Football with Faris: The week’s hottest stories from the beautiful game
Matthijs de Ligt of Manchester United celebrates scoring his team's first goal with teammates during the match between Southampton and United at St Mary's Stadium on September 14. (Photo: Getty Images)
By Faris GohirSep 19, 2024
This week saw Manchester United shake off their slow start in the Premier League, while Liverpool faced an unwelcome reality check.
Meanwhile, Arsenal celebrated a historic win in a fiercely contested North London derby.
Let’s dive into the key moments from this week:
The Red Devils strike back
After Manchester United’s bad start to the season, 19th place Southampton was just what they needed to bounce back after an international break. Everything went right for Manchester United, from a first goal for the club for Matthijs de Ligt to the cracking strike from the not-so-confident Marcus Rashford in a 3-0 victory.
By the way, what an absolute brain-dead challenge late in the game from Saints centre-back, Jack Stephens, which deserved a red card for a tackle at knee height on Alejandro Garnacho, who went on to score the third in added time.
Most fans will want to know why Bruno Fernandes didn’t receive a booking for delaying a restart. This inconsistency in refereeing is what angers fans.
It needs to be stressed that United should also count themselves lucky—if Cameron Archer had tucked his penalty away at 0-0, the game would’ve turned out very differently, in my opinion. United fans shouldn’t get carried away as Ten Hag looks to turn the ‘theatre of nightmares’ back to the ‘theatre of dreams’.
I personally don’t think he is the man who can turn things around long term (deep down, most Man United fans will likely feel the same).
Liverpool cut down to size by Forest
No one expected Liverpool’s blistering start to be halted by Nottingham Forest. It was a poor display all round from the Reds, not helped by a subpar performance from their talisman, Mo Salah.
Massive credit should go to underdogs Forest for digging deep, and what a fantastic goal that was from Callum Hudson-Odoi to secure his team’s first win at Anfield in 55 years. Going back to Liverpool, where was Dominik Szoboszlai’s second yellow for kicking the ball away? It seems the ‘letter of the law’ only applies to Arsenal.
Adjusting to the new manager, Arne Slot, after nine years of Jurgen Klopp, alongside hardly any incomings in the summer, meant this result was perhaps inevitable. More results like this could rear their ugly heads over the course of the season.
But that won’t stop Liverpool from having a solid campaign.
Derby day delight for the Gunners
Being a massive Arsenal fan, I was incredibly proud of the performance at the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium. Despite the big misses of the injured skipper Martin Ødegaard and the suspended Declan Rice, Arsenal got the job done in old school fashion with a 1-0 scoreline. Jurrien Timber’s performance was thoroughly impressive, as he proved exactly why Zinchenko has been displaced at left back, and rightfully so, in my view.
The at-times underrated Gabriel Magalhães displayed a monstrous man-of-the-match performance at the back, alongside getting the only goal with a header through an excellent corner delivery from Bukayo Saka.
Spurs were toothless in attack, and Ange Postecoglou’s side showed naivety yet again in defending set pieces.
Tottenham fans should be concerned that their goalkeeper Guglielmo Vicario’s weakness at dealing with corners has yet to be addressed.
Gabriel of Arsenal celebrates scoring his team's first goal with teammate William Saliba during the Premier League match between Tottenham Hotspur FC and Arsenal FC at Tottenham Hotspur Stadium on September 15. (Photo: Getty Images)
It is the first time since 1988 that Arsenal have beaten Spurs away in three consecutive league games, showing them who currently rules North London.
Manchester City keep marching on
The expensive Manchester City machine powers on. Despite a record-breaking fastest goal in the Premier League delivered by Brentford’s Yohan Wissa in 22 seconds, Haaland struck back with a brace to seal a 2-1 win.
Like most rival fans, I am getting sick and tired of Erling Haaland scoring all these goals. Putting those rivalries aside, plaudits should go to him, as he played despite the death of a dear family friend, putting in a stunning display.
I’m sure Pep Guardiola is grateful for that, as he opened the door for the Norwegian striker to miss the game.
Surely, City need to have an off day at some point, and I’m praying it is this week against my beloved Arsenal.
US PRESIDENT Donald Trump’s visit sees the British state deploy all of its pomp and pageantry to stroke his ego. King Charles has the constitutional duty of pretending to like the American president, as his UK government seeks to limit the economic damage and diplomatic fallout of this more volatile second Trump term.
But could Trump’s presence provide a spectre of British politics yet to come? He arrives with Reform leader Nigel Farage riding high in the polls, and after Tommy Robinson’s mass rally in London.
Hope Not Hate called it the biggest far-right rally in British history. Many of those who attended would dispute that characterisation, but the organisers certainly had no qualms about platforming extremist content. Elon Musk went much further than Enoch Powell, whose ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech claimed to be prophesying violence to avert the danger. The radicalised Musk told the large crowd that violence was coming, so that they should adopt it pre-emptively. Musk’s ability to enter Britain in future must depend on a public retraction of this call for violence.
The mood music of British politics seems to be moving sharply to the right. Yet the Labour government has lost its voice on challenging racism for much of this summer. When it is struggling so badly on asylum, the fear of being perceived to call everybody racist has seemingly left it unable to criticise even neo-Nazis.
Immigration was one of Trump’s strongest issues at the last election. Nigel Farage now seeks to emulate that with his arguments for mass deportations and abolishing asylum in the UK.
So a new BritishFuture report, “How we can actually stop the boats,” takes on the exam question that does most to keep ministers up at night. I have coauthored the report with Frank Sharry, a US immigration expert who also worked for the Biden and Harris campaigns. It details some surprising lessons from America about how to avoid our own Trump moment here.
For three years, the Biden administration struggled with unauthorised entry of two million people a year – a much greater inflow than the small boats that feel like an existential threat in Downing Street. Biden initially sought to duck the issue, seeing it as a distraction from his economic agenda. But that political strategy of avoidance failed.
Yet the untold story about the Biden administration at the border is not just about political failure – but also of a belated policy success. A mix of diplomatic cooperation, a significant new legal route and the refusal and return of those who came outside of it, led to illegal border crossings from Mexico falling by 81 per cent in the final year of the Biden administration. It happened too late, politically, for the Kamala Harris campaign, but it offers insight to Shabana Mahmood and Keir Starmer over how to defeat Trumpism in Britain.
The UK and US contexts are not identical but there are transferable lessons. The new UK-French pilot scheme works on similar principles. The initial pilot scheme may begin by removing 50 people a week – about 2,500 a year. That is around one in seventeen people crossing the Channel. A pilot won’t significantly reduce numbers, or disrupt the smugglers’ business model, while most people know this is unlikely to affect them .
But if the pilot can be expanded ten-fold, it would make returns more likely than not. At twenty times the scale, it could operationalise a returns guarantee. That could reduce crossings by 75 per cent and provide a path to closing down the irregular route as a viable way to claim asylum in Britain. The US experience offers hard evidence of what can be achieved when this approach is delivered at scale. The government does want to scale the pilot at pace and is dealing with the legal, practical and political challenges, including political instability in France.
The British Future report presents striking new evidence of how the ‘routes for returns’ deal can depolarise public opinion too. We hear a lot about the anger of those protesting outside hotels, and sometimes the counterprotestors too. But most people are balancers on immigration. A majority want action on Channel crossings but still want Britain to protect refugees in need. Farage’s rejectionist case for ditching the principle of refugee protection would destroy too much; but the humanitarian counter-argument needs to combine both more control as well as more compassion if it is to secure popular support.
The anti-Trump protestors can claim to speak for Britain: three-quarters of people remain bemused that American voters could have chosen Trump a second time.
Most people would prefer an orderly, controlled and humane system to the populist threat of tearing everything up. The government’s job is to show that combining control and compassion can work.
Sunder Katwala
Sunder Katwala is the director of thinktank British Future and the author of the book How to Be a Patriot: The must-read book on British national identity and immigration.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.
Piyush Goyal with Jonathan Reynolds at Chequers during the signing of the UK–India Free Trade Agreement in July
IN SIR KEIR STARMER’S cabinet reshuffle last week, triggered by the resignation of Angela Rayner, the prime minister shifted Jonathan Reynolds from business and trade secretary and president of the board of trade after barely a year in the post to chief whip, making him responsible for the party.
The move doesn’t make much sense. At Chequers, the UK-India Free Trade Agreement was signed by Reynolds, and the Indian commerce and industry minister, Piyush Goyal. They had clearly established a friendly working relationship.
Reynolds apparently bought Goyal an ice cream some weeks ago when they were walking in London’s Hyde Park and ironed out the last remaining problems.
Goyal will have to start all over again with Reynolds’s replacement, Peter Kyle.
At least, Lisa Nandy, who managed to sign a cultural agreement with India, remains culture secretary, despite persistent reports she was due for the sack. I have high hopes of Kanishka Narayan, who has been appointed parliamentary under-secretary in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. Crucially, chancellor Rachel Reeves has not been given another job.
But, in his heart of hearts, Starmer must know he cannot win the next general election if she remains his chancellor. Her vindictive VAT raid on private schools has ruined the lives of many children and forced school after school to close. And the rules on inheritance tax and non-doms have driven many Indian entrepreneurs to flee to Dubai. Starmer should be “pragmatic” – a word he likes – and reverse these policies for the good of the country.
Finding romance today feels like trying to align stars in a night sky that refuses to stay still
When was the last time you stumbled into a conversation that made your heart skip? Or exchanged a sweet beginning to a love story - organically, without the buffer of screens, swipes, or curated profiles? In 2025, those moments feel rarer, swallowed up by the quickening pace of life.
We are living faster than ever before. Cities hum with noise and neon, people race between commitments, and ambition seems to be the rhythm we all march to. In the process, the simple art of connection - eye contact, lingering conversations, the gentle patience of getting to know someone - feels like it is slipping through our fingers.
Whether you’re single, searching, or settled, the landscape is shifting. Some turn to apps for convenience; others look for love in cafés, gyms, workplaces or community spaces. But the challenge remains the same: how do we connect deeply in a world designed to move at lightning speed?
We’ve become fluent in productivity, in chasing careers, in cultivating polished identities. Yet are we forgetting how to be fluent in intimacy? When was the last time you sat across from someone and truly listened - without checking your phone, without planning the next step, without treating time like a currency to be spent?
It’s a strange paradox: we have more access to people than ever before, yet many feel more isolated. Fun is always available - dinners, drinks, nights out, fleeting encounters - but fulfilment is harder to grasp. Are we mistaking access for intimacy? Are we human, or are we slowly adapting into versions of ourselves stripped of those raw, humanistic qualities - vulnerability, patience, tenderness - that once defined love?
Perhaps we’ve grown comfortable with the fast exit. It’s easier to ghost than to explain. Easier to keep moving than to pause. But what does that cost us? What do we lose when romance becomes a checkbox on an already overstuffed to-do list?
The truth is - the heart doesn’t move at the pace of technology or ambition. It moves slowly, awkwardly, with a rhythm that resists acceleration. Maybe that’s the point. Love has always lived in the messy spaces - hesitant pauses, nervous laughter, words spoken without rehearsal.
So the real question for 2025 is not “Have we gone too far?” but “Can we afford to slow down?” Can we still allow ourselves the sweetness of beginnings - the chance encounters, the unplanned moments, the quiet courage to be open?
Because in the end, connection is not about speed or access—it’s about presence. In a world that won’t stop moving, choosing to be present might be the bravest act of love we have left.
Instagram & TikTok: @Bombae.mix
Keep ReadingShow less
Shabana Mahmood, US homeland security secretary Kristi Noem, Canada’s public safety minister Gary Anandasangaree, Australia’s home affairs minister Tony Burke and New Zealand’s attorney general Judith Collins at the Five Eyes security alliance summit on Monday (8)
PRIME MINISTER Keir Starmer’s government is not working. That is the public verdict, one year in. So, he used his deputy Angela Rayner’s resignation to hit the reset button.
It signals a shift in his own theory of change. Starmer wanted his mission-led government to avoid frequent shuffles of his pack, so that ministers knew their briefs. Such a dramatic reshuffle shows that the prime minister has had enough of subject expertise for now, gambling instead that fresh eyes may bring bold new energy to intractable challenges on welfare and asylum.
“Can Shabana Mahmood save Keir Starmer?” is the question being asked in Westminster. Small boats are increasingly talked about as an existential risk to the government. It will not be the only issue at the next general election – the economy and public services will matter, too – but Labour fear being unable to get heard on anything else without visible progress in the Channel.
The new home secretary has been asked to “think the unthinkable”. Ministers and MPs should be eager to try anything that might work – but might heed the lessons of six years of failure to stop the boats as they do. It is hardly as if former Conservative home secretaries Priti Patel and Suella Braverman were unwilling to brainstorm the unthinkable, nor indeed to legislate the unworkable. If performative gestures – asylum seekers on barges – could stop the boats, it would have been all quiet in the Channel long ago.
As justice secretary, Mahmood’s voice was tough on crime, reflecting her communitarianism. Yet her policy involved a liberalism of necessity. With the prisons overflowing, shortening sentences and seeking public consent for alternative forms of punishment was unavoidable. Number 10 media briefings about being willing to make Labour MPs ‘queasy’ on asylum could – ironically – be a form of comfort zone politics; a distraction from tougher choices that might actually work. Hotel use for asylum could end in 2026 – not 2029 – if ministers both streamlined appeals and gave asylum seekers from high-risk countries limited leave to remain – with the right to work and the responsibility to house themselves. It could save billions, if the government can navigate the political risks. Labour’s challenge is to show how it can deliver an orderly and humane system by cooperating with allies, not ripping up treaties.
Migrants in a dinghy crossing the English Channel
As Mahmood becomes the most prominent British Asian and British Muslim in public life, others project contradictory ideas of what they imagine her politics, faith and personality mean. It is curious that Maurice Glasman could declare her the new leader of his Blue Labour faction (though Mahmood does not share the baron’s misplaced enthusiasm for US president Donald Trump) while Reform donor Aaron Banks declared that a Muslim lawyer as home secretary would immediately ‘open the floodgates’ to refugees from Gaza, exemplifying more about his presumptions and prejudices, than her politics.
There is no novelty in a British Asian home secretary now. Sajid Javid broke that ceiling in the Conservative government of 2018, yet Mahmood is already the fifth visible minority politician to hold that office. However, overt racism towards her goes unchecked on X/Twitter – where radicalised site owner and US businessman Elon Musk is infinitely more likely to retweet than to suspend racist voices who say no Muslim should ever be home secretary. That is Tommy Robinson’s view – yet Musk champions his London march on Saturday (13), where ex-soldier and minor TV celebrity Ant Middleton will pitch a London mayoral campaign founded on the absurdly racist proposition that Sadiq Khan, Mahmood and Conservatives opposition leader Kemi Badenoch should be barred from high office if their grandparents were not British-born.
This is the curious paradox of multi-ethnic Britain today: British Asian faces in high places have never been more common. Yet a vocal minority challenges the equal status of ethnic and faith minorities more aggressively than for a generation. It is not just the government that must show more leadership by speaking up to defend our multi-ethnic society. Every civic institution can contribute to how we respect differences and strengthen our common ground.
Knowing our history better is one vital foundation. Everyone is aware of this country’s pride in defeating fascism matters – but fewer know that the armies that won the war look more like our modern Britain of 2025 than that of 1945. Half of the public do know that Indian soldiers took part. Not so many understand that Hindu, Sikh and Muslim soldiers fought alongside British officers in the largest volunteer army the world has ever seen. The My Family Legacy campaign from British Future, the Royal British Legion and Eastern Eye will help British Asian families find and tell their stories. Writing this vital chapter fully into our national history remains work in progress – but can show why national symbols, like the poppy, belong to us all and can help to bring this diverse society together.
Sunder Katwala
Sunder Katwala is the director of thinktank British Future and the author of the book How to Be a Patriot: The must-read book on British national identity and immigration.
Keep ReadingShow less
Indian infantrymen on the march in France in October 1914 during World War I. (Photo: Getty Images)
This country should never forget what we all owe to those who won the second world war against fascism. So the 80th anniversary of VE Day and VJ Day this year have had a special poignancy in bringing to life how the historic events that most of us know from grainy black and white photographs or newsreel footage are still living memories for a dwindling few.
People do sometimes wonder if the meaning of these great historic events will fade in an increasingly diverse Britain. If we knew our history better, we would understand why that should not be the case.
For the armies that fought and won both world wars look more like the Britain of 2025 in their ethnic and faith mix than the Britain of 1945 or 1918. The South Asian soldiers were the largest volunteer army in history, yet ensuring that their enormous contribution is fully recognised in our national story remains an important work in progress.
About half of the public do know that Indian soldiers took part. It is better known among British Asians - with almost 6 out of 10 aware of the contribution. Yet while that means that more than three million British Asians have heard something about this, that suggests too that a couple of million of Asians in Britain today remain unaware of the South Asian contribution to the war effort.
It is less well understood that Hindu, Sikh and Muslim soldiers fought alongside British officers in the largest volunteer army that the world has ever seen. About four in ten report being aware that there were Hindu and Sikh soldiers in the Indian Army - while just under a third are aware of the Muslim contribution. Yet there is an appetite to learn more. Three-quarters of the public believe that learning more about this history could help social cohesion in Britain. It is a view held as strongly by the white British and by British Asians.
So the My Family Legacy project from British Future, the Royal British Legion and Eastern Eye seeks to make a contribution to doing that. It aims to raise awareness of the South Asian contribution in the world wars, among South Asian communities and people from all backgrounds in Britain today. It asks British Asian families to share stories and pictures of ancestors who served, creating an archive for future generations.
When we talk about the Indian Army, we are talking about the army drawn from the India of the 1940s. This was pre-independence India – so it included modern day India and Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. The Indian Army grew from 195,000 men in the Autumn of 1939 to over 2 million by the end of the war. A fledgling Indian Air Force went from 285 men to 29,000. This made the Indian army of the Second World War the largest volunteer army in history.
It may sound strange to our modern ears: that Indian soldiers would volunteer for the army of the British imperial power. Yet those who volunteered often saw the German and Japanese regimes as an existential threat as well as believing that India should govern itself after the war. So the Indian Army volunteers outnumbered – by a 50:1 ratio – the 43,000 rebels who heeded the call to form a rebel army for the Germans and Japanese.
We should not shy away from the complexity and controversies of understanding that we are a post-imperial society. But this country’s role in winning the Second World War should always endure as a source of shared pride.
It matters because we should honour the past properly: we should recognise the service and commemorate the sacrifice of all who contributed, especially when the liberties of all of us today are their legacy.
Yet this matters too because of how it can help us to look forward as well as back and help us to bind together our society today. To have a story of how our past, present and future are linked, is an important part of what it means to be a nation. Understanding the diversity of the war effort is a crucial way to join the dots in the making of modern post-war Britain.
That becomes all the more important in times like these, when a vocal, visible and toxic minority are making their most aggressive attempt for a generation to all into question the equal status and very presence of ethnic minorities in Britain.
Yet the toxic and racist far right fringe have always been deeply ignorant of the history of which they claim to be so proud. What could be more absurd than neo-fascists trying to wrap themselves in the very flag under which we defeated fascism - especially when that victory over fascism was achieved by multi-ethnic and multi-faith armies just as diverse as the modern Britain which honours today the victory which made this democratic and diverse society possible.
So this new effort to help people to find, document and tell their family stories of courage and contribution, service and sacrifice can make a difference. It can help show how our national symbols and traditions of Remembrance can bring today's modern, diverse Britain together ever more powerfully when we commemorate all of those who served.
Sunder Katwala is the director of thinktank British Future and the author of the book How to Be a Patriot: The must-read book on British national identity and immigration.