In the wake of England’s dramatic World Cup semi-final loss, star player Marc Guehi has voiced his frustration over the team’s overly cautious strategy. The spotlight is now on head coach Thomas Tuchel, whose tactical substitutions during the match have come under heavy scrutiny.

The match saw Anthony Gordon break the deadlock with a goal in the 55th minute, after England endured a punishing first half. Argentina employed a physical game, relentlessly targeting midfielders like Jude Bellingham and Elliot Anderson with fouls.

Despite having more than 20 minutes plus injury time to play, Tuchel opted for a series of defensive changes. This move limited England’s ability to build on their lead and put further pressure on their opponents.

The decision proved costly, as Enzo Fernandez netted an equalizer in the 85th minute. To compound England’s woes, Lautaro Martinez dealt the final blow with a header during injury time, clinching the victory for Argentina.

While Tuchel faces widespread criticism from outside the team, Guehi has openly questioned England’s game plan. He suggested that the tactics didn’t match the magnitude of the occasion, hinting at a mismatch between strategy and execution.

‘Once we went 1-0 up, we seemed to just try and hold on, which at this level is just not enough, so I’m gutted,’ the Manchester City defender told BBC Sport after the final whistle. 

‘We should have carried on. We should have carried on pushing. It kind of felt like we scored and the mentality was, go back, defend.’ 

Tuchel later threw on Marcus Rashford and Ivan Toney as the game ticked into added time, but it was too little, too late, for England to force extra time and seek a potential winner. 

When asked whether he thought that this was the squad that could finally win England silverware, Guehi continued to cut a deflated figure. 

‘I don’t know. I don’t know,’ he said. ‘It’s hard to think about the future right now. 

‘At the moment, it’s just disappointment. That’s all.’ 

Tuchel defended his decision-making in the aftermath of his defeat, suggesting that his critics would have had a different view with an alternative outcome. 

‘If it doesn’t go well, it’s easy to say that it was wrong,’ Tuchel told the BBC – and then suggested England were on the back foot before his changes.

‘We just tried to help the players. We conceded straight away. We decided to go to a back five because the gaps were far too open.

‘Straight after our goal, without a substitution we conceded way too many crosses and chances. We tried to help but the responsibility was on the coach.’

Between Gordon’s opener and Enzo Fernandez’s leveller, England had just 12 per cent of possession.

‘We couldn’t get out,’ Tuchel said. ‘Of course we wanted to go for the second goal but I didn’t feel an offensive substitution would help.

‘We stayed in our 4-4-2 but we became passive, couldn’t win any balls or keep the ball. It wasn’t a structure problem.

‘We changed nothing after the goal but the match changed completely. I understand these discussions are out there and other coaches know it better after the game.’

Among those to hit out at Tuchel were Alan Shearer and Wayne Rooney, who claimed that his tactics had ‘cost’ England their meeting with Spain in New York. 

World Cup-winning goalkeeper with Spain Iker Casillas described his coaching as ‘cowardly’, while Chris Sutton was unafraid to speak out, dubbing it a ‘coaching catastrophe’ from the former Chelsea manager. 

England might have however considered themselves unlucky in the first-half after a number of rough Argentine challenges went unpunished. 

In the third minute of the match, Enzo Fernandez ploughed into a heavy challenge on Anderson which left the England player clutching the back of his neck.

Anderson, who was repeatedly targeted throughout an attritional first 45 minutes, took a minute or two to haul himself off the turf as England and Argentina players came together in an early showing of the bitter rivalry between the two teams. 

Referee Ismail Elfath battled to separate the sets of players, but did not hold up a card of either colour to punish Fernandez. 

An extended replay for television audiences however shows Fernandez barrelling into Anderson with little thought for the ball at his feet, and appearing to chop him in the neck with his elbow. 

Arguably an outright red, Fernandez might have at least seen a yellow card for his clumsy play – with the Chelsea star then dodging a second punishment minutes later for skittling an on-rushing Jude Bellingham yards from the Argentina penalty area. 

It was instead Anderson himself who received the first yellow card of the match, the midfielder lashing out at Lionel Messi after suffering persistent tackles. 

Some England fans watching from home also claimed that Martinez’s winner should not have stood, with Lionel Messi appearing to foul Djed Spence in the build-up. 

After Alexis Mac Allister hit the post for the second time, the ball cannoned back out on England’s left-hand side, leading to a foot race between Spence and Messi in the penalty area. 

Spence beat Messi to the ball but appeared to be caught by Messi in the process.

Immediately the full back spun around in some discomfort but the referee waved play on – and just seconds later England were punished as Messi crossed to an unmarked Martinez to score.

How much is David Beckham set to pocket from his World Cup brand deals? Take on our quiz in our newsletter HERE 

A remarkable transformation is sweeping across African economies, bolstered by the Trump Administration’s strategic shift in policy from aid-centric to trade-focused. This pivot has been pivotal, as reported by a senior State Department official to News Media.

Initially, there were dire predictions for several African nations when USAID funding was dramatically reduced under the Trump administration. Contrary to these forecasts, however, unprecedented economic growth has unfolded, largely attributed to the Commercial Diplomacy Strategy launched at the onset of President Trump’s second term.

“Nine of the 20 fastest-growing economies globally are now situated in Africa,” announced Frank Garcia, Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of African Affairs, in an interview with News Media.

Garcia further revealed, “African economies are thriving in response to this shift towards trade. By 2025, U.S. exports to sub-Saharan Africa surged by 23%, reaching a considerable $22.6 billion, and they continue to grow this year.”

When the Administration cut USAID by 83% early last year, “The predictions were catastrophic: economies heavily dependent on foreign donors—from Ethiopia to South Sudan and Malawi — were expected to collapse. Instead, something quite different happened,” Anna Mahjar-Barducci, Project Director at the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), told News Media.

“The African continent proved far more resilient than expected, citing Ethiopia, which revised its 2026 growth forecasts upward despite the funding cuts,” Mahjar-Barducci continued. “According to projections by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Sub-Saharan Africa is expected to grow between 4.3% and 4.6% in 2026, outpacing Asia as a whole, whose growth is forecast at around 4.1%. Growth is propelled by massive hydroelectric investments, construction, mining and expanding coffee exports.”

“This is no minor detail,” she continued. “For decades, we were told that without international aid Africa would collapse. Now that aid is genuinely drying up, much of the continent is not only avoiding collapse —i t is accelerating. This is precisely the argument that a long-standing school of African economic thought, now more relevant than ever, has advanced for years: aid is not the solution. In many cases, it is part of the problem.”

Assistant Secretary Garcia explained how the strategy works:” We see this economic acceleration in Africa. In order to best capitalize on it, the United States is focused on driving private investment, sustainable growth in terms of partnership and treating African nations not as aid recipients, but as capable commercial partners.”

He added “Our embassies (in Africa) work directly with the private sector to identify the policies, laws, and regulations constraining U.S. trade and investment. We then work with partner governments to develop practical reforms, identify the officials responsible for implementing them and determine where technical assistance may support implementation.”

It’s a strategy that appears to be working, with Garcia adding, “The Bureau of African Affairs has worked on 37 commercial transactions that have closed since the beginning of the (current) Trump Administration, representing $25.67 billion in total value, with more still being reported. Embassies across the continent are actively working to close hundreds more. Top sectors include Energy 24%, ICT 19%, Critical Minerals and Mining 11%, Aerospace 8%, Agriculture 8%, Infrastructure 8%.”

Mahjar-Barducci criticized the way USAID worked, telling News Media,” When aid flows to governments rather than markets, it tends to finance projects designed in Brussels, Rome, or Washington which are not responding to the actual needs of local economies. Poverty cannot be overcome by treating people as permanent recipients of charity. Poverty can be reduced by recognizing people as entrepreneurs, workers and economic partners capable of building their own prosperity.”

Trade, rather than aid works, Mahjar-Barducci claimed. “The Trump administration’s more transactional approach to aid — access to critical minerals, or to citizens’ health data, in exchange for funding — should not be dismissed as merely cynical. Unconditional transfers have long been the deeper flaw in the traditional aid model: money with no strings attached removes any incentive for a recipient government to reform and often entrenches the same officials responsible for the underlying poverty.”

Enter the America First Global Health Strategy. A senior State Department official told News Media this week that the administration “has signed 34 bilateral global health Memoranda of Understanding(MOU) representing more than $24 billion in new health funding, including more than $14.3 billion in U.S. assistance, alongside more than $9.6 billion in co-investment from recipient countries.”

“24 of these MOUs were signed with sub-Saharan African countries,” the official continued. “These new bilateral MOUs are designed to continue life-saving care, build resilient healthcare systems, reduce dependency on American taxpayers and strengthen country ownership.”

The administration has also decided to cut funding for a U.S. anti-AIDS program known as PEPFAR. Africa has been hit hard by the HIV/AIDS pandemic. UNAIDS, the United Nations program that deals with the virus, reports that South Africa has the highest infection rate in the world. 

But the State Department official News Media spoke with says South Africa must take some of the blame for cutting help to its own people. “The United States has decided to initiate a phased drawdown of PEPFAR programming in South Africa, following South Africa’s failure to make demonstrable progress on policy requests by the administration. The United States communicated to [the] South African government multiple times at many levels that PEPFAR funding would be terminated if they failed to address President Trump’s concerns.”

“PEPFAR was never intended to be permanent,” the official added. “Its success is measured by countries’ ability to sustain and build upon these gains. South Africa is a middle-income country and is more than capable of supporting its own health programs.”

News Media reached out to the South African government, but received no response.

A rising dental student tragically passed away following medical treatment allegedly administered by a doctor not physically present, as claimed in a $15 million lawsuit filed by his grieving father.

Conor James Hylton, aged 26 and a resident of New Haven, Connecticut, died on August 15, 2024, at the Milford Campus of Bridgeport Hospital.

The lawsuit, filed by his father William H Hylton, alleges that Conor’s medical care during his final hours was dictated by a physician positioned 12 miles away at Yale New Haven Health’s tele-clinic.

William, accompanied by his wife Betsy Hylton, hurried to the ICU just an hour before Conor’s passing. The couple claims they witnessed medical staff battling to save their son while receiving directives from a man appearing on a screen, as detailed in the lawsuit.

“We saw the whole thing unfold,” William recounted to the Free Press. He described watching the individual on the screen managing the entire procedure remotely, instructing the nurses and others present.

‘And you know, at first, it doesn’t maybe hit you, but then you start thinking, so this guy on the TV is really running the show here.’ 

His lawsuit alleges that Conor’s death was ‘a direct result of the negligence of Bridgeport Hospital, Yale New Haven Hospital Inc.’

The suit takes aim at the medics involved in Conor’s care, claiming they failed to effectively communicate as they tried to save his life – something which was exacerbated by the remote working setup, according to the filing.

The Daily Mail has contacted each defendant named in the lawsuit. 

Yale New Haven Health previously told reporters that it ‘is aware of this lawsuit and is committed to providing the safest and highest quality of care possible; however, we are unable to comment on pending litigation’. 

Conor’s nightmare began at 11am on August 14, when he arrived at the Bridgeport hospital after vomiting all day and being unable to keep his food down. 

He had low blood pressure, EKG results suggesting heart rhythm problems, and elevated heart and respiratory rates. 

His clinical record also noted a history of alcohol abuse, and within hours, doctors diagnosed him with conditions related to alcohol withdrawal, including dehydration, pancreatitis, and metabolic acidosis. 

Conor was given medication and a hospital bed. His parents went home at 7pm, believing he was stable and in good hands, but his condition rapidly deteriorated overnight. 

‘At approximately 4.30am, Mr Hylton slid down in bed, his eyes rolled back and he became unresponsive and exhibited seizure-like activity,’ the lawsuit reads. 

Conor began vomiting blood and his heartrate dropped. Medics intubated him and attempted to perform life-saving measures, but he died just after 6am. 

The lawsuit claims that efforts to save him and his pronouncement of death were ‘erroneously attributed to Dr. Denu in the medical record, but in reality, Dr. Denu did nothing and the pronouncement was done by a “tele-health” provider on a video screen.’

Dr Denu was the hospitalist overseeing the hospital on the night Conor died, but she told investigators she did not see ICU patients because they were seen by ICU tele-physicians instead, according to the Free Press. She is not named as a defendant in the lawsuit.

The lawsuit launched by Conor’s father accuses the hospital of giving his son ‘substandard care,’ saying the medics present for his final moments exhibited ‘extremely poor communication.’

The lawsuit also claims that no physicians saw Conor in person while he was in the ICU ‘for hours’, and that his parents were not notified that his condition had deteriorated until he was almost dead. 

His father, William, 63, said that he chose to take his son to the Bridgeport Hospital believing it would provide the best care. 

‘I took him to Milford because it’s a little smaller than Yale New Haven, but it’s still a Yale facility,’ he told the Free Press. ‘We thought it might be quicker.’ 

William said he and his wife left the hospital at about 7pm on August 14, believing their son simply needed rehydration, which he would receive overnight. 

They planned to return the next day with Conor’s two younger brothers, but were instead woken by a phone call from the hospital at 4.45am. 

An ICU medic told the family that Conor was undergoing CPR and they would need to get to the hospital immediately. 

William said his son had been in the ICU for almost five hours at this point, but nobody had notified them until was too late. 

By the time they arrived, he said Conor ‘was, basically, for all intents and purposes, already dead.’ 

The family attorney, Joel Faxon, said Conor essentially received care in a ‘fake ICU.’

‘You can’t delegate the responsibility for intensive care to somebody on a screen,’ Faxon told the Free Press. 

‘I mean, it’s called intensive care for a reason. And this is why I say this is a fake ICU.’ 

Following in the footsteps of his parents who are both dentists, Conor was a promising student at the UConn School of Dental Medicine. 

He studied his undergraduate degree at the University of Connecticut, and was a student athlete during his high school years at Notre Dame. 

‘His gifted athleticism led him to play Irish football at the New Haven Gaelic Football Club and to receive his black belt in Taekwondo,’ his obituary reads.  

Qualifying as a dentist was his ‘life long dream,’ according to the tribute. 

His father’s lawsuit requests $15 million in economic and emotional damages. 

The Daily Mail has contacted Bridgeport Hospital, Yale New Haven Hospital, and Northeast Medical Group for comment.