Mikel Arteta admitted he has an emotional connection with Everton and expects his former side to put up a battle when Arsenal travel to Goodison Park in the Premier League on Sunday. Arsenal reignite their Premier League bid with a trip to Merseyside where they face Sean Dyche’s Everton, who are unbeaten at home against the Gunners since 2017. Arteta praised his former side’s attributes and highlighted the special connection between himself and the Toffees. “I’m really excited about it, the last six years we have not won there so we are going to have to earn it,” Arteta said. “We know we are going to have to be at our best to beat them there and that’s something we haven’t managed to do so that’s where we are going to start. “It is a big emotional connection I have to that football club with many years I spent there, the incredible memories that I have so I’m always grateful. It’s a big part of my playing career and as a coach I have to play against them and we have to beat them. “We’ve been here and we’ve been to grounds before where we haven’t won before and we’ve done it so it’s about understanding the importance and knowing what we lacked in those games and putting it right. “Sometimes you cannot avoid a battle (with Everton), the style of play they have is very clear and they’re very good at that. “We have a different one and it’s about trying to impose your way of playing and the tactic is just to make sure your opponent’s strengths are hiding and that ours are coming out every single time to fulfill the potential of your players, and that’s what I think both managers and players will try to do.” Arsenal’s Champions League opener against PSV next week is their first time back in the competition since the 2016-17 season. The Spaniard embraced the challenge of a difficult schedule alongside another battle with Manchester City at the summit of the Premier League this season. “We played three games a week last year, but the Champions League is obviously different with the expectations and that we’ve been away from it for seven years,” he added. “It’s excitement, this is where we want to be and when you look at the fixtures and the games we are going to have to play, I think everyone is really looking forward to it.” Arsenal terminated Nicolas Pepe’s contract on Saturday after the Ivorian failed to hold down a starting role at the Emirates since his reported £72 million move – then a club-record fee – in 2019. Arteta said: “What I can say is that he’s a phenomenal boy, he trained really hard, it’s not his fault that the amount of money we paid at the time. “When things aren’t working out you have to move on and there’s no point when things aren’t working either way. “The decisions has been made and I think it’s in the benefit of both parties.” Read More Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Ange Postecoglou says Tottenham will give support to troubled Richarlison Ireland braced for ‘big step up’ ahead of facing Tonga’s ‘serious threats’ Erik ten Hag says he inherited Manchester United with ‘no good culture’

Former New Zealand lock Sam Whitelock will have a "massive impact" on Pau, the French club's fly-half Joe Simmonds said before Saturday's...

Newly released FBI documents say there were “ever-present“ IRA threats during her US visits.

Hertz Global Holdings Inc. reported a per-share profit for the second quarter of 72 cents, beating the consensus

Wondering if Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII Reunion is included in the PlayStation Plus subscription? Here's what you need to know.

BEIJING Profits at China's industrial firms extended gains for a second month in September, adding to signs of

BANGKOK Thailand's headline inflation rate dropped to its lowest in 21 months in May due to falling energy

BOGOTA Mexican used-car platform Kavak has opened a vehicle reconditioning plant in Colombia, which it hopes will help

By Lucy Craymer WELLINGTON Race and relations with the indigenous Maori population have emerged as issues in New

Lando Norris raised hopes that he could challenge Max Verstappen for pole at the Japanese Grand Prix by finishing final practice within three tenths of the Red Bull driver. Verstappen’s record 10-race winning run and Red Bull’s unbeaten season came to an end in Singapore last weekend. He had set a blistering pace on Friday to suggest the team have put their struggles in the city-state behind them. The Dutchman’s margin in opening practice was a huge 0.626 seconds over Ferrari’s Singapore-winner Carlos Sainz before beating Charles Leclerc by 0.320sec in P2. That raised fears that Verstappen, who is closing in on a hat-trick of world titles, could dominate the weekend in a Red Bull car which Lewis Hamilton predicted would be “phenomenal” around the high-speed corner track at Suzuka. But Norris finished just 0.240 seconds adrift of the 25-year-old and just 0.048 ahead of his McLaren team-mate Oscar Piastri as the British team continued to show strong pace. Mercedes pair Hamilton and George Russell enjoyed a more promising session but remained off the pace of Red Bull and McLaren. Hamilton in particular struggled badly in Friday’s two practice sessions, finishing 16th and 14th, with the seven-time world champion admitting Mercedes had work to do before qualifying. The 38-year-old finished seventh in P3, albeit 0.892sec behind pace-setter Verstappen, with Russell eighth. Mercedes are battling with Ferrari to finish second in the Constructors’ Championship. Ferrari, who are running a new floor at Suzuka, claimed the edge by finishing fifth and sixth but were over half-a-second adrift of the two McLarens. Sergio Perez in the second Red Bull claimed fourth, 0.737sec behind his team-mate. A large number of the teams are struggling with tyre degradation due to the higher-than-usual heat at Suzuka, with a track temperature of over 48 degrees Celsius recorded during P3, raising the possibility of a three-stop race on Sunday. Qualifying gets under way at 1500 local time (0700 BST). Read More Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Max Verstappen returns to form in Japanese Grand Prix practice Lance Stroll to sit out Singapore Grand Prix after huge crash in qualifying ‘You can forget about that’ – Max Verstappen rules out another win in Singapore

Amber Husain was cooking dinner for a friend when she suddenly realised the meat she was preparing was a corpse. She looked at the chicken in front of her and was overcome with a visceral sense of disgust. Instead of food, she saw “a carcass – plucked, beheaded, and fleshy”. Husain was 26 when she had this epiphany, and it served as a wake-up call not just for her stomach but her mind, too – as her personal tastes shifted away from meat products, her political outlook on the meat industry and food production more broadly also altered and expanded. Five years later, that moment of revulsion forms the opening of her new book, Meat Love, in which she scrutinises the idea of “ethical” meat consumption, and dares to ask how the contemporary middle classes have come to criticise “the worst violence against animals” while still happily feeding on their flesh. Why, for example, has well-heeled, middle-class London gone nuts for slurping bone marrow from the shin bones of baby cows? Why is offal on so many trendy menus? How has contemporary culture at large come to accept that factory farms are monstrous, but that if animals are cared for, cherished and loved while alive, we should feel better about killing them for our carnivorous pleasures? “For ages, I was one of those carnivores who felt mildly bad about eating meat but just turned that into this inane, self-consciously sadistic part of the pleasure of it all,” Husein tells me. “The more my diet started to revolve around stuff that wasn’t meat, the weirder meat started to feel. Interestingly, once my stomach had been radicalised, I found I had a much greater intellectual openness to thinking about the politics of meat.” Having freed herself from the conflict of eating meat but also feeling bad about it, she found she was able to go beyond those questions of morality – which she suggests can be “stifling” – and think politically. “Now that I have no desire to eat animals, there’s nothing to stop me reckoning with what it means that the meat industry [consists of] an underclass of both humans and animals who are exploited and – in the animals’ case – killed for pleasure and profit.” This is the essential crux of Husain’s argument, and it’s something often lacking in discussions around the “ethics” of meat consumption. For Husain, the question is not, “how can humans eat meat responsibly?” but “how are certain lives devalued to an extent that their suffering can be written off, in order to ‘make a killing’?” What she’s saying, in other words, is that whether the meat on the table has come from a factory farm or an organic farm, or whether you’re tucking in at Burger King or the River Cafe, the path to the plate is still paved with violence. And, while current cultural trends may claim it is better to love and respect an animal before killing and consuming it, perhaps what this cultivates is the ability to embrace exploitation “in a spirit of virtuous indulgence”. What does it really mean, for all living beings, if love is imagined as compatible with killing? “To slide your buttery hand between the flesh and skin of a thing that, if only for a moment, you have re-learnt to perceive as a corpse, is to give an invigorating massage to your sense of political possibility,” Husain writes in Meat Love. By the slim book’s end, her invigorated “sense of political possibility” has led to “a ravenous hunger – a desire for a different culture, a different society”; a new world “in which no one, neither animal, immigrant, worker, woman, or peasant, was considered a thing to be owned, controlled, killed, or left to die”. For many, the leap from a chicken breast on a plate to the exploitation of oppressed people around the globe might seem like a vast one. Yet, it certainly seems clear that there has been a marked shift in the way meat is conceived and consumed – among the middle classes, at least. Since the turn of the millennium, foodie figures like Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall have been promoting “seasonal, ethically produced food” as part of a broader commitment to caring for the environment. At the same time, a distinctly carnivorous spirit has taken hold – one that professes to be an “honest”, “grounded” and “down to earth” ethos. “Good food, good eating, is all about blood and organs, cruelty and decay,” Anthony Bourdain wrote at the start of the 1999 New Yorker article that would, eventually, catapult him into global foodie fame. I find it easy to laugh at Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and people like that, but I’m not totally convinced that they’re really the bad guys Lewis Bassett Then there’s Fergus Henderson and St John – the illustrious London restaurant, born in 1994 on the premises of a former bacon smokehouse, which popularised “nose to tail” dining. This offal-centric “no waste” approach is neatly summed up in Henderson’s oft-quoted phrase: “If you’re going to kill the animal, it seems only polite to use the whole thing.” Traditionally “cheap cuts” are “elevated” from a source of sustenance for the working classes, to a source of virtue for the urban bourgeois. According to its own cookbook, St John dishes combine “high sophistication with peasant roughness” – that winning aesthetic formula that also sees middle-class urbanites flocking to farmers’ markets and chugging natural wine. In a sharp and searing piece for food and culture newsletter Vittles, writer Sheena Patel dubs this “Rich Person Peasantcore”, asking: “Why are these influencers pretending that they themselves till the land and eat like 17th-century French peasants when in fact their chopping boards cost more than most people’s rent?” In the face of swathes of small plates adorned with offal, and slices of ham served for upwards of £20, it seems like a pertinent question not just for influencers, but also for today’s trendiest restaurateurs and diners. Lewis Bassett is a chef and the host of The Full English podcast, which, over its two seasons, has dived into everything from the birth of “modern European” cuisine to high food prices, factory farms, and why Britain is in love with Greggs. “It’s interesting the way we create these fantastical worlds for us to eat within,” he says. “It is clearly a fantasy to imagine that you can have the rural experience of a peasant in France or Italy, in modern-day Britain.” Yet, he also says that this trend is far from new. The current “rustic” style – typified by “nose to tail eating” – is, he suggests, “intimately tied with what you could call a culinary and broader cultural movement that appears in the wake of countercultural movements in the Sixties, and eventually finds its way into food, especially as some of those countercultural people get a bit older and a bit more affluence”. Essentially, “it’s the same thing that manifested in places like Habitat,” he says, of the homewares and furnishings brand founded in 1964 by Terence Conran. Both design and dining were transformed, offering experiences to the middle classes that were both refined and casual at the same time. Alongside that cultural shift, and “that fashion for pared-down forms of eating out”, Bassett notes the arrival of a broader awareness of environmental and animal welfare concerns. “It’s obviously easy to ridicule these middle-class forms of culture,” he says, “but these concerns are ones I certainly share and I think should be considerations for everyone. I find it easy to laugh at Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and people like that, but I’m not totally convinced that they’re really the bad guys.” So is there a danger that legitimate backlash to the “thrifty rural”, “nose to tail” trend – and bourgeois “peasantcore” more broadly – could spill over into an attack on all food industry attempts at sustainability? “I think people don’t want stuffy fine dining experiences,” Bassett says, “but at the same time, having the kind of pared-down, rustic, ‘peasant food’ – like, having ham served to you at St John costs you 20 quid – maybe people are slightly sick of that.” He quickly adds, though, that he is “not saying it can come any cheaper than 20 quid, because when you spend a lot of time and effort rearing animals properly, and paying chefs properly, and paying rents in your restaurants, that racks up”. It seems there is a tension, then, between practical and immediate ethical matters – such as paying food industry staff liveable wages or reducing food waste – and broader questions about what kind of society we wish to live in or create. Is the question of “ethical” meat consumption, as Husain suggested, “beyond morality” – a question of politics only? Or is it still, at heart, a moral dilemma, based on people’s personal sense of “right” and “wrong”? Summing up Husain’s attitude towards animals in Meat Love, Bassett suggests “she’s saying that, if you love them so much, why are you killing them? I suppose where Amber Husain and I would slightly disagree is that I’m not convinced that killing an animal is inherently wrong.” Away from the carnal appreciation and “peasantcore” of contemporary restaurant culture, meat-eating often seems to be conceived as either a “guilty pleasure” or a “grim necessity”. In all these cases, however, there appears to be an overriding sense that there is “no alternative” to a meat-eating status quo. The late cultural critic Mark Fisher famously used similar terms to define “capitalist realism”, meaning that capitalism is the only viable economic system, and thus there can be no imaginable alternative. Is it possible we’re also stuck in a kind of “carnivorous realism”? If so, it might be because the two are so interlinked. As Husain puts it, “meat is the inevitable outcome of an economic system that relies on cheap labour and cheap life. But that doesn’t mean meat is a necessity, it means a new economic order is a necessity.” Perhaps taking the leap from a vegetarian diet to full-scale social and economic revolution still seems unthinkable to many. But, in nasty, brutish and austere times, it has also perhaps never been more necessary to seriously consider who can eat, and who is made meat. “I think we need an avalanche of political will from within the food justice, land justice, climate justice and labour movements to radically transform society,” Husain says. With that as the goal, she believes it isn’t helpful “for us to be clinging to the idea of meat as a pleasure”: “If we can’t imagine something other than animal flesh to eat for dinner we might struggle to imagine an entirely different society.” ‘Meat Love: An Ideology of the Flesh’ by Amber Husain is out now Read More Between Brexit and Covid, London’s food scene has become a dog’s dinner – can it be saved? It’s time for booze bottles to have health warning labels Should I give up Diet Coke? With aspartame under suspicion, an addict speaks Food portion sizes on packaging are ‘unrealistic and confusing’, says Which? In Horto: Hearty, outdoorsy fare in a secret London Bridge garden Zero-fuss cooking: BBQ pork ribs and zingy Asian slaw

Everton manager Sean Dyche was frustrated by his side’s inability to convert their chances and disappointed by the lack of VAR intervention on Michael Keane’s disallowed goal in the 1-0 defeat to Fulham. Despite an encouraging performance in which they created twice as many chances as the visitors, they were undone by a sucker-punch goal as two Cottagers substitutes Aleksandar Mitrovic and Andreas Pereira combined to provide the third, Bobby Decordova-Reid, with a 73rd-minute tap-in. But it was the chalking off of Keane’s goal, when he turned the ball into an empty net after goalkeeper Bernd Leno had dropped it in a challenge with James Tarkowski, which was crucial to an Everton side who were the Premier League’s lowest scorers last season. “Very frustrated with the outcome. We played well and a lot of the things we are looking for were there, especially first half,” said Dyche. “We limited them to almost no chances or nothing clear while creating nine or 10 in the first half, five of which are high quality. We had one of the highest chance counts in my time. So the mix of the performance is right, but we have to score a goal. “I am a big fan of VAR, I don’t know why (Keane’s goal was not referred) on this occasion, I get the idea they are promoting the idea the referee’s decision is first but they should step in on this one. “I can’t really work it out. I have seen it back, Tarky does nothing really, minimal contact other than the keeper landing on him. “The minimum should be that you go and look at the monitor. He didn’t do anything to put the keeper off and he drops it.” Fulham boss Marco Silva – a former Everton manager – admitted his side got fortunate with the result. “It was not a good performance from ourselves. Overall during the game we didn’t perform at our level,” he said. “Even if we started the game well. after the first 15 minutes we started to lose too many balls in areas it is difficult to lose balls in. “We gave Everton so many chances to punish us in counter-attacks. It was more our fault because we didn’t perform. Bernd keeps us in the game – a great performance. “That we are able to win in such circumstances, it is a great feeling. It is not a problem for me to say Everton deserved better. “It’s a great feeling when you don’t play at your level for 95 minutes and you are able to win away from home.” Read More Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Tom Pidcock wins mountain bike cross-country at World Championships Roy Hodgson brushes off Max Lowe spat as Crystal Palace beat Sheffield United West Ham boss David Moyes considering using Jarrod Bowen as striker