By Lananh Nguyen and Juby Babu Ratings agency Moody's downgraded the credit ratings of several U.S. banks on

Dylan Mortensen, who survived the massacre at the University of Idaho, apparently felt 'survivor's guilt' and changed schools

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 is just days away from its full release, and Activision have listed all Field Upgrades available in the multiplayer at launch.

Even though Mets manager Buck Showalter was named safe in Steve Cohen's blasting presser, he was feeling a little frisky on Wednesday night.Steve Cohen's recent press conference was full of all kinds of fun tidbits for New York Mets fans. Like finding out the team may sell at the deadl...

Tom Brady unretirement talk, again.

Refereeing, head collisions and player safety again made the headlines on the opening weekend of the Rugby World Cup with a number of contentious incidents. The most high-profile came on Saturday when an England player was shown a red card for the fourth time this year, as Tom Curry was sent off early in his side’s win over Argentina, following a head-on-head collision with Juan Cruz Mallia. However, apparent inconsistency among officials irked many, especially on social media, with other incidents of head contact across the weekend not being punished as severely. Later in that same match, Santiago Carreras only received a yellow card despite his leap in attempting to charge down a George Ford kick seeing his hip make contact with the England No 10’s head. During South Africa’s impressive 18-3 win over Scotland, Jesse Kriel’s tackle on Jack Dempsey in which his head clattered into that of his Scottish opponent wasn’t even reviewed by the TMO and hasn’t subsequently been cited, while Chile captain Martin Sigren was only sin-binned despite a head-on-head collision while tackling a Japanese attacker. But what are the laws around head contact and high tackles that referees are following and how do they decide on the punishment? Here’s everything you need to know: What are World Rugby’s laws on head contact? Head-on-head contact in the tackle comes under Law 9 of the Laws of Rugby Union, which covers foul play. Law 9.11 dictates “Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others, including leading with the elbow or forearm, or jumping into, or over, a tackler” and Law 9.13 goes on to say “A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders.” If a player breaks these laws and the act is deemed to be reckless or dangerous, then the referee is entitled to issue a yellow or red card. World Rugby also clarify the intent of the laws, stating in their guidelines that: “ Player welfare drives World Rugby’s decision making for zero tolerance of foul play, especially where head contact occurs. The focus must be on the actions of those involved, not the injury – the need for an HIA [a Head Injury Assessment] does not necessarily mean that there has been illegal head contact.” What are the punishments for head-on-head contact? Ok, this is where things get technical and debates start to occur. In March 2023, World Rugby issued their latest ‘head contact process law application guidelines’ to guide referees on whether foul play has occurred and how it should be punished. The referee has to go through a four-step process (detailed below) to determine the extent of the foul play and the sanction. The four steps are: Has head contact occurred? Was there any foul play? What was the degree of danger? Is there any mitigation? Step 1 (has head contact occurred?) is relatively straightforward, with head contact including the head and the face as well as the neck and throat area. If any head contact is made at all, we move on to Step 2. Step 2 (was there foul play?) is a touch more complex. The referees are told to consider whether the head contact was either intentional, reckless or avoidable – e.g. the defender is always upright. If it was, the tackler will be penalised and they move on to Step 3. However, if the head contact was deemed not to be foul play, the game continues. Step 3 (what was the degree of danger?) – judged from high to low – determines the initial punishment. A degree of high danger is judged on any of: direct contact rather than indirect, a high-force impact, a lack of control from the tackler, the incident occurring at high speed, the tackler leading with the head/shoulder/elbow/forearm or the tackle being reckless. If the referee judges there to be a high degree of danger, a red card will be shown. Meanwhile, low danger is judged as indirect contact, low force, low speed or no leading head/shoulder/forearm/swinging arm and a yellow card or even just a penalty to the opposition may be awarded. The final step, Step 4 (is there any mitigation?) determines whether the punishment can be reduced by one grade (i.e red card down to yellow card or yellow card down to just a penalty). Mitigation includes a sudden or significant drop in height or change in direction from ball carrier, a late change in dynamics due to another player in the contact area, a clear effort from the tackler to reduce their height or the tackler having no time to adjust. However, mitigation will never apply for intentional or always-illegal acts of foul play. What about the Foul Play Review Officer/Bunker review? Introduced for this World Cup was the Bunker review system. This allows the referee to issue a yellow card to a player, sending them to the sin-bin while play goes on, where a Foul Play Review Official (FPRO) will then take another look at the incident and determine if the yellow card should be upgraded to red, allowing the game to continue rather than a long stoppage to debate this. This is what happened to Curry against Argentina. The referee crosses their arms to indicate a Bunker review will take place. Once a player is in the sin-bin, the FPRO has up to eight minutes to review the decision and decide if it warrants upgrading to a red card. If not, the player will return to the field after their 10 minutes in the sin-bin has elapsed. Read More Tom Curry ban: How many games will England star miss after red card vs Argentina? ‘Ruining this World Cup’: TV presenter slams ‘grotesque’ refereeing as Wales beat Fiji George Ford plays the pragmatist as England finally come to the boil in Marseille cauldron South Africa explain use of signals during Scotland win National anthems are ruining the Rugby World Cup – they must be changed now Tom Curry banned after red card in Rugby World Cup against Argentina

Lewis Hamilton said he was “disappointed” after his shock disqualification from the United States Grand Prix – while Mercedes boss Toto Wolff admitted “we got it wrong.” Hamilton finished the race in second, behind race winner Max Verstappen, but was later disqualified alongside Ferrari’s Charles Leclerc for breaching the rules governing the floor of their cars. Hamilton therefore loses the 18 points earned from his second-place finish, while Leclerc loses eight points. It is thought Mercedes won’t be appealing the decision. In a Mercedes press release, Wolff explained how Mercedes fell foul of the rules. “Turning to the race result and the disqualification, set-up choices on a sprint weekend are always a challenge with just one hour of free practice - and even more so at a bumpy circuit like COTA and running a new package,” he said. “In the end, all of that doesn’t matter; others got it right where we got it wrong and there’s no wiggle room in the rules. “We need to take it on the chin, do the learning, and come back stronger next weekend.” Hamilton said: “It is of course disappointing to be disqualified post-race but that doesn’t take away from the progress we’ve made this weekend.” Mercedes chief Andrew Shovlin admitted the team need to “go away and learn from this.” “We are of course naturally very disappointed to lose our podium finish,” he said. “Unfortunately, it is one of the pitfalls of the sprint format where we have a solitary hour of running before parc fermé. “Without running at a race fuel load in FP1, combined with a circuit as bumpy as this and the parts of the track where the drivers have to put the car during the Grand Prix, have contributed to the higher than expected wear levels. “We will go away and learn from this but also take the positives from our experience as a whole.” Read More Logan Sargeant earns first F1 point in bizarre circumstances Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc disqualified from United States GP Lando Norris reflects on 2023 win prospects after another near-miss in Austin Lewis Hamilton rues Mercedes error which cost him victory at US Grand Prix Max Verstappen booed by American fans on podium after victory Max Verstappen defies Lewis Hamilton to edge United States Grand Prix victory

Sen Feinstein (D-CA), the oldest senator currently serving, is facing fresh calls to resign amid news that she handed power of attorney over to her daughter. The San Francisco Chronicle first reported last month that the senior senator had handed over power of attorney. The longtime senator from California’s only daughter Katherine Feinstein is engaged in a feud with the three children of Ms Feinstein’s late husband Richard Blum, who died last year, The New York Times reported. In one lawsuit, they two are debating Ms Feinstein’s desire to sell a beach house in a neighbourhood in San Francisco, and in another, they are arguing about money from Mr Blum’s life insurance. A number of commentators renewed calls for Ms Feinstein to step down after the latest revelation. Earlier this year, Ms Feinstein was sidelined from Senate activities as she recovered from shingles. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, it put a halt to Democrats’ attempts to confirm some of President Joe Biden’s judicial nominees who lacked Republican support. When she returned to the Senate, she seemed to not recall her absence, according to a conversation with Slate. She has at times not understood basic questions from reporters. During a vote in the Senate Appropriations Committee last week, Sen Pattty Murray (D-WA) told her to “Just say aye” when she supported a bill. Katherine Feinstein, who has power of attorney, filed the two lawsuits on her mother’s behalf, arguing the beach house is in a disheveled state and accused Mr Blum’s children of limiting the senator’s ability to sell off parts of her trust. The second lawsuit says that the senator “incurred significant medical expenses” and despite her late husband’s “intent to support his spouse after his death, the purported trustees have refused to make distributions to reimburse Senator Feinstein’s medical expenses.” The suit challenges whether trustees to Mr Blum’s estate were properly appointed. The attorneys for Mr Blum’s private equity firm disputed the claims, saying it never denied payment for medical expenses. Similarly, a statement said that Katherine Feinstein had not provided documentation that she had been appointed power of attorney. “Nor has Katherine made it clear, either in this filing or directly to my clients, why a sitting United States senator would require someone to have power of attorney over her,” they said. This article was amended on 7 August 2023 to attribute the reporting of the latest line to the San Francisco Chronicle, and not the New York Times as was originally the case. Read More Nikki Haley urges McConnell and Feinstein to ‘walk away’ after recent health concerns Mitch McConnell’s health history reveals previous issues as he freezes during briefing Senator Dianne Feinstein appears confused at meeting Bill Barr says ‘of course’ he’ll testify against Trump in Jan 6 case if asked Trump and Biden tied in hypothetical 2024 rematch: poll

Chris Jones and the Kansas City Chiefs agreed to a new one-year deal, but it was also relatively one sided.

Parents Kate and Gerry McCann have spent 16 years searching for answers over their missing daughter.

Roberto Firmino's departure from Liverpool was unexpected by his teammates, Fabinho has revealed. The Brazilian will leave Anfield after eight seasons at the club, winning six major honours including the Premier League and the Champions League.

Apex Legends competitors have discovered a speedy trick that drastically improves their chances at victory by increasing their reaction time during shootouts.