The Gunners delivered the statement Champions League victory their manager had demanded to bounce back from a narrow defeat at Inter Milan last time out. Goals from Gabriel Martinelli, Kai Havertz, Gabriel Magalhaes, Bukayo Saka and Leandro Trossard got their continental campaign back on track, lifting them to seventh place with 10 points in the new-look 36-team table. It was Arsenal’s biggest away win in the Champions League since beating Inter by the same scoreline in 2003. “For sure, especially against opposition we played at their home who have not lost a game in 18 months – they have been in top form here – so to play with the level, the determination, the purpose and the fluidity we showed today, I am very pleased,” said Arteta. “The team played with so much courage, because they are so good. When I’m watching them live they are so good! They were all exceptional today. It was a big performance, a big win and we are really happy. “The performance was there a few times when we have played big teams. That’s the level that we have to be able to cope and you have to make it happen, and that creates belief.” A memorable victory also ended Sporting’s unbeaten start to the season, a streak of 17 wins and one draw, the vast majority of which prompted Manchester United to prise away head coach Ruben Amorim. The Gunners took the lead after only seven minutes when Martinelli tucked in Jurrien Timber’s cross, and Saka teed up Havertz for a tap-in to double the advantage. Arsenal added a third on the stroke of half-time, Gabriel charging in to head Declan Rice’s corner into the back of the net. To rub salt in the wound, the Brazilian defender mimicked Viktor Gyokeres’ hands-over-his-face goal celebration. That may have wound Sporting up as they came out after the interval meaning business, and they pulled one back after David Raya tipped Hidemasa Morita’s shot behind, with Goncalo Inacio netting at the near post from the corner. But when Martin Odegaard’s darting run into the area was halted by Ousmane Diomande’s foul, Saka tucked away the penalty. Substitute Trossard added the fifth with eight minutes remaining, heading in the rebound after Mikel Merino’s shot was saved. A miserable night for prolific Sporting striker Gyokeres was summed up when his late shot crashed back off the post.
Article content Stop the presses; Chrysler has major news! Well, okay, that may be a bit dramatic. However, if you’re a lover of all things minivan , then you’ve probably been impatiently waiting for an electric minivan. Sure, maybe the Volkswagen ID.Buzz was a good start, but it’s not really and truly a minivan in the sense of a “soccer mom” equivalent, right? Chrysler brought us the first plug-in hybrid minivan via the Pacifica , and it’s still the only PHEV minivan in the North American market. (Note: The Toyota Sienna lineup is fully hybrid, and Kia recently added hybrid variants to its 2025 Carnival .) Now, if Toyota, Kia, and Honda don’t try to pull any fast moves with their minivan lineups, Chrysler will be the first to introduce an all-electric minivan in this segment. At the 2024 L.A. Auto Show , Chrysler CEO Christine Feuell confirmed to Green Car Reports that its upcoming electric minivan will also come in the form of the Pacifica , which makes the most sense, considering the only other vehicle in Chrysler’s current lineup is the Grand Caravan that comes in only one trim, and adding an all-new player to produce a lineup of three minivans would be extremely uncalled for in today’s market. “Consumers have a favorable opinion about Pacifica and very high awareness. I see no reason at this point to change the name,” Feuell told GCR , who also confirmed the Pacifica will receive a refresh for 2026, with the electric Pacifica likely to follow a year later. Details on whether the PHEV will continue to be offered, or if there might be a range extender, are still unknown. While nothing is set in stone just yet, Feuell also noted Chrysler is working on keeping the well-known Stow ‘N Go seats in the electric minivan, with a few ideas on the table. Meanwhile, design cues may come from the Halcyon concept , which could prove to be very interesting. Can you imagine a Chrysler Pacifica Pinnacle EV with Halcyon styling? What do you think? Is an all-electric minivan just what we need? Sign up for our newsletter Blind-Spot Monitor and follow our social channels on Instagram , Facebook and X to stay up to date on the latest automotive news, reviews, car culture, and vehicle shopping advice.A court challenge over a Stormont vote on extending post-Brexit trading arrangements for Northern Ireland has been dismissed, and the Assembly debate will go ahead as planned on Tuesday. Ruling on Monday after an emergency hearing at Belfast High Court, judge Mr Justice McAlinden rejected loyalist activist Jamie Bryson’s application for leave for a full judicial review hearing against Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn. The judge said Mr Bryson, who represented himself as a personal litigant, had “very ably argued” his case with “perseverance and cogency”, and had raised some issues of law that caused him “some concern”. However, he found against him on the three grounds of challenge against Mr Benn. Mr Bryson had initially asked the court to grant interim relief in his challenge to prevent Tuesday’s democratic consent motion being heard in the Assembly, pending the hearing of a full judicial review. However, he abandoned that element of his leave application during proceedings on Monday, after the judge made clear he would be “very reluctant” to do anything that would be “trespassing into the realms” of a democratically elected Assembly. Mr Bryson had challenged Mr Benn’s move to initiate the democratic consent process that is required under the UK and EU’s Windsor Framework deal to extend the trading arrangements that apply to Northern Ireland. The previously stated voting intentions of the main parties suggest that Stormont MLAs will vote to continue the measures for another four years when they convene to debate the motion on Tuesday. After the ruling, Mr Bryson told the court he intended to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Any hearing was not expected to come later on Monday. In applying for leave, the activist’s argument was founded on three key grounds. The first was the assertion that Mr Benn failed to make sufficient efforts to ensure Stormont’s leaders undertook a public consultation exercise in Northern Ireland before the consent vote. The second was that the Secretary of State allegedly failed to demonstrate he had paid special regard to protecting Northern Ireland’s place in the UK customs territory in triggering the vote. The third ground centred on law changes introduced by the previous UK government earlier this year, as part of its Safeguarding the Union deal to restore powersharing at Stormont. He claimed that if the amendments achieved their purpose, namely, to safeguard Northern Ireland’s place within the United Kingdom, then it would be unlawful to renew and extend post-Brexit trading arrangements that have created economic barriers between the region and the rest of the UK. In 2023, the UK Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the trading arrangements for Northern Ireland are lawful. The appellants in the case argued that legislation passed at Westminster to give effect to the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement conflicted with the 1800 Acts of Union that formed the United Kingdom, particularly article six of that statute guaranteeing unfettered trade within the UK. The Supreme Court found that while article six of the Acts of Union has been “modified” by the arrangements, that was done with the express will of a sovereign parliament, and so therefore was lawful. Mr Bryson contended that amendments made to the Withdrawal Agreement earlier this year, as part of the Safeguarding the Union measures proposed by the Government to convince the DUP to return to powersharing, purport to reassert and reinforce Northern Ireland’s constitutional status in light of the Supreme Court judgment. He told the court that it was “quite clear” there was “inconsistency” between the different legal provisions. “That inconsistency has to be resolved – there is an arguable case,” he told the judge. However, Dr Tony McGleenan KC, representing the Government, described Mr Bryson’s argument as “hopeless” and “not even arguable”. He said all three limbs of the case had “no prospect of success and serve no utility”. He added: “This is a political argument masquerading as a point of constitutional law and the court should see that for what it is.” After rising to consider the arguments, Justice McAlinden delivered his ruling shortly after 7pm. The judge dismissed the application on the first ground around the lack consultation, noting that such an exercise was not a “mandatory” obligation on Mr Benn. On the second ground, he said there were “very clear” indications that the Secretary of State had paid special regard to the customs territory issues. On the final ground, Justice McAlinden found there was no inconsistency with the recent legislative amendments and the position stated in the Supreme Court judgment. “I don’t think any such inconsistency exists,” he said. He said the amendments were simply a “restatement” of the position as set out by the Supreme Court judgment, and only served to confirm that replacing the Northern Ireland Protocol with the Windsor Framework had not changed the constitutional fact that Article Six of the Acts of Union had been lawfully “modified” by post-Brexit trading arrangements. “It does no more than that,” he said. The framework, and its predecessor the NI Protocol, require checks and customs paperwork on goods moving from Great Britain into Northern Ireland. Under the arrangements, which were designed to ensure no hardening of the Irish land border post-Brexit, Northern Ireland continues to follow many EU trade and customs rules. This has proved highly controversial, with unionists arguing the system threatens Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom. Advocates of the arrangements say they help insulate the region from negative economic consequences of Brexit. A dispute over the so-called Irish Sea border led to the collapse of the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2022, when the DUP withdrew then-first minister Paul Givan from the coalition executive. The impasse lasted two years and ended in January when the Government published its Safeguarding the Union measures. Under the terms of the framework, a Stormont vote must be held on articles five to 10 of the Windsor Framework, which underpin the EU trade laws in force in Northern Ireland, before they expire. The vote must take place before December 17. Based on the numbers in the Assembly, MLAs are expected to back the continuation of the measures for another four years, even though unionists are likely to oppose the move. DUP leader Gavin Robinson has already made clear his party will be voting against continuing the operation of the Windsor Framework. Unlike other votes on contentious issues at Stormont, the motion does not require cross-community support to pass. If it is voted through with a simple majority, the arrangements are extended for four years. In that event, the Government is obliged to hold an independent review of how the framework is working. If it wins cross-community support, which is a majority of unionists and a majority of nationalists, then it is extended for eight years. The chances of it securing such cross-community backing are highly unlikely.
When Will Donald Trump Dump Elon Musk? “Morning Joe” Panelists Predict The Exact TimeASX juniors are drilling hard into Xmas