A replay of Liverpool’s match at Tottenham could be possible on a legal interpretation of Uefa’s rules, according to those within football legal circles. Premier League sources are adamant that a replay of the controversial clash will not happen, especially since their rules only allow for a replay in the event of a club being guilty of an offence, but there is a belief that the fact the competition's own rules make no other mention may allow a new precedent to be set. Jurgen Klopp became the first figure to publicly raise the prospect of a replay in his Wednesday Europa League press conference. The Liverpool manager said he would prefer that as an outcome of this controversy, but admitted it's unlikely. Liverpool have not made such a request up to now, as the fall-out from the decision to wrongly disallow Luiz Diaz's goal continues. It was the nature of how that goal was ruled out that could create a problem for the game if the club do decide to pursue that route. A replay could be possible over incorrect application of laws, rather than an outright mistake: since the VAR actually identified that Diaz was onside, the correct application of the laws of the game would have been to award a goal, but that evidently didn't happen. That takes it beyond the threshold of a simple mistake, and could fall under the provisions for a protest to Uefa. The European governing body do allow clubs to submit protests - albeit within 12 hours of the game finishing. The current principles of the International Football Association Board [IFAB] regarding “admissability of protests” state that “protests may not be lodged against factual decisions taken by the referee”” and that “in principle, a match is not invalidated because of: malfunction(s) of the VAR technology (as for goal line technology (GLT)); wrong decision(s) involving the VAR (as the VAR is a match official); decision(s) not to review an incident; review(s) of a non-reviewable situation/decision”. Since it has been acknowledged by the PGMOL that this did constitute a “factual error”, there is a belief that this could be legally pursued. Liverpool themselves were involved in a potential precedent, when Roma complained about the incorrect decision of a corner - rather than a penalty - from a Stephane Henchoz handball in their 2000-01 Uefa Cup semi-final. Referee Jose Maria Garcia-Aranda initially pointed to the spot only to change his mind and indicate a corner. While a drop-ball should actually have been given in this situation, it was felt by Uefa that no further action should be taken as a corner actually ended up benefitting Roma more than the drop-ball. Had that not been the case, though, the governing body's use of language in the situation had some sources involved fearing the prospect of a replay might at least have been raised. Liverpool were surprised at the time that Roma's complaint got that far. Protests do usually have to be submitted within 12 hours of the end of the game in such cases, but the fact that the Premier League make no mention of replays means that the Uefa example could be pointed to in any legal case. Where Liverpool could find a greater likelihood of success is in suing for compensation, but there is an internal acknowledgement of how deep the repercussions could be depending on what happens next. The club are currently assessing what steps to take, as the PGMOL are set to improve their protocols following the biggest VAR error the Premier League has seen. Read More Jurgen Klopp calls for Liverpool’s match at Tottenham to be replayed over VAR blunder Gary Neville responds after Jurgen Klopp calls for Liverpool replay: ‘That’s madness’ MP condemns TalkSport presenter Simon Jordan over Liverpool ‘victim culture’ comment PGMOL rejects Ben Foster’s claim that refs pressured Sky into VAR cover-up Jurgen Klopp should know better — calling for replays sets a dangerous precedent Gary Neville responds after Jurgen Klopp calls for Liverpool replay: ‘That’s madness’

Novak Djokovic is right where he wants to be after a slow start to his clay-court season

The Oklahoma Supreme Court will review an appeal from survivors of the 1921 Tulsa race massacre who are

Federal prosecutors and attorneys for President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, are at loggerheads and appear to have scrapped a deal for the lawyer and lobbyist turned artist to plead guilty to tax misdemeanour charges and enter into a diversion programme on a gun-related charge after the judge overseeing a plea hearing questioned whether the deal would preclude the government from pursuing other charges against him. US District Judge Maryellen Noreika ordered Mr Biden’s lawyers and prosecutors to confer further after Mr Biden said he would not accept the agreement if it did not provide that the government could not charge him for any crimes currently known to prosecutors if he successfully completes the terms of the deal. Prosecutors had agreed to ask Judge Noreika to impose a term of probation on Mr Biden for not having paid taxes on time in 2017 and 2018. Mr Biden was also expected to enter into a diversion deal under which he’d plead guilty to charges that he’d lied on a gun background check form when he said he wasn’t a user of drugs when he bought a pistol during that same time period, but would withdraw the plea after completing the terms of the diversion agreement, which often requires community service and continued sobriety verified by drug tests. During the court hearing, he told Judge Noreika that he’d been sober since 2019 but had been in and out of drug treatment for roughly two decades. The sticking point in the proceedings appeared when the judge asked prosecutors and defence counsel whether they understood the hearing to conclude any criminal proceedings against Mr Biden, and when prosecutors said that was not their understanding, she ordered prosecutors and defence counsel for the president’s son to confer on whether they still have an agreement. More follows... Read More Is Donald Trump going to prison? Trump begs Congress to help with legal troubles as possible Jan 6 charges loom – live Congressman asks UFO whistleblower if anyone has been ‘murdered’ to maintain coverup

Here's a breakdown of how to hit the Griddy in Madden NFL 23.

By Gram Slattery WASHINGTON Fentanyl producers in Mexico should be killed. So too should human traffickers and drug

Here's how to get a free Gengar in Pokemon Scarlet and Violet in Levinica City.

How Kate Middleton honored Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Diana at coronation

Hozier would stand in solidarity with his fellow musicians if a strike about AI ever happened.

Detailed list of Saints Row 3 Remastered cheats: PS5, Xbox Series X, PC

First it was Andrei Kanchelskis, then David Beckham and then Cristiano Ronaldo. For the best part of two decades, Manchester United were alright on the right. For periods in that time, the player on the flank – in two cases, in the iconic No 7 shirt – was arguably the best in the team; possibly, in a couple of seasons, the best in the world. Now two of the five most expensive signings in United’s history joined as right wingers. Both are unavailable. There are different reasons why Antony and Jadon Sancho are absent but if, after having spent almost £160m on the pair, the right wing should be one of the strongest departments of the United team, it was shaping up as a problem position even when manager Erik ten Hag could pick from both. Antony is currently taking a leave of absence after allegations of assault from three women; if, as he insists, he is innocent, he needs to clear his name while, if guilty – and so far police in both England and Brazil are investigating but no charges have been brought – his disappearance could, and many would say should, become a permanent affair. Sancho was omitted from the squad for the defeat to Arsenal because of his performances in training, Ten Hag said. The England international responded with a pinned tweet saying he had been made a “scapegoat”; United were willing to sell him for a suitably sizeable fee to Al-Ettifaq but only received a loan offer. For now, Sancho has been given a personal training programme as United decide which disciplinary action he should face. If, with Antony out of the picture, there is added scope to reintegrate Sancho, Ten Hag seems to deem his public criticism too great a transgression to ignore. So far, though, United have derived too little benefit from either. Antony has one goal in his last 26 league games. In all competitions, he has eight in 48 United appearances and just three assists: a habit of cutting infield to shoot suggests he is scarcely likely to get too many more. The footballing verdict may be that he is one-footed, one-dimensional and at times, one-paced as well. Sancho’s statistics are barely more impressive, with 12 goals and six assists in 82 games. If each forms a contrast with a more productive past – Beckham got 20 assists in one Champions League-winning season, 1998-99, and Ronaldo 42 goals in another, 2007-08 – there is a difference with Sancho’s own history, with his 17-goal, 16-assist Bundesliga campaign with Borussia Dortmund in 2019-20. There is the sense each has been miscast: Antony as a United player, with Ten Hag’s fondness for his former Ajax player prompting them to pay an exorbitant £86m, and Sancho as a right winger, when he looks better equipped to operate from the left and where, rather than using raw pace to sprint into space, he is better at close-combination play. If the evidence is that Ten Hag does not believe Sancho is quick enough to be his type of winger, a recurring theme at Old Trafford is an imbalance, with a host of attackers preferring to play from the left than the right: in recent years, they include Marcus Rashford, Anthony Martial, Alexis Sanchez, Jesse Lingard, Paul Pogba, Daniel James and Ronaldo. One exception, even if his long-term future seemed destined to be as United’s centre-forward, was Mason Greenwood, who brought more goals from the right than either Sancho or Antony. If United were far too slow to realise the 21-year-old could not resume his career at the club, belatedly aborting plans for his comeback, it could mean they have lost three options for the right flank in a matter of weeks. Which leaves Ten Hag with a problem as Brighton and Bayern Munich beckon. Of the youthful understudies, Amad Diallo (two Premier League starts in his career) is injured while Facundo Pellestri (none) is fit. Rashford or Martial could be moved into what is only the third-best position for each. United rebuffed suggestions they could sign the free agent Anwar El Ghazi; that they were mooted indicated how plans have gone awry. So an internal answer is required. Christian Eriksen had a profitable time for Tottenham when deployed off the right, though often as more of a No 10. If he was younger then and plays deeper and more centrally now, it may offer a hint to the best potential stand-in. Ten Hag showed an occasional willingness to use Bruno Fernandes from the right last season, often with a licence to come infield. Amid the question of how to accommodate the captain and Mason Mount, and whether the deadline-day signing Sofyan Amrabat should give the midfield more ballast by partnering Casemiro at the base, a way to do it would be to field one of the attack-minded players, whether the Englishman or the Portuguese, as a nominal right winger. Mount is not fit yet, but Eriksen could play centrally and Fernandes on the right in the meantime. As Fernandes looked more creative than Antony on the right last season, it may add to a regular theme at Old Trafford: if something needs doing, ask Bruno to do it. The reality that it is less than ideal to shift United’s premier No 10 is augmented by the fact United’s best attacking right-back, Diogo Dalot, who could have overlapped before if the supposed winger was in midfield, is actually playing left-back now because of injuries there. There may be compromises across the team. But then United have been making do on the right flank for various points in the 14 years since Ronaldo first left. There have been periods of excellence – Antonio Valencia won player of the year in 2011-12, Juan Mata excelled in 2014-15, albeit when the costlier Angel Di Maria was dropped, Greenwood delivered goals for a while – but if Sancho was Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s preferred solution and Antony was Ten Hag’s expensive answer, now United find themselves with a familiar dilemma: who is the right man for the right? Read More Erik ten Hag consulted as Antony put on ‘period of absence’ from Man Utd amid abuse allegations Man Utd punish Jadon Sancho over Erik ten Hag comments What next for Jadon Sancho after his public fall-out at Manchester United? Man Utd punish Jadon Sancho over Erik ten Hag comments Harry Maguire says he can deal with pressure after ‘banter’ from Scotland fans Manchester United announce new shirt sponsor for 2024/25 season

Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva yielded to pressure from a prominent political party and agreed to