When the Saudi national team takes to the pitch at the 2026 World Cup, they will carry a weighty legacy of both glory and anticipation.

In the same country that witnessed its greatest World Cup moments more than three decades ago, the Green Falcons return to reclaim a story that has remained unfinished since the summer of 1994. In 1994, Saudi entered the tournament for the first time and emerged having put their name on the map of world football.

Since that extraordinary American summer, generations have come and gone, and teams and managers have changed, but that achievement remains a solitary entry in the annals of Saudi football.

Today, as the World Cup returns to the US, the same question returns with it: will America once again be Saudi Arabia’s gateway to the knockout stages?

Saudi: The newcomers who became a phenomenon

No one expected much from a team making its World Cup debut. However, the Saudi Arabia side at the 1994 World Cup refused to be just another number in the tournament.

In a group featuring the Netherlands, Belgium and Morocco, the Green Falcons managed to write one of the most inspiring stories in the history of Arab and Asian participation. The team secured a place in the Round of  16 with two historic victories, most notably their famous win over Belgium.

Thanks to a goal by Saeed Al-Owairan, he became an enduring icon in World Cup history.

The achievement was not limited to the results alone but also to the character the team displayed. A brave, confident side, capable of competing against opponents who surpassed them in experience and history. Even after their elimination by Sweden, Saudi Arabia left the tournament carrying the respect of the entire world.

Since that day, the 1994 World Cup has become a constant reference point in any discussion of Saudi football at the World Cup.

Three decades in search of the elusive breakthrough

The Saudi national team took part in the 1998, 2002 and 2006 tournaments without managing to progress beyond the group stage, before missing out on the 2010 and 2014 editions. They then returned for Russia 2018 with a late victory over Egypt, but it was not enough to keep them in the tournament.

As for Qatar 2022, it seemed as though history was poised to write a new chapter. A historic victory over Argentina, who went on to become world champions, gave the Saudis a legitimate dream of qualification. But losses against Poland and Mexico brought the team back to square one.

This is where Saudi Arabia’s World Cup dilemma of recent decades lies: the ability to create a defining moment is there, but the ability to turn that moment into a lasting achievement has remained elusive.

A group testing ambition and realism

The draw was not kind to Saudi Arabia for the 2026 World Cup. The presence of Spain, Uruguay and Cape Verde in the group presents the Saudi team with a series of varied challenges.

Spain represents a style that dictates the tempo through possession and technical quality, whilst Uruguay embody one of the world’s most resilient and fierce sides in major tournaments.

As for Cape Verde, they may lack the star quality of their rivals, but this match appears to be the most crucial in the qualification calculations, as it could prove to be the difference between staying in the competition and being eliminated.

Nevertheless, the difficulty of the group does not mean the task is impossible. In 1994, too, the odds were not in Saudi Arabia’s favour, but the team managed to turn the tables and secure their place among the qualifiers.

Where can Saudi Arabia make the difference?

The clash against Spain looks the toughest from a technical standpoint. The Saudi team will need great tactical discipline and the ability to close down space and deny the opposition complete control of the game’s tempo.

Against Uruguay, the battle will be completely different. Physical intensity, one-on-one duels and second balls will dominate the match, making concentration and mental resilience crucial factors.

As for the clash with Cape Verde, it could be the match that decides the fate of the entire group. Such matches leave no room for hesitation as they often determine which teams will remain in the race and which will exit early.

The victory over Argentina at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar remains fresh in Saudis’ memories as one of the greatest triumphs in Arab football. The victory carries an important lesson as well being a source of pride.

The World Cup does not reward the team that wins a single match but rather the team capable of maintaining its balance throughout the tournament. For this reason, Saudi Arabia in 2026 needs more than just a resounding surprise.

It needs consistency, the ability to manage difficult moments, and the capacity to come away from every match with the best possible outcome, be it three points, a single point, or even a defeat with limited damage.

Donis faces a different test

On the bench, Georgios Donis will face one of the biggest challenges of his coaching career.

His deep knowledge of Saudi football is a significant strength, but it will not be enough on its own in a tournament of the World Cup’s stature. What is required is not merely to prepare a competitive team, but to build a squad capable of handling shifting pressures, reading the big games, and capitalising on the opportunities afforded by the new format.

Donis’ real task is to turn memories into a competitive project, not a psychological burden that haunts the players. The return to the US carries a symbolism that is hard to ignore. It was there that Saudi Arabia’s greatest World Cup dream was born, and it was there that the finest chapter in the history of the ‘Green’ team’s participation was written.

But modern football does not recognise memories alone. What happened in 1994 may inspire, but it does not confer any advantage on the pitch. Past achievements light the way, but they do not walk it on behalf of those who achieved them.

Featured image via Catherine Ivill/ Getty Images 

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

Former first lady Jill Biden waved away Democrats’ concerns that her new memoir is setting off a wave of backward-looking infighting, insisting that the party is moving on from the 2024 election.

“Democrats have a great future,” she said in an interview on Monday on NBC’s “Today,” when asked if she was “reopening old wounds” with her tour. “We’re looking forward to winning the midterms. Things are going to move forward. … And yes, we’re going to look back and learn from the mistakes we made.”

Jill Biden is on tour promoting her new memoir, which has become the latest headache for Democrats. Some Democrats privately say Jill Biden’s return to the public eye is a “distraction” that risks relitigating a painful election for the party when it should instead be focused on winning in the future.

In her book, she opens up about then-President Joe Biden’s disastrous, career-ending debate in 2024. She was “frightened” watching her husband on stage, and feared he was having a medical episode of sorts.

Her confession hasn’t landed well with fellow Democrats and former White House aides, given her relentless defense of Joe Biden at the time.

“I had to lift him up [after the debate]. I’m his wife,” she told NBC. “I’m not going to get out on the stage there and say, ‘Joe, you really screwed that up.’”

The press tour comes as Democrats are still reeling from their long-awaited autopsy of the 2024 presidential election. Its botched, typo-ridden release failed to explain Democrats’ defeat — and skipped over the former president’s age — but did spark a fresh round of party infighting.

Source link

Source link

Source link

The second tranche of documents related to Mandelson’s appointment were published on Monday (Alamy)

4 min read1 hr

The former UK ambassador to the US, Peter Mandelson, told a cabinet minister that Keir Starmer’s No 10 operation required a “complete revamp and infusion of purpose” in a series of WhatsApp messages last year, the latest tranche of documents relating to Mandelson’s appointment show.

Advertisement

On Monday afternoon, the government published the second tranche of documents relating to Mandelson’s appointment and tenure as UK ambassador to Washington. 

The files, which number more than 1,000 pages, show that Mandelson said that Starmer is “consistently going for direction B” in a July 2025 exchange of messages with Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Pat McFadden, who was then chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster. 

In the messages, Mandelson told McFadden: “I went in to No 10 after I saw you. It is beleaguered and bereft. It requires complete revamp and infusion of purpose and confidence to get anywhere.”

Advertisement

While discussing staff in No 10, Mandelson suggested the team around Starmer “are not led and none of them really know what Keir thinks or wants. In fact most of them don’t think Keir knows what he wants”.

Mandelson was sacked from his role as UK ambassador to Washington in September 2025 after new details came to light about his relationship with the paedophile financier Jeffery Epstein. The former Labour peer later resigned from the House of Lords, with the government committing to removing his peerage.

Starmer later accused Mandelson of betraying the country and lying to Downing Street about the depth of his relationship with Epstein. The row led to the resignation of Starmer’s chief of staff and long-time ally Morgan McSweeney, and has contributed significantly to Labour MP unrest with the PM’s leadership.

Advertisement

Mandelson is currently being investigated by the police over allegations that he leaked confidential government documents to Epstein while he was a minister in the New Labour government. 

In February, the leader of the opposition, Kemi Badenoch, tabled a humble address requesting the disclosure of documents relating to Mandelson’s appointment and time as ambassador to Washington, with the first publication taking place in March. 

Former Foreign Office permanent secretary Olly Robbins was sacked following reports in April that Mandelson had not cleared the UK Security Vetting (UKSV) procedure for appointment as US ambassador in late January 2025, before starting the role the next month. 

After leaving his position, Robbins accused No 10 of having had a “dismissive approach” to the vetting process. 

Advertisement

Addressing the House of Commons on Monday afternoon, the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister, Darren Jones, told MPs that the publication of the second tranche of documents had cost the Cabinet Office alone over £1m.

The files published on Monday also reveal that Mandelson told then-foreign secretary David Lammy in November 2024, ahead of his appointment, that Lammy would “never regret it” if he were to appoint Mandelson to the role of US ambassador. 

Following the local elections in 2025, in which Reform UK made major gains, the files show McFadden asked Mandelson how Labour should fight Nigel Farage’s party, describing the results as “a shellacking”.

Mandelson suggested that Starmer should be more “Trumpian” in his approach.

“The problem is the government doesn’t give a sense of crusading to turn round and change Britain. That’s what I mean by panache, verve,” he messaged.

Advertisement

“It does start right from the top, I am afraid, but you must all contribute more to it by breaking out of the Whitehall system and mould and appearing less like business as usual conventional ministers and, dare I say it, behaving in a more Trumpian risk-taking and dare-devil way.

“At the moment ministers seem to be looking more to the Whitehall machine and the party base than to the public who are crying out for leadership.”

Other disclosures reveal that on the week of the government’s U-turn over winter fuel payments last year, McFadden told Mandelson in WhatsApp messages that the situation “doesn’t feel good for Keir”. Speaking about conversations with Labour MPs, McFadden said: “Every meeting I have is ‘who can we tax in order to pay benefits to others’. They’re asking the wrong questions”.

The government was forced to abandon reforms to the welfare system after large numbers of Labour MPs threatened to inflict what would have been a humiliating defeat on Starmer.

Advertisement

McFadden also told Mandelson that the government climbdown on welfare would “destroy his [Starmers] authority”.

Messages published today also reveal that Mandelson told McFadden that he thought the former health secretary Wes Streeting was having an “early mid-life crisis” after he raised concerns that Israel was “committing war crimes before our eyes”.

 

Source link

GMB branch secretaries have told the union to “practice what you preach” as they strike for pay and job security. The dispute is the latest in a woeful surge of unions abusing their staff while claiming to represent workers.

‘GMB’s chutzpah is unbelievable’

The branch secretaries say they are being bullied by the union’s management, threatened with summary dismissal and often paid below the legal minimum wage. They are demanding that the union engage in “serious talks” to resolve the dispute.

Further strike action is scheduled for Friday 5 June. Their spokesperson, Alex Mitchell, has accused the union of “unbelievable chutzpah” in its treatment of its workers.

He said:

GMB’s chutzpah is unbelievable.

GMB was an enthusiastic backer of Labour’s Employment Rights Act, which extends protection from unlawful dismissals to staff with only six months service. GMB wanted to go further and have full employment rights from day one.

Yet the strikers have told Unite the Union that in GMB’s Southern Region, the Regional Secretary claims to have the power to close any branch at any time, without process, and therefore deny the branch secretary their livelihood, even when they have worked for GMB for several years. This can obviously be used to bully branch secretaries.

GMB has a category of skilled but casual worker, who they call an “accompanying Rep”. These individuals have extra, special training to be accredited, and yet GMB pays them £40 for a half day, and £80 per day. This is less than minimum wage.

No employment status

The union is also denying employment status to the workers, even though they work full time and qualify as such.

Mitchell said:

The branch secretaries involved in the current strike work full time for the union, at a highly skilled level, and have enormous experience and responsibilities. Yet GMB denies them employment status.

Undoubtedly, they are employees. In fact, only employees have a legal right to strike, and GMB did not seek an injunction to stop the strike.

There are other branch secretaries who have smaller branches, and whose work is not full time, but GMB denies them even the sort of worker status that Uber drivers have, and which GMB campaigned for to support their members who work for Uber. These branch secretaries are, in some cases, paid less than minimum wage by GMB for what they do.

GMB needs to practice what they preach, they cannot campaign against rogue employment practices by other employers, and then themselves exploit people in a two-tier workforce.

Advertisement

‘Anti-union’ unions

The GMB strike is just one recent example of union workers going into dispute with their employers over complaints of abusive conduct. In response, the unions’ managers have allegedly engaged in blatant anti-union and strike-busting tactics.

Unite’s union officers went on strike in April this year over the union’s “Murdoch tactics” to block workers from organising. Shockingly, it was far from the first time that employees of the union had felt forced to take industrial action against Unite boss, Sharon Graham.

Unite workers have repeatedly gone on strike against Graham and her husband, Jack Clarke. Clarke was appointed to a top job in the union soon after Graham took over despite Clarke’s reputation for bullying and misogyny.

Unite’s lawyers, long after Skwawkbox first reported it, admitted that the union had, under Graham, destroyed evidence gathered by workers against Clarke. Workers in Clarke’s previous department had gathered evidence against him. Graham had asked colleagues to destroy this evidence of bullying and misogyny before she became general secretary.

Graham and Clarke vs workers

Despite his record, Clarke was promoted shortly after Graham took over the union in 2021, overseeing Unite’s newly-created Bargaining and Disputes Unit (BDSU). Union insiders point out that Unite’s approval procedures for the promotion had not been followed. Prior to his promotion, Clarke had been on a final warning from Unite over his conduct.

Like workers in his last department, BDSU staff were soon in dispute with the union and Clarke over alleged bullying by Clarke and his cronies.

Graham and Unite have also spent huge amounts of members’ money on lawyers’ fees on behalf of Clarke.

Staff have also accused Graham and her management team of employing intimidation, suspension and anti-union tactics against staff in the dispute. So bad was this alleged conduct that more than 90% of Unite staff working at the union’s Holborn HQ voted for strike action.

Three, some say four, of the five women who worked in Clarke’s department since Graham formed it left. Union sources say they also alleged bullying and abuse.

A spreading problem

The same kind of tactics have been picked up by other union bosses. TSSA rail union staff demonstrated again in March this year against the war on their democracy they say general secretary, Maryam Eslamdoust, is conducting.

The deeply unpopular Eslamdoust had moved, a month earlier, to disenfranchise all the union’s retired members — and boasted about it. Senior TSSA figures also said that she and her coterie lied to justify it and have put the union’s structures into collapse.

But this was just the tip of an iceberg of member, rep and staff disgust with Eslamdoust. The TSSA has been embroiled for years in strikes because of the union workers’ fury at her attacks on them and their GMB union reps, both public and private.

The attacks culminated in January with Eslamdoust de-recognising GMB as the workplace union — an outrageous move for a union boss, and one that came after Eslamdoust told the Guardian that she is only being criticised because she is female.

One in ten

In 1982, the band UB40 sang:

I am the one in ten, a number on a list, I am the one in ten even though I don’t exist.

The lyrics could apply in the GMB in 2026. The union has about 700 branches that act as vital hubs of democracy in the union. Of those, about one in 10 are so large that the branch secretary is a full-time role.

As GMB fights the TSSA over bullying, the union is accused of doing the same to these vital branch representatives. As Unite the Union represents the branch secretaries against their union employer, Unite workers are in ongoing disputes against its management for similar, and even worse, behaviour.

Unions acting as bad bosses badly undermines the fight of their members against their own bad bosses. It is a betrayal of the working class and must stop. But the grip of union bosses on the structures of ‘their’ unions is not easily pried loose, to the detriment of workers and their whole movement.

Featured image via Sky News

By Skwawkbox

Source link

Source link

Source link

The post The absurdity of banning Hasan Piker and Cenk Uygur from the UK appeared first on spiked.

Source link

Ariana Grande has leaned into her dark sense of humour in the music video for her new single Hate That I Made You Love Me.

Merging elements of horror and comedy – two genres of which the Grammy winner is a well-documented fan – the tongue-in-cheek music video was released on Monday, featuring Justin Long as a man who’s haunted by a figure from his past, played by Ariana.

The clip opens with Justin digging what appears to be a grave, before it’s revealed that the No Tears Left To Cry is living in an abandoned room underneath it all, reading over her past diary entries.

Following this, the Weapons actor is seen trying to rid himself of visions of Ariana, culminating in him crashing his car, setting himself on fire and eventually revisiting the “resting place” – only for her to turn the tables on him in its final moments.

Advertisement

If all of that sounds like a lot, that’s probably because it is, but the five-minute clip is sure to get people talking.

Check out Ariana Grande’s latest video for yourself – also featuring what appears to be a cameo from a true Broadway legend – below:

Hate That I Made You Love Me was released last week, and while on the surface it seems like a straightforward break-up song, fans have been speculating that its lyrics see Ariana reflecting on her relationship with fame and celebrity.

The Wicked star previously described Hate That I Made You Love Me as “one of my favourite songs i’ll ever give to you, the greatest fans in the entire world”.

Advertisement

“I’m so grateful for all of the art, moments, songs we have shared,” she told her fans. “I can’t wait for this next chapter and all of the surprises I have for you.”

Hate That I Made You Love Me is the lead single from Ariana’s upcoming eighth album Petal, which is due for release on Friday 31 July.

The track is currently on track to give Ariana her eighth UK number one, which will be her first since 2020’s Positions.

Source link