges due to its geography. For example, many parts of Mumbai are low-lying and close to the sea, which makes them more vulnerable to flooding during heavy rains and high tides.
But experts say it’s human actions that have made things much worse: cutting down mangroves, which normally act like natural barriers against floods, and building on floodplains where water is supposed to drain.
“The breakdown is systemic – it begins with planning that often doesn’t account for future climate variabilities, gets exacerbated by poor execution and is compounded by weak enforcement of regulations,” Mr Kukerja says. “Political will is often reactive – responding to disasters rather than investing in long-term resilience.”
This isn’t just a big city problem. Smaller towns often suffer equally, if not more.
Over the weekend, at least 30 people died in India’s northeastern states after heavy rains triggered flooding and landslides. Tens of thousands have been affected, with rescue efforts under way.
So, can anything be done to prevent this?
“Yes,” says Mr Kukreja, but only if it is part of a long-term, co-ordinated strategy.
He suggests using mapping and real-time sensors to identify high-risk zones and alert communities. Predictive models can also help authorities plan better responses.
“But technology alone is not a fix, it needs to be paired with responsive governance and community involvement,” he said.
For India’s cities to withstand the rains, they need more than just de-watering pumps and quick fixes. They need forward-thinking planning, before the damage is done.
-
Published
-
832 Comments
It’s been a busy few days at Manchester United.
From agreeing to sign Matheus Cunha, speaking with Brentford’s Bryan Mbeumo, finding out Bruno Fernandes won’t be joining Saudi Arabian side Al Hilal and that Jadon Sancho will return from Chelsea, along with a £5m payment, it has been a whirlwind return from their troubled post-season tour of Asia.
So, where are they now and what is their transfer strategy moving forward?
-
The spark to reinvigorate Man Utd? How Cunha fits Amorim’s plans
-
Published2 days ago
-
-
Embarrassing defeat and bizarre parade – inside Man Utd’s troubled trip
-
Published3 days ago
-
What is Man Utd’s transfer strategy?
Fernandes took a bit of time mulling over the Al Hilal offer after United head coach Ruben Amorim said in Hong Kong on Friday he thought his captain would stay at the club.
The 30-year-old wanted to talk it through with his family as, after all, the sums being offered were truly staggering and could not just be dismissed out of hand.
At this point last week, many at United thought Fernandes would go. Now we know he won’t.
Lost amid his assertions about Fernandes, Amorim said something else that resonated.
Knowing nailing him down on individuals and specifics would be impossible, I asked Amorim if he knew what he wanted his squad to look like when pre-season training began at the start of July.
“Yes,” he said. “I have a clear idea what we want.
“As you know, we are bit limited and can’t do it all in one summer. But there is a clear picture for what we want.”
The initial approach – and as a guide it still holds – was to go for younger, hungry players, who can improve.
That is the basis on which 20-year-old Denmark international Patrick Dorgu arrived in a £25m deal from Serie A outfit Lecce in February to address the problematic left wing-back berth. It was the same with 18-year-old Arsenal central defender Ayden Heaven.
Both players made promising contributions, albeit in a struggling team.
However, some issues are so urgently in need of addressing, no time for development is available.
And, what Amorim wanted, as an absolute priority, was to reinforce his attack.
Time and again towards the end of the Premier League season, the United boss had lamented his side’s ability to make the most of the chances they were creating.
-
Man Utd captain Fernandes rejects Al-Hilal move
-
Published6 hours ago
-
-
Chelsea pass on Sancho so pay Man Utd £5m penalty
-
Published5 hours ago
-
-
Man Utd set to open talks over Mbeumo deal
-
Published7 hours ago
-
Between them, Wolves’ Cunha and Mbeumo scored 35 league goals last season. The campaign before, it was 21.
They are proven in England in a way Rasmus Hojlund and Joshua Zirkzee were not before moving to United for a combined fee of almost £110m in the summers of 2023 and 2024 respectively.
Two signings alone is a bit early to confirm a significant shift away from buying in from overseas – and the arrival of Mason Mount from Chelsea in 2023 is proof United had not completely ignored the domestic market before.
But it does take out some of the risk when you buy players who know the challenges that lie ahead.
“I think they are players who can come in and hit the ground running,” former United skipper Gary Neville told Sky Sports.
“United has become a very difficult place for new signings to operate in the last 10 years. Cunha and Mbeumo have got Premier League experience and lots of games under their belt.
“When I watch Manchester United’s wide players, they have to be able to get from box to box quickly, and they have to be able to travel with the ball and without the ball. Mbeumo and Cunha can do that, they both run forward with real intent and purpose.
“The players who are going to leave are more jinkers and play in smaller spaces.”
The great unknown is whether Amorim would play Cunha and Mbeumo – if he signs and, as yet, United have not made contact with Brentford – behind a number nine in the two ’10’ slots, or if one of them will operate as a main striker, or they will swap.
Who could leave and what are the challenges ahead?
Amorim was adamant in Hong Kong that United could work around Fernandes staying at Old Trafford from a financial point of view.
However, the situation is not straightforward.
With no European football of any sort next season, finances will be tight. Amorim has already said he can operate with a smaller squad given there are fewer matches, so sales are inevitable.
Broadly speaking, there are three categories.
Players Amorim just does not want – so the likes of Sancho, Antony, Marcus Rashford and Alejandro Garnacho.
Players who have struggled and it would make sense to sell – Hojlund and Zirkzee fit into this group, as does Casemiro.
Then, the bulk are players who have something to offer and United would be open to keeping but would let go if the right bid came in.
Yet the major issue around all of this is how long would it take to do a deal and how much would it cost?
Take Sancho for example.
It has been established Chelsea would have signed him on reduced terms, which he was not prepared to accept.
If a Premier League club that has just qualified for the Champions League are baulking at Sancho’s wages, it is fair to assume most other clubs will reach the same conclusion.
If Sancho refuses to drop his demands and Amorim wants him out, United will have to negotiate some kind of compromise.
This puts them back in the uncomfortable position of paying a player to play for a rival. It is the kind of situation minority owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe finds so irritating and wants to end.
Yet, when you take a realistic approach to Sancho, Antony and Rashford in particular, it is hard to see how that situation is avoided. The same could also be said of many United players who remained at the club last season.
The matches may have finished but for United technical director Jason Wilcox and chief negotiator Matt Hargreaves, the hard work is just beginning.
It is how well they do, getting players in and out, that will determine how much progress Amorim can be expected to make.
Related topics
- Manchester United
- Football
-
Latest Manchester United news, analysis and fan views
-
Get Man Utd news notifications
-
Published26 July 2022
-
UK threatens to sue Abramovich over Chelsea sale
The UK government has threatened to sue former Chelsea Football Club owner Roman Abramovich to make sure the money from the club’s sale goes to Ukraine.
The £2.5bn in proceeds have been frozen in a UK bank account since the sale, with Mr Abramovich sanctioned after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
The UK government wants the money to be for Ukrainian humanitarian aid, but Mr Abramovich has said he wants it to go to “all victims of the war in Ukraine”.
In a joint statement, Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Foreign Secretary David Lammy said: “While the door for negotiations will remain open, we are fully prepared to pursue this through the courts if required.”
They said they wanted “to ensure people suffering in Ukraine can benefit from these proceeds as soon as possible”.
They added: “The government is determined to see the proceeds from the sale of Chelsea Football Club reach humanitarian causes in Ukraine, following Russia’s illegal full-scale invasion.
“We are deeply frustrated that it has not been possible to reach agreement on this with Mr Abramovich so far”.
The delay in releasing the funds centres on a disagreement between the UK government and his lawyers.
Mr Abramovich – a Russian billionaire who made his fortune in oil and gas – was granted a special licence to sell Chelsea following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, providing he could prove he would not benefit from the sale.
He is alleged to have strong ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, something he has denied.
He cannot access the £2.5bn sale proceeds under UK sanctions but the money still legally belongs to him.
When he announced his decision to sell the club, he said proceeds from the sale would be donated via a foundation “for the benefit of all victims of the war in Ukraine”, which would include those in Russia.
The UK government has pushed back and argued that the funds should only be spent on humanitarian efforts inside Ukraine.
A House of Lords committee said last year said it was “incomprehensible” that Mr Abramovich’s promise to use the funds to support Ukraine remained unfulfilled, and that the assets remained frozen.
“This impasse reflects badly on both Mr Abramovich and the government, which ought to have pushed for a more binding commitment,” the report said.
Get our flagship newsletter with all the headlines you need to start the day. Sign up here.
At least 27 Palestinians killed by Israeli fire near aid centre, Gaza authorities say
At least 27 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire as they attempted to collect aid near a distribution site in Gaza, local officials say.
Civilians were fired upon by tanks, quadcopter drones, and helicopters near the al-Alam roundabout, about 1km (0.6 miles) from the aid site, a spokesman for Gaza’s Hamas-run Civil Defence agency, Mahmoud Basal, said.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said its troops fired shots after identifying suspects who moved towards them “deviating from the designated access routes”.
Israel previously denied shooting Palestinians in a similar incident on Sunday which the Hamas-run health ministry said killed 31 people and injured nearly 200.
Its denial was in direct contradiction to what dozens of civilian witnesses, NGOs, and health officials said.
Following Tuesday morning’s incident, the director of Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, Atef Al-Hout, described 24 dead and 37 wounded arriving with gunshot injuries, saying Israeli forces had opened fire on “crowds of civilians waiting for aid in western Rafah.”
A foreign medic working in the area told the BBC it had been “total carnage” since 03:48 (01:48 BST) and that they had been overwhelmed with casualties.
In a video shared by a local journalist, witness Nadeem Zarab said he and his uncle began walking to the aid centre at 02:00 (00:00 BST). When they reached the roundabout “the shooting started, from the helicopter, the tanks, and the sniper soldiers”, he added.
“Gunfire was coming from all directions. We started using the wall as cover, shielding ourselves close to it.”
“People, as they were running, began collapsing in front of us. My uncle couldn’t bear it, he saw someone get shot right in front of him, so he tried to run and catch him. But I told him, ‘Come back, come back! Where are you going?'”
Another eyewitness, who did not want to be named, told BBC Arabic: “I am displaced from Khan Younis and responsible for a family of five.
“The Israeli Army informed us that we would be receiving aid through the US committee.
“When we arrived, the checkpoint opened at six o’clock. Suddenly, gunfire erupted from all directions.
They added: “Hundreds were wounded or killed, the scene was horrific. After we moved just two hundred metres, machine guns began firing at us.”
A third eyewitness, who also did not want to be named, said they had seen “intense shelling from aircraft and tanks” after arriving at the aid centre at around 05:00 (03:00 BST).
It is unclear from witness statements whether people were killed in one incident or several incidents throughout the night.
In a statement, the IDF said its troops were “not preventing the arrival of Gazan civilians to the humanitarian aid distribution sites.”
“The warning shots were fired approximately half a kilometre away from the humanitarian aid distribution site toward several suspects who advanced toward the troops in such a way that posed a threat to them,” it added.
Israel does not allow international news organisations, including the BBC, into Gaza, making verifying what is happening in the territory difficult.
Aid distribution has recently been taken over by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an Israel- and US-backed group which aims to replace UN agencies and other organisations.
The GHF system requires civilians to go to distribution centres situated in areas of Israeli military control, and staffed by armed American security contractors.
Palestinians are forced to walk long distances to collect the aid – and then carry boxes of it weighing up to 20kg (44lbs) back to their homes or shelters.
The previous UN system delivered aid directly into communities – at 400 sites across Gaza. It also distributed the aid based on a registry of the population, guaranteeing everyone food.
The new system appears to operate on a first come, first serve basis, meaning Palestinians are gathering through the night to secure a place at the front of the line – before a race to collect supplies when the aid site opens hours later.
The GHF has been heavily criticised by UN bodies and the wider international community for “weaponising” aid and creating a system that goes against humanitarian principles.
Responding to Tuesday’s incident, the group said: “While the aid distribution was conducted safely and without incident at our site today, we understand that IDF is investigating whether a number of civilians were injured after moving beyond the designated safe corridor and into a closed military zone. This was an area well beyond our secure distribution site and operations area.”
UN human rights chief Volker Türk said: “For a third day running, people were killed around an aid distribution site”.
“Palestinians have been presented the grimmest of choices: die from starvation or risk being killed while trying to access the meagre food that is being made available through Israel’s militarized humanitarian assistance mechanism.”
During Sunday’s incident, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said its hospital in Rafah received “a mass casualty influx” with 21 “declared dead upon arrival”.
The IDF said its findings from an initial inquiry showed that its forces had not fired at people while they were near or within the aid centre.
The GHF also denied the claims of injuries and casualties at its site and said they had been spread by Hamas.
Responding to Sunday’s incident, UN Secretary General António Guterres said in a statement: “I am appalled by the reports of Palestinians killed and injured while seeking aid in Gaza yesterday
“I call for an immediate and independent investigation into these events and for perpetrators to be held accountable.”
Israel launched a military campaign in Gaza in response to Hamas’ cross-border attack on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.
At least 54,470 people have been killed in Gaza since then, including 4,201 since Israel resumed its offensive on 18 March, according to the territory’s health ministry.
More than 200 inmates escape Pakistan jail after earthquake
More than 200 prisoners escaped from a jail in Pakistan’s largest city following an earthquake in the early hours of Tuesday, police said.
Thousands of inmates broke down doors and the locks of their cells and shattered windows after they felt tremors shake the walls at Malir Jail in Karachi.
Of those who escaped the prison, police said 80 inmates had been recaptured and searches were ongoing for more than 130 still at large. One prisoner was killed in the operation and two prison officers injured.
A prison superintendent told the BBC inmates began shouting from their cells and barracks around midnight as they were terrified the building would collapse on top of them.
After the frenzy turned violent, police said they responded with warning shots, firing guns into the air.
While many returned to their cells, others stormed the main gate in panic – with 216 inmates using the opportunity to escape the prison altogether.
Police are now going door-to-door, visiting past residences to arrest those who are still on the run.
The facility in the Malir district is Sindh province’s second largest prison, and is over capacity. While it can accommodate up to 2,200 prisoners, there are at least 5,000 inmates there currently.
The minister for prisons in the province, Ali Hassan Zardari, has ordered an investigation and warned any officers at fault will be disciplined.
The prison’s superintendent told the BBC the incident is “not a security lapse, it’s all due to a natural disaster”.
He said security teams at the prison were on high alert, and responded to the incident throughout.
Families have been protesting outside the jail’s main gates, and police said relatives of other inmates are frustrated that visits have been postponed.
-
Published
French Open 2025
Dates: 25 May-8 June Venue: Roland Garros
Coverage: Live radio commentaries across 5 Live Sport and BBC Sounds, plus live text commentaries on the BBC Sport website and app
World number one Aryna Sabalenka will face three-time defending champion Iga Swiatek in a blockbuster French Open semi-final between two title contenders.
Sabalenka edged a tight quarter-final against China’s Olympic champion Zheng Qinwen 7-6 (7-3) 6-3 on a blustery Court Phillippe Chatrier on Tuesday.
Poland’s Swiatek then came through 6-1 7-5 against Elina Svitolina to set up a fascinating last-four encounter.
Belarusian Sabalenka replaced fifth-ranked Swiatek as world number one in October last year.
The pair have met 12 times, with Swiatek leading the head-to-head 8-4 – but they have not met at a major since the 2022 US Open semi-finals.
Swiatek has won four of the past five Roland Garros titles, while Sabalenka is bidding for her first Paris trophy.
“Aryna has a game for every surface, so I need to focus on myself, do the work, be brave in my shots and just go for it,” Swiatek said.
“It is going to be a tough match, but I’m happy for the challenge.”
-
What Draper must do to bridge Sinner & Alcaraz gap
-
Published4 hours ago
-
-
British pair Skupski & Salisbury reach semi-finals
-
Published1 hour ago
-
-
GB’s Hewett sets up second-round meeting with Reid
-
Published21 minutes ago
-
‘A true battle’ – Sabalenka advances
For all that Swiatek has dominated the French Open in recent years, Sabalenka is the player to beat this time around.
She has won three titles this year – including one on the Madrid clay – and reached two further finals, as well as strengthening her grip on the top ranking.
But her three-set defeat by Madison Keys in the Australian Open final stung – and she looks on a mission to avenge that loss.
Zheng had cause for optimism. She snapped a six-match losing streak to Sabalenka on the Rome clay in May and ultimately started the better of the two.
However, the mistakes were the difference, with Zheng committing 31 unforced errors to Sabalenka’s 18 and winning just 39% of points behind her second serve.
Sabalenka was visibly unimpressed with the wind, her game and finding herself down an early break in the first set, but she generated enough rhythm to break back for 4-4.
The top seed dominated the eventual tie-break, taking it on a long whipped forehand from Zheng, and repeatedly battled back from 0-30 down in her service games to keep the second set close.
The pair exchanged breaks before Zheng played her worst game of the match to hurry Sabalenka along to a 4-3 lead.
Sabalenka’s quality then shone through as, with Zheng 40-0 up and serving to stay in the match, she hammered winners past her opponent to seal the match as quickly as possible.
“That was a true battle – I have no idea how I was able to get back into that first set,” Sabalenka said.
“I was ready to leave everything I have on court to win.”
‘Proactive’ Swiatek sees off Svitolina
Swiatek’s struggles in the build-up to the French Open were well-documented, but there was always a chance her game would click into place in Paris.
Victory over Elena Rybakina in the fourth round, with Swiatek battling back from a set and a break down, will have been a welcome confidence boost.
Although the first set was closer than the scoreline suggested, once Swiatek broke there was an inevitability about it.
One of the best frontrunners, Swiatek saved break points in her first service game, broke and then reeled off five games in a row to deflate Svitolina.
Svitolina, who has added more attack to her game since her return from maternity leave, took a 3-1 lead with some powerful hitting early in the second set.
But Swiatek broke back in the next game and, just as Sabalenka did, capitalised on a wobbly Svitolina service game to regain the break lead and ultimately serve out the match.
“I wanted to be proactive and really lead in the game, so I’m happy I did that,” Swiatek added.
Related topics
- Tennis
-
Published
-
1609 Comments
The Spanish Grand Prix was won by McLaren’s Oscar Piastri, who took his fifth victory of the season from team-mate Lando Norris.
But the story of the race was the controversial series of events surrounding Max Verstappen in the closing laps.
Verstappen appeared to drive deliberately into George Russell’s Mercedes, a few laps after he left the track while battling for position with the Briton.
Following the race in Barcelona, BBC Sport F1 correspondent Andrew Benson answers your latest questions.
Should Max Verstappen have been given a bigger penalty for his actions in the Spanish Grand Prix? Deliberately ramming another driver feels like the sort of action which would have led to a ban for the following race in times past – John
Everyone will have their own opinion on this.
It was clear after the race that many people in Formula 1 did not think Verstappen had behaved correctly in his collision with George Russell’s Mercedes at Turn Five, and he has now admitted that it was “not right and shouldn’t have happened”.
Asked whether Verstappen should have had the black flag – which disqualifies a driver from the race – Russell said: “If it was truly deliberate, then absolutely. Because you cannot deliberately crash into another driver.
“We’re putting our lives on the line. We’re fortunate the cars are as safe as they are these days. But we shouldn’t take it for granted.”
But penalties are at the stewards’ discretion and in this case they decided to give Verstappen a 10-second penalty, a relatively severe sanction, and three points on his licence.
Why was this adjudged to be a less serious offence than Russell cutting the chicane to pass a Williams in Monaco and not giving the place back, for which he got a drive-through penalty?
The stewards’ verdict did not address that, and an FIA spokesperson said they could not speak for the stewards as they are independent.
Those three points do put Verstappen one away from a ban. Which means any transgression in the next two races in Canada and Austria, and Verstappen will be forced to miss the next grand prix.
After that, some points come off his licence because they go beyond their year’s expiry date.
-
Verstappen ‘let himself down’ with Russell collision
-
Published1 day ago
-
-
What are penalty points in F1 and how do they work?
-
Published1 day ago
-
Given the stewards were not going to take any further action against Max Verstappen for leaving the track and gaining an advantage, do you think Red Bull pulled the trigger too early in ordering him to give the position back to George Russell? Danny
With the benefit of hindsight, this was one of two mistakes Red Bull made in the Spanish Grand Prix.
After the stewards launched an inquiry into the Verstappen-Russell incident in Turn One, Red Bull decided to order Verstappen to give the place back.
Team principal Christian Horner said the decision was based “on recent experience and looking at recent incidents”.
Verstappen had kept fourth position by taking to the escape road after the two had made light contact while Russell tried a passing move. He believed he was justified in keeping the place because he felt the Mercedes driver had barged him off the track.
Horner said Red Bull had contacted FIA race control and received nothing back and that, as it had gone to the stewards, “it looked for all intents and purposes that it was going to be a penalty”.
Horner added: “The argument is, was George under control at that point in time? Would he have made the corner? We’ve seen so many occasions this year where penalties have been given.
“You’re expecting to get a penalty, so that’s why it was, ‘OK, do you know what? We’re going to have to give this place up.'”
The stewards’ verdict was published some time after the race. It said that Russell had “momentarily lost control of the car and collided” with Verstappen, who “did not deliberately leave the track”. As a result, it said, they took no further action.
In other words, in their view, Verstappen could have justifiably kept the place.
There are two parts of the racing guidelines in play here. To be entitled to be given space – ie, to have been judged to have won the corner – the driver overtaking on the inside has to have his front axle “at least alongside the mirror of the other car prior to and at the apex”.
Russell seems to have complied with this.
But the car must also “be driven in a fully controlled manner particularly from entry to apex”.
This, the stewards decided, Russell had not. And that was also Verstappen’s opinion.
Horner said: “With hindsight, was it a mistake? Yeah, but I think that’s where it would be nice, as the referee, as a race director, to either say, ‘Play on,’ or ‘you need to give it back.’ It’s very hard for the team, subjectively, to try and make that call, because you’re going on historical precedents.”
The second decision Red Bull got wrong, Horner admitted, was the decision to pit Verstappen for fresh hard tyres under the safety car, one that Verstappen immediately questioned vociferously once he was back on track.
Horner acknowledged they should have left him out on his soft tyres. “He would have got passed by the two McLarens. Would he have got passed by (Charles) Leclerc? But you can only go with the information you have to hand.”
Could the cycling accident injury, a second angry outburst and very poor performances signal the beginning of the end for Lance Stroll at Aston Martin? – Peter
There are a lot of unanswered questions about this situation, but one that has been answered is whether Lance Stroll lost his temper in the Aston Martin garage after qualifying on Saturday.
On Sunday morning, this writer and another journalist asked an Aston Martin spokesperson whether claims that Stroll had banged equipment about, sworn at team members, and stormed out of the garage were true.
The spokesperson did not deny the story. They said: “Lance was upset.”
Later that evening, an Aston Martin source contacted BBC Sport to deny that anything was broken or that Stroll swore at colleagues. But not the central truth of the story.
This came to light after Aston Martin announced on Saturday evening that Stroll had withdrawn from the race because of pain in his hand and wrist, which they said his medical consultant believed was related to the operation he had after suffering two broken wrists in a cycling accident before the 2023 season.
There are a couple of ways of looking at this.
On the one hand, for Stroll to be so annoyed, apparently about being knocked out in Q2 and being 0.535secs slower than team-mate Fernando Alonso, suggests he is very invested in his attempt to be successful in F1.
Stroll’s previous outburst after qualifying came in a similar situation, when he had been over a second slower than Alonso in Qatar in 2023.
But it is very unusual for an F1 driver to deliberately skip a race for an injury or pain of this kind.
Many drivers race with injuries, and Stroll himself raced with two fractures at the start of 2023, after the operation that the team say his medical consultant believes is at the root of his current predicament.
As to whether this is the beginning of the end for Stroll, only he knows.
He has a seat at the team as long as he wants. His father Lawrence owns it, and he essentially bought it so Lance could have a drive in F1, with the aim of becoming world champion.
Stroll is far from the most communicative or amenable of F1 drivers with the media. But, whenever he is asked, he always says he is committed to F1 and the team.
Is there any evidence that McLaren have made changes to deal with how Lando Norris was struggling to get to grips with the car in qualifying. Is this the biggest difference between last year, where Norris was clearly the quicker McLaren driver, and this year where Oscar Piastri has had a clear edge? – Tom
Norris has admitted in the first part of this season that an aspect of the behaviour of the McLaren car has been affecting his qualifying form, particularly what team boss Andrea Stella says is a “numb” feeling from the front axle.
To resolve this issue, McLaren have been working with Norris on his driving, and have said that upgrades will be introduced to the car to help the issue.
Norris felt that he made a breakthrough with this in Monaco, where he took pole position. After he qualified second to team-mate Oscar Piastri in Spain, he was asked whether he still felt he had made that progress.
Norris replied: “The speed was easily there today. And sometimes you just don’t put the laps in. Today was good.
“I was a little bit behind at the start of qualifying and I caught up nicely. I know where I lost that time on the final lap. It was just trying a little bit too much and just not being quite tidy enough – especially around a lap like Barcelona.
“One little oversteer in Turn One, Turn Two, you kind of already know it’s going to be a tricky rest of the lap. So, it’s still good. I still feel fine. I’m happy with second, especially in Barcelona – it’s not the end of the world. So, a positive weekend.”
As for the dynamic between the two drivers, well, that’s still playing out. Let’s see how the next few races pan out.
Why did Ferrari leave Lewis Hamilton out so long before his second pit stop? He was two seconds in front of George Russell, who had made his second stop and afterwards he was 10 seconds behind. What is going on with that pit wall? – Mike
This topic was not covered in Ferrari team principal Frederic Vasseur’s post-race briefing. But bear in mind that running long is a standard tactic in Spain, to give the driver a tyre offset against a rival.
Russell was only two seconds behind Hamilton when Mercedes pitted him on lap 41, well within undercut range. So it would make sense for Ferrari to leave Hamilton out for exactly this reason.
In any case, this is not the biggest issue surrounding Hamilton after the Spanish Grand Prix.
The seven-time champion was downcast after the race. He mumbled through his media briefing, giving very short answers, if he answered questions at all, before excusing himself after a couple of minutes.
He said: “I have no idea why it was so bad”, and said it was the “worst race I’ve experienced, balance-wise.” There were “zero” positives, he said.
Hamilton’s concern, presumably, was his lack of pace.
He started the race two places ahead of team-mate Charles Leclerc. It was an encouraging qualifying performance by Hamilton, even if the context was that Leclerc’s session had gone slightly awry as he tried to save two fresh sets of medium tyres for the race.
Leclerc passed Mercedes’ Kimi Antonelli immediately and trailed close behind Hamilton until lap 10, when Ferrari ordered Hamilton to let him by.
In the subsequent five laps before his pit stop, Hamilton lost just under four seconds to his team-mate.
Leclerc stopped for the first time a lap later than Hamilton. By the time the Monegasque stopped again on lap 40, Hamilton was 10 seconds adrift.
That’s hardly a disaster, but nor is it what Hamilton expects of himself.
In the final part of the race, Vasseur said, Hamilton had a problem on his car, the identity of which he did not specify.
“He did 70% of the race in front of Russell,” Vasseur said. “I’m not sure that Russell said that the race was a disaster. Then we had an issue on the car, the last stint (after) the safety car. The result is not good, but he did 45 laps in front of Russell.”
Get in touch
Send us your question for F1 correspondent Andrew Benson
Related topics
- Formula 1
-
Spanish Grand Prix Review
-
Published
-
849 Comments
It’s been a busy few days at Manchester United.
From agreeing to sign Matheus Cunha, speaking with Brentford’s Bryan Mbeumo, finding out Bruno Fernandes won’t be joining Saudi Arabian side Al Hilal and that Jadon Sancho will return from Chelsea, along with a £5m payment, it has been a whirlwind return from their troubled post-season tour of Asia.
So, where are they now and what is their transfer strategy moving forward?
-
The spark to reinvigorate Man Utd? How Cunha fits Amorim’s plans
-
Published2 days ago
-
-
Embarrassing defeat and bizarre parade – inside Man Utd’s troubled trip
-
Published3 days ago
-
What is Man Utd’s transfer strategy?
Fernandes took a bit of time mulling over the Al Hilal offer after United head coach Ruben Amorim said in Hong Kong on Friday he thought his captain would stay at the club.
The 30-year-old wanted to talk it through with his family as, after all, the sums being offered were truly staggering and could not just be dismissed out of hand.
At this point last week, many at United thought Fernandes would go. Now we know he won’t.
Lost amid his assertions about Fernandes, Amorim said something else that resonated.
Knowing nailing him down on individuals and specifics would be impossible, I asked Amorim if he knew what he wanted his squad to look like when pre-season training began at the start of July.
“Yes,” he said. “I have a clear idea what we want.
“As you know, we are bit limited and can’t do it all in one summer. But there is a clear picture for what we want.”
The initial approach – and as a guide it still holds – was to go for younger, hungry players, who can improve.
That is the basis on which 20-year-old Denmark international Patrick Dorgu arrived in a £25m deal from Serie A outfit Lecce in February to address the problematic left wing-back berth. It was the same with 18-year-old Arsenal central defender Ayden Heaven.
Both players made promising contributions, albeit in a struggling team.
However, some issues are so urgently in need of addressing, no time for development is available.
And, what Amorim wanted, as an absolute priority, was to reinforce his attack.
Time and again towards the end of the Premier League season, the United boss had lamented his side’s ability to make the most of the chances they were creating.
-
Man Utd captain Fernandes rejects Al-Hilal move
-
Published6 hours ago
-
-
Chelsea pass on Sancho so pay Man Utd £5m penalty
-
Published5 hours ago
-
-
Man Utd set to open talks over Mbeumo deal
-
Published7 hours ago
-
Between them, Wolves’ Cunha and Mbeumo scored 35 league goals last season. The campaign before, it was 21.
They are proven in England in a way Rasmus Hojlund and Joshua Zirkzee were not before moving to United for a combined fee of almost £110m in the summers of 2023 and 2024 respectively.
Two signings alone is a bit early to confirm a significant shift away from buying in from overseas – and the arrival of Mason Mount from Chelsea in 2023 is proof United had not completely ignored the domestic market before.
But it does take out some of the risk when you buy players who know the challenges that lie ahead.
“I think they are players who can come in and hit the ground running,” former United skipper Gary Neville told Sky Sports.
“United has become a very difficult place for new signings to operate in the last 10 years. Cunha and Mbeumo have got Premier League experience and lots of games under their belt.
“When I watch Manchester United’s wide players, they have to be able to get from box to box quickly, and they have to be able to travel with the ball and without the ball. Mbeumo and Cunha can do that, they both run forward with real intent and purpose.
“The players who are going to leave are more jinkers and play in smaller spaces.”
The great unknown is whether Amorim would play Cunha and Mbeumo – if he signs and, as yet, United have not made contact with Brentford – behind a number nine in the two ’10’ slots, or if one of them will operate as a main striker, or they will swap.
Who could leave and what are the challenges ahead?
Amorim was adamant in Hong Kong that United could work around Fernandes staying at Old Trafford from a financial point of view.
However, the situation is not straightforward.
With no European football of any sort next season, finances will be tight. Amorim has already said he can operate with a smaller squad given there are fewer matches, so sales are inevitable.
Broadly speaking, there are three categories.
Players Amorim just does not want – so the likes of Sancho, Antony, Marcus Rashford and Alejandro Garnacho.
Players who have struggled and it would make sense to sell – Hojlund and Zirkzee fit into this group, as does Casemiro.
Then, the bulk are players who have something to offer and United would be open to keeping but would let go if the right bid came in.
Yet the major issue around all of this is how long would it take to do a deal and how much would it cost?
Take Sancho for example.
It has been established Chelsea would have signed him on reduced terms, which he was not prepared to accept.
If a Premier League club that has just qualified for the Champions League are baulking at Sancho’s wages, it is fair to assume most other clubs will reach the same conclusion.
If Sancho refuses to drop his demands and Amorim wants him out, United will have to negotiate some kind of compromise.
This puts them back in the uncomfortable position of paying a player to play for a rival. It is the kind of situation minority owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe finds so irritating and wants to end.
Yet, when you take a realistic approach to Sancho, Antony and Rashford in particular, it is hard to see how that situation is avoided. The same could also be said of many United players who remained at the club last season.
The matches may have finished but for United technical director Jason Wilcox and chief negotiator Matt Hargreaves, the hard work is just beginning.
It is how well they do, getting players in and out, that will determine how much progress Amorim can be expected to make.
Related topics
- Manchester United
- Football
-
Latest Manchester United news, analysis and fan views
-
Get Man Utd news notifications
-
Published26 July 2022
-
-
Published
-
92 Comments
Brentford have signed goalkeeper Caoimhin Kelleher from Liverpool to replace Netherlands stopper Mark Flekken, who has left the Bees to join Bayer Leverkusen.
The move for Republic of Ireland international Kelleher is for an initial £12.5m, which could rise to £18m with add-ons, and Flekken has been sold for a fee in the region of £8m.
Kelleher has signed a five-year contract with Brentford, who have the option to extend the deal by a further 12 months.
Liverpool have sold the 26-year-old with Valencia keeper Giorgi Mamardashvili joining them in July to compete for the number one shirt with established first choice Alisson Becker.
“I don’t think it was very difficult for me to leave [Liverpool],” said Kelleher. “I felt for my own career that the time was right for me to go, to be a number one and to play every week.
“I heard of some interest a number of weeks ago. Once I knew Brentford was in for me, it was definitely one I was really excited about and wanted to do as quickly as possible.”
-
Kelleher’s Brentford move ‘will benefit’ Republic of Ireland
-
Published36 minutes ago
-
-
Is Kelleher to Brentford the bargain of the summer? Transfer window Q&A
-
Published1 day ago
-
-
Inter Milan keen on Hojlund loan move – Tuesday’s gossip
-
Published20 hours ago
-
Kelleher played in 25 Premier League games for Liverpool since making his debut five years ago.
He also made more than 40 cup appearances for the Reds and won two Premier League titles, the Champions League, FA Cup, two League Cups and a Uefa Super Cup in his time at Anfield.
“We have scouted him in the past and were aware that he had a year to go on his contract with Liverpool this summer,” said Brentford director of football Phil Giles.
“When Mark Flekken had the opportunity to move to Bayer Leverkusen, we immediately thought about Caoimhin as his replacement.
“As well as being a very good goalkeeper, I’ve rarely met a player for whom everybody has such positive words to say about his personality and character. I’m therefore confident he’ll be an excellent addition to the squad.”
Flekken, who has signed a three-year deal with Leverkusen, had been at Brentford since joining from Freiburg in May 2023.
The 31-year-old made 77 appearances for the west London club and helped them finish 10th in the Premier League last season.
“Mark has proven to be a seamless replacement for David Raya, who set an extremely high standard during his years with us,” added Giles.
“We were expecting Mark to be our goalkeeper for many more years, however when Bayer Leverkusen made it known that they wanted to do this transfer, and Mark made it clear that he was interested in moving closer to home and with a possibility of Champions League football, we turned our attention towards how all parties could make this happen.
“Mark has done a great job for us and leaves with our thanks and support.”
Leverkusen recently appointed former Ajax and Manchester United boss Erik ten Hag as their new manager following the departure of Xabi Alonso to Real Madrid.
“Mark Flekken possesses a wide range of skills that a goalkeeper in modern top-flight football must possess,” said Leverkusen sporting director Simon Rolfes.
“Mark exudes an impressive physical presence; from a footballing perspective, he has certainly been one of the best goalkeepers in the Premier League over the past two years.”
Related topics
- Brentford
- Premier League
- Football
-
Latest Brentford news, analysis and fan views
-
Get Brentford news sent straight to your phone
-
Published26 July 2022
-
-
Published
Chelsea have opted not to sign winger Jadon Sancho on a permanent basis and will instead pay a £5m penalty to send the player back to Manchester United.
However the Blues have expressed their interest to AC Milan in signing France goalkeeper Mike Maignan.
Sancho moved to Stamford Bridge on loan last summer after his relationship with former United manager Erik ten Hag broke down.
United, who signed Sancho for £73m from Borussia Dortmund in 2021, are happy for the 25-year-old to leave.
Chelsea did not pay a loan fee for the player and covered just half of his reported £300,000-a-week wages.
The Blues had agreed an obligation to buy Sancho for a fee of about 25m if they finished higher than 14th in the Premier League, which they did – or pay to get out of the deal.
-
What went wrong for Sancho at Man Utd?
-
Published11 January 2024
-
However, the club and the player’s representatives have not been able to agree on a contract for Sancho, who would have had to take a pay cut from his deal at United.
The England forward has a year remaining on his United contract, and the club still owe £17m to Dortmund.
Sancho scored in the 4-1 win over Real Betis on Wednesday to help Chelsea win the Conference League – their first trophy since February 2022 – and ended the season with five goals and 10 assists in 42 games.
Although he is under contract until 30 June at Chelsea, he is unlikely to play for them in this month’s Club World Cup in the United States.
Maignan emerges as goalkeeper target
Chelsea have learned that doing a deal for Maignan is a possibility, because the goalkeeper would be interested in a move to Stamford Bridge.
The 29-year-old has been a regular for Milan since joining them on a five-year contract from Lille in 2021.
He has been first choice for France since Hugo Lloris retired from international football in January 2023.
Chelsea have struggled to find a long-term option in goal since buying Kepa Arrizabalaga in 2018 for £71m, which remains the world-record fee for a goalkeeper.
Two years later they brought in Edouard Mendy, who left for Al-Ahli in 2023, while Kepa has spent the past two seasons on loan at Real Madrid and then Bournemouth.
In the past two years the Blues have also signed Robert Sanchez, Djordje Petrovic and Filip Jorgensen but the club appears unconvinced by all three.
Petrovic spent last term on loan at Strasbourg while Sanchez and Jorgensen both had spells in the Chelsea team.
Related topics
- Manchester United
- Chelsea
- Premier League
- Football
-
Latest Chelsea news, analysis and fan views
-
Get Chelsea news sent straight to your phone
-
Published26 July 2022
-