Captain Ben Stokes looks set to be removed from England’s Test squad after breaching team protocols in a nightclub incident alongside team-mate Gus Atkinson.

The England and Wales Cricket Board announced on Monday evening that the pair became embroiled in an incident in the early hours as they celebrated Sunday’s victory over New Zealand at Lord’s.

The Press Association understands that the timing contravened the team’s midnight curfew, which was still in operation despite the end of the match, but that was not the only breach.

Reports linking the incident to a player or players from Saracens prompted the Gallagher Prem club to issue a statement confirming they have launched an investigation.

No further details have been made public, but there is also an internal ECB investigation under way as the governing body seeks clarity over the the exact circumstances. The matter has also been referred to the Cricket Regulator.

In the short term, it seems highly likely that both players will lose their places in the squad for the second Test, which starts at the Kia Oval on June 17.

Beyond that, Stokes may need to persuade his employers that he can still hold the office of captain. The ECB has been at pains to show that lessons have been learned from the winter, with their troubled Ashes tour marred by accusations of unprofessionalism and excessive drinking.

Harry Brook, Stokes’ vice-captain and a candidate to lead in his expected absence, narrowly held on to his role as white-ball skipper after it emerged he was involved in an altercation with a nightclub bouncer in Wellington immediately prior to the Australia tour.

The Saracens statement read: “We are aware of an incident involving an academy player connected to Saracens on Sunday evening.

“The club is currently establishing the full facts and is in contact with the relevant authorities and individuals involved. Once this process is complete, the matter will be reviewed and addressed appropriately.

“We will make no further comment at this time.”

The reports will come as a further embarrassment to England head coach Brendon McCullum, who has defended his players over previous incidents, but conceded in the wake of the 3-0 T20 series win over Sri Lanka in February that players had to be responsible for their own behaviour.

McCullum said: “If you go back to the day I walked into the job, the first thing I said to these boys is don’t do anything that lands you on the front page of the paper and nothing good happens after midnight, but we’re going to have a good time.”

After a shock loss to Algeria ended their 10-game unbeaten run and the sad news of Jurrien Timber being ruled out of the World Cup, the Netherlands needed an uplift today.

Thanks to Cody Gakpo, they are in the lead against Uzbekistan in New York.

Advertisement

The Liverpool forward made no mistake from 12 yards out just after the half-hour mark, shortly after Donyell Malen had a missed a sitter from close range.

It was a big goal on a big night for Gakpo, who now has 20 goals and 50 caps for his country.

• 

• 32 Thoughts: The Podcast

  Hockey fans already know the name, but this is not the blog. From Sportsnet, 32 Thoughts: The Podcast with NHL Insider Elliotte Friedman and Kyle Bukauskas is a weekly deep dive into the biggest news and interviews from the hockey world.

  Latest episode

The main source of entertainment, according to many Minnesota Vikings fans, from organized team activities (OTAs)? Quotes from head coach Kevin O’Connell and quarterbacks J.J. McCarthy and Kyler Murray about the summer quarterback competition. The situation took another turn last week when O’Connell appeared to refer to McCarthy as a “former” team captain.

Some seized on the comment as evidence that Murray has already won the QB1 battle.

Vikings QB Competition Just Got a Little More Interesting

O’Connell’s Comment

Asked about McCarthy’s progress at OTAs, O’Connell replied, “I think he’s handled it really well. He’s been great in the meeting rooms, spending a little bit more time with those guys. The dialogue between the group, the great questions you get from those guys as we’re going through the installation process.”

“He’s been great in the meeting rooms, he’s been great on the grass, and as always, as a former — as a captain and a guy that helps lead our team, he’s been phenomenal there as well.”

The former term turned heads.

O’Connell added about McCarthy’s comments from the first week of OTAs, “So I didn’t make a lot out of it. I know there was some reaction to it, and that’s probably not the first time there’s gonna be a reaction to those guys answering questions about the situation.

“And that’s what part of the competition is all about. There’s no hiding anything; it’s gonna be displayed on the field. And their teammates and coaching staff and the guys in this building have to feel conviction about the direction we go. And you do that by your daily habits and just improving.”

A Slip?

Here’s the question — asked by many social media users — does O’Connell simply know that McCarthy was a captain last year and won’t be one in 2026? He started to say former something, appeared to catch himself, and ended up on the word captain.

The Vikings will embark on the training camp quarterback competition at the end of July, and the victor will almost certainly earn the captain’s title. The “other guy” probably won’t.

There’s always a chance that O’Connell totally lost his train of thought and misspoke, but those hanging on every word at OTAs were convinced that McCarthy’s former captainhood means Murray has already won the QB1 job.

The Viking Age‘s Chris Schad noted, “The latest breadcrumb was unintentionally dropped by Kevin O’Connell after Thursday’s practice. When talking about McCarthy’s viral comments on the quarterback battle made a week ago, O’Connell almost referred to McCarthy as a ‘former captain’ before quickly correcting himself and finishing his statement.”

“Nobody really knows the true intention of O’Connell’s comments, and as Armstead noted, captains are voted on each year. But there’s enough to suggest he said the quiet part out loud. A former player himself, O’Connell may know that whoever the starter is will be voted a captain. And with Murray remaining a heavy favorite, O’Connell’s comments may have been more than just a slip.”

A Battle Nevertheless

McCarthy faces a more immediate challenge this summer. Once heralded as the Golden Boy, the quarterback poised to make the Sam Darnold handoff feel seamless last offseason, his 2025 season devolved into a relentless battle against his own body. A high ankle sprain, a concussion, and a broken hand sidelined him repeatedly. When he did play, his performance was inconsistent. He’d flash brilliance as a fourth-quarter monster, only to appear clunky in the pocket with mechanics that drew widespread criticism.

Consequently, McCarthy has much to prove. He must demonstrate he’s more than just potential, that he can remain healthy, maintain composure, and solidify his position as a QB1.

Murray’s motivation, though different, is equally compelling.

Arizona unceremoniously cut him during their tumultuous 2026 offseason, opting for a quarterback tandem of Jacoby Brissett and Carson Beck. That perceived snub fuels Murray’s desire for redemption, and Minnesota presents the ideal opportunity. He can step into a superior offensive system and prove the Cardinals made a huge blunder.

Murray as the Probable QB1 Anyway

While O’Connell’s accidental hint may or may not be rooted in his inherent knowledge, Murray is the overwhelming favorite to win the QB1 job any damn way. Every 17 starts, the normal allotment in the regular season, he averages nearly 4,000 passing yards, 600 rushing, and 30 combined touchdowns. Third-year NFLers like McCarthy who struggle with consistency and durability don’t often win quarterback competitions against men with that type of production.

Therefore, while O’Connell might’ve spilled the beans, which would not be a great look for a head coach, most of the world knows and understands that Murray is the frontrunner to lead the Vikings at QB1 in 2026.

The next question will be how McCarthy reacts to a QB2 assignment.

Dustin Baker is a novelist and political scientist. His second novel, The Invaders , is out now. So is … More about Dustin Baker

The Philippines’ Alexandra Eala celebrates winning her women’s singles final match against Nikola Bartunkova on day nine of the Lexus Birmingham Open Championships at Edgbaston Priory Club, Birmingham, England, Sunday June 7, 2026. (Mike Egerton/PA via AP)

MANILA, Philippines–Alex Eala jumped four places to World No. 33 in the latest Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) rankings ahead of her campaign at the HSBC Championships, formerly known as the Queen’s Club Championships in London.

After winning the title in the WTA 125 Birmingham Open on Sunday night, Eala wastes no time and gets back into action on Tuesday in the main draw of the Queen’s Club Championships in London.

READ: Alex Eala wins Birmingham Open title, ends Czech curse

The 21-year-old Eala battles China’s Zhang Shuai, who’s ranked 64th, in the round-of-32.

Eala survived Czech Nikola Bartunkova, 5-7, 6-3, 7-5, in the Birmingham final for her first victory against a Czech in 14 tries since turning pro in 2020.

Polish rising star Maja Chwalinska, who made a surprise run to the French Open final, was the biggest mover in the rankings, soaring to 21st from 114th.

Russian ace and newly minted French Open champion Mirra Andreeva improved two spots to No. 6.

Belarusian Aryna Sabalenka remains the top-ranked WTA player for the 89th consecutive week.

Less than a week away from the UFC White House event that has been nearly a year in the making, it doesn’t seem like anyone is setting their sights low.

“We’re expecting Super Bowl-type numbers for this fight,” UFC CEO Dana White told TNT Fight Sports.

Advertisement

U.S. President Donald Trump, no stranger to hyperbole, at one point promised that this event would be “the greatest show on earth.” White House spokesman Davis Ingle was slightly more measured, calling it “one of the greatest and most historic sports events in history.”

Mark Shapiro, president and COO of UFC parent company TKO, has said the event will be “a once-in-a-generation moment.”

In other words, this is going to be big. Just how big — and for whom, exactly — remains to be seen.

Specific plans for the broadcast on Sunday, June 14, have been scarce so far. White has suggested that a portion of the undercard may air for free on CBS, with the top fights held in reserve for Paramount+ subscribers, but no exact schedule has been released as of yet. (Uncrowned reached out to a Paramount executive with questions about the broadcast plan, but did not receive a response.)

Advertisement

In a recent story from “The Hollywood Reporter,” executives from both TKO and Paramount suggested that one primary goal for the event is to drive signups on Paramount+, the streaming service that’s home to all UFC events under a behemoth seven-year, $7.7 billion deal.

“This is about sampling, new fans, casual viewers, a spectacle on a stage that will ultimately expand our audience, our viewership, and our success on Paramount+,” Shapiro told Wall Street analysts back in February. “We see this once-in-a-lifetime stage as a strategic investment to drive subscriber acquisition at Paramount+, massive audience sampling for the UFC overall, and Super Bowl-like earned media across the globe.”

But here’s where it gets tricky. As a network, CBS is available in almost every home in America that contains a television set. Paramount+, on the other hand, has reported somewhere around 80 million subscribers. If the UFC were to air some of the White House event prelim bouts on CBS, but keep the title fights in the main and co-main event exclusively on Paramount+, that could significantly limit the overall reach.

For the sake of comparison, the most recent Super Bowl drew an estimated 125.6 million viewers. Even if every single existing Paramount+ subscriber watched this event, the UFC would still need to pick up an additional 45 million viewers either through new subscriptions or other broadcast methods in order to hit the goal of “Super Bowl-type numbers.”

It’s not impossible, but it’s also not easy. This event will be up against the opening weekend of play in the 2026 FIFA World Cup, and potentially Game 6 of the Stanley Cup Finals. It also faces the resistance that’s now essentially built-in to any Trump-endorsed event, which is no small obstacle in a country where the President faces plummeting approval ratings.

Advertisement

That backlash potential became evident when Trump’s “Freedom 250” concert plans saw multiple artists, ranging from Martina McBride to Bret Michaels, withdraw in recent weeks. That alone suggests that Trump’s very vocal and visible association with this UFC event might be enough to turn some viewers away.

Even without polarizing political implications, MMA has long been a niche sport that appeals to a subset of American sports fans. Unarmed combat in the confines of a cage simply may not to everyone’s liking.

So what’s a reasonable bar for success? The recent MVP MMA debut on Netflix last month peaked with nearly 17 million viewers while averaging about 12.4 million, shattering the record as the most-watched U.S. MMA broadcast in history. If the UFC White House event doesn’t at least beat that mark, you’d have to think it would be a major disappointment after all this build-up and these promises of Super Bowl-level interest worldwide.

But a lot may depend on what the goal of this event really is. If it were purely about reaching the largest audience possible, you’d think it would air simultaneously on CBS and Paramount+. That would expose the UFC to the largest potential audience, while also increasing the Trump administration’s chances to come away boasting that it had met the goal of putting on a truly massive sporting event.

Advertisement

If a portion of the broadcast is limited to Paramount+, however, that would decrease the potential audience size while likely increasing the potential for immediate monetization. Telling people they have to subscribe to Paramount+ to see the top two bouts would almost certainly lead to a sudden injection of new signups. It also means inevitably playing to a smaller audience in the end, since not every viewer will be willing to add a new subscription service to their monthly bills.

There’s also the question of broader purpose for this event. If it’s truly a celebration of America, shouldn’t it be available to all Americans? Or at least those with a TV?

Then again, maybe there is something quintessentially American about charging a subscription fee even for our big birthday bash. We want big audiences, sure. But it’s paying crowds that keep the lights on.