Latest News
Rahul, Pant and Jadeja star as Lord’s Test turns into second-innings shootout
India were in the middle of a careful, painstaking build. Then they got distracted by something shiny, and spent the rest of the day paying for it. Cricket may be a team sport but the events leading up to lunch on the third day at Lord’s epitomise how much individual records matter – for better or worse.
KL Rahul offered a sheepish look after his clattering of a short and wide delivery proved insufficient to beat deep point. So now he was on 98 instead of 101, and facing the prospect of a nervous 40 minutes inside the change room. Risbah Pant wanted to spare his team-mate that trouble and went for a risky single. Ben Stokes pounced.
That moment coloured the rest of play on the third day, which ended with India drawing level with England’s 387. There were ten minutes left. England dragged their feet. Tempers began to flare. Shubman Gill had some choice words, and sarcastic claps as Zak Crawley and Ben Duckett’s delay tactics allowed for only one over until stumps.
Three players earned the opportunity to take this game by the scruff of its neck. Jofra Archer summoned fire and brimstone during a four-over spell right after lunch. Lord’s lived every ball, clapping him on as he ran in, their oohs and aahs defying the physics of a wide open space to create an echo. Ravindra Jadeja and Nitish Kumar Reddy couldn’t appreciate any of this. It was all they could do to survive.
Archer unleashed at this ground is addiction. On a slow pitch, with an old ball, he was generating an average speed of 150.3kph/90.3mph. He had never bowled quicker in Test cricket.
But England couldn’t break through. It was a feeling they had to get used to on Saturday morning. Stokes didn’t care for it. He had been functioning as less than himself over the last two years, his body coming in the way of his myth. The England captain used to be known for his ferocity with the ball in hand. And now, after hamstring surgery, it seems he will be able to carry on that persona.
For five overs, Stokes bombarded India. Twenty-six bouncers or back-of-a-length deliveries, many of them aimed at Pant, who was nursing an injured finger which seemed to behave itself except when Stokes was close and cranking his own pace up to 90mph.
It was at the tail-end of this little skirmish that India’s focus shifted from the team’s needs to an individual’s, and Stokes could feel it happening. He was hyperalert to Pant trying to pinch a single to cover and help Rahul get to his century before lunch. There was anger in the celebration of that run-out – itself an homage to Stokes’ athleticism as he swooped down on the ball, spun around and completed a markedly more difficult direct hit at the bowler’s end. He brought his cap to his mouth, a trick used to prevent the cameras from catching what you’re saying, even as the rest of the team rallied around him, and rose with him.
Rahul set the rhythm of this Test match. He was partly the cause of England’s frustration. He was the source of India’s calm. He secured their eighth century on tour, a new record. Repeatedly, he talks about the discrepancy between effort and reward, and when he does so, it is tempting to extrapolate he had learned that lesson the hardest way possible. Obsessing about his lack of success and doubling down on his prep work in search for a change.
At some point, though, Rahul realised he needed to let go, which is funny because, one time, in South Africa, he started speaking about how letting go of the ball was where his joy was. Bit by bit, his focus turned from scoring runs to just being the best batter he can be. Well, in this series, he has made two hundreds in three Tests, and as he scurried to this one, he took time for himself, running practically all the way to the boundary as he completed a quick single, and then looking up at the sky with closed eyes. Once again, it was tempting to imagine him looking back at all the struggle and telling himself it was worth it.
All of these stirring performances, and yet the third Test of this series remains evenly poised.
Stokes tried to sway it again – this time with the new ball – a seven-over spell where a dead pitch came to life just for him and helped England break the 72-run Jadeja-Reddy partnership that had been immune to their own abysmal running.
Pant had tried to sway it earlier, braving time in the middle, even though he was far from 100%. But injured or not, he was still him, so it was natural that he charged down the track to Archer in the first over of the day. Or that he was irked by a stretch of 25 dots and tried to break it with a reverse scoop. Or that he turned the first ball of spin he faced into his 88th six, which means he is only two short of Virender Sehwag, who holds the India record. Frenetic. Unpredictable. Captivating. Even when he makes mistakes, like with the run-out.
India slipped from 248 for 3 to 254 for 5 when Rahul was dismissed on 100, which was 11 balls later. That prompted Stokes to wind Archer and let him loose. The idea was to burst through India’s allrounders into the tail just in time for the second new ball. But Jadeja wouldn’t budge. He made 72 off 131 balls. His technique – particularly the ability to discern between the balls he needs to play and those he doesn’t – is under-rated. When he’s in form, he’s as good as a top-order batter, and he seemed to be the final play, a decisive shift in the game, until he was dismissed with India 11 runs off England’s total, and they were bowled out for exactly the same score: 387.
Lord’s and ties. It’s starting to get ridiculous.
Brief scores:
England 387 in 112.3 overs and 2 for 0 in 1 over (Zak Crawley 2*) lead India 387 in 119.2 overs (KL Rahul 100, Karun Nair 40, Rishabh Pant 74, Ravindra Jadeja 72; Chris Woakes 3-84, Jofra Archer 2-52, Ben Stokes 2-63) by two runs
[Cricinfo]
Latest News
Anthropic boss Dario Amodei calls for AI development to slow down
The head of AI company Anthropic has called for the pace of development of artificial intelligence models to slow down and to be closely monitored.
In an essay, Dario Amodei said developing AI was not in question, but the risks associated with it were “serious” and companies and governments must be given time to address them.
The bosses of two rival AI firms, Sam Altman of OpenAI and Elon Musk, have both said they agree with Amodei.
There have been growing concerns recently about the technology’s potential risks. An AI researcher who left Anthropic this week told the BBC that “if we don’t slow down at the current rate of progress, there is a strong chance that we could all die in the immediate future”.
Jacob Coxon told Laura Kuenssberg that people working at AI companies were “genuinely frightened… genuinely concerned about the fate of humanity in the next two years”.
“It’s not at all an exaggeration to say that the people who are involved with both founding these companies and building the tech believe there is a possibility of human extinction,” Coxon said.
“Many of the people who are sort of deep in the weeds on actually coding the thing believe that there is like a greater than ten percent chance, or even greater. Some smaller, but they all have different numbers for a probability that humans might die. And they all keep this in their head on a daily basis while working on the technology.”
In Amodei’s essay, called We Must Pace the Frontier and made public on Saturday, he proposed a three-point plan that includes independent monitoring of AI models as they are developed, industry-wide regulation and global regulation.
As his proposal made the rounds, even competitors voiced support for the idea of third-party monitors who could evaluate the safety of models as they are developed.
“I agree with Dario that we need to pace the frontier,” wrote OpenAI CEO Sam Altman on X. He called independent evaluators “a great idea.”
In a new interview with Fortune Magazine, Altman had sounded similar safety concerns, saying standards were “not at a place” to push AI capabilities much further.
He added that he believed AI beyond human control is “absolutely” possible.
Elon Musk meanwhile said the Anthropic boss was “right”.
The warnings have prompted calls to action, but US President Donald Trump has so far rejected such fears, saying on Thursday he was concerned “if we don’t win AI, we’re going to be put in a very bad position”.
Cyber-security concerns have grown as new models have exhibited more and more powerful hacking capabilities.
Anthropic withheld its Mythos model from public use when it was announced in April that it could independently escape the testing environment, known as the sandbox.
In the run-up to the release of its most recent Astra model, OpenAI cited cybersecurity concerns as it explained it had paused certain aspects of the model’s development.
Safety has also taken centrestage in the rivalry between Anthropic and OpenAI.
Amodei, who had previously worked as a vice president at OpenAI, has said he co-founded Anthropic in 2021 so he could build safer and more trusted AI models.
In his essay, Amodei pointed out that AI had advanced “drastically faster” including its “ability to build the next generation of AI” – and mentioned an incident involving rival OpenAI which has revealed that agents conducted cybersecurity attacks on targets they were not asked to attack in July.
The OpenAI agents had “essentially acted as a fanatically devoted collective”, Amodei said. OpenAI has said it is slowing down training of certain advanced AI models and tools as a result.
Amodei called for “building AI at a balanced rate that aims to ensure its safety while still achieving its benefits”.
This would not mean “halting model training or technical progress, but ensuring companies take adequate time to align and safeguard their models, and for third party evaluators to confirm this”.
He was committing Anthropic to this “unilaterally” – as well as calling on governments “to require other frontier companies to match”.
Amodei said he recognised that regulation might not be able to keep up with the pace of AI, and therefore called on AI companies to “voluntarily work together to set standard” in parallel with regulation.
The Anthropic CEO went on to address the impact that a slowdown would have on the industry and competition with leading developers worldwide, particularly China.
“I believe that if slowing down bought us even an extra year or two before models reach critical levels of capability, and we used that time to advance alignment, we could greatly reduce the risk that something goes seriously wrong,” Amodei said.
This would have to be done in a co-ordinated manner “without sacrificing commercial advantage or the United States’ lead in AI”. Any slowdown would have to be limited, he said, to avoid allowing China to pull ahead.
He urged the US government to take measures so that US companies’ AI chips could not be sold to China – or the technology shared with authoritarian countries.
His former employee, Jacob Coxon, told the BBC, however, that the initiative to slow down must go beyond the US – “there’ll need to be some sort of co-ordinated slowdown with China if we’re going to avoid a race at an international scale”.
Amodei’s post has prompted a wide range of responses.
Clement Delangue, the CEO of the AI platform Hugging Face, said he was launching a new project called the Open Alignment Initiative, adding he wanted to be among “embedded evaluators” that Amodei proposed could be part of a solution.
Hugging Face was hacked by OpenAI agents earlier this year prompting an outcry over AI safety.
“Let’s make AI safer by making it more transparent,” Delangue wrote on X.
Elon Musk also voiced his support, writing that “Dario is right”.
Musk, whose SpaceXAI makes the controversial chatbot Grok, once called Anthropic “evil” but has changed his tone since signing a $15bn deal to sell compute capacity to Anthropic in May.
However some observers suggested that Amodei’s post was less about safety than about consolidating control over AI technology.
“Dario makes the case to stop open source and concentrate enormous technological and economic power with Anthropic,” wrote Chamath Palihapitiya, investor and co-host of the tech podcast “All-In”.
Notions of slowing down or even pausing AI development have long been met with such cynicism in certain corners of Silicon Valley, with critics accusing leading AI developers of hyping their technology as a marketing ploy.
Anthropic and OpenAI are both reportedly preparing for potentially record-setting initial public offerings.
[BBC]
Latest News
It’s spin vs spin as India and Sri Lanka battle for Asia Cup title
If spin is to decide the Women’s T20 Asia Cup final, both India and Sri Lanka have plenty to call upon. India’s spin attack, led by Deepti Sharma, has taken 26 wickets in the tournament, the most by a side. Sri Lanka are next with 25. That makes it seem like a spin vs spin and more spin kind of title contest.
On the plus side for India is that they have appeared well-rounded on the whole. Smriti Sharma and Shafali Verma have scored the bulk of the runs.
Sri Lanka, by contrast, have had to fight for momentum with the bat on the slow Dubai pitches. They were 33 for 4 in the semi final against Pakistan before Hrshitha Samarawickrema and Kavisha Dilhari revived and then completed the chase. Prior to that, they were 44 for 5 against Bangladesh and had to depend on Samarawickrama’s composed knock to seal their semi-final spot. They were also 45 for 5 against Indonesia in the league stage, before Nilakshi Silva lifted them.
That batting order has looked shaky. Chamari Athapaththu allying just 63 runs from four innings and Imesha Dulani 64 from four innings is a concern. And India’s bowling – quick bowler Nandani Sharma has been in good form too – might be tougher to handle than what Sri Lanka have faced so far.
India’s recent record against Sri Lanka also makes them favourites. They swept the five-match T20I series in December 2025 at home, and have won nine of their last ten T20Is against them.
But Sri Lanka’s one victory in that stretch came in the biggest game of all: the 2024 Asia Cup final in Dambulla, when they chased down 166 with eight wickets to spare to win the title.
That means Sri Lanka have both a challenge and a cause for optimism. They will need their batters to withstand Nandani and India’s spin trio – Deepti, N Shree Charani and Prema Rawat – and find a way to build partnerships, rather than leave too much for the middle and lower-middle order to do.
India have the balance and form while Sri Lanka, the defending champions, know better than most that a final can reset the equation. Not to forget, despite their struggles with the bat, Sri Lanka have an all-win record in the Asia Cup so far, the same as India.
Shafali Verma has made fast starts a recurring theme, scoring 168 runs in four matches at an impressive strike rate of 169.69. Two of her knocks have been 64s, and she has shown little sign of taking her foot off the accelerator. In the final, how she sets up the innings could be crucial.
Sri Lanka have found ways to recover from early collapses, with different players stepping up at different stages. But they need their talisman, Chamari Athapaththu, to come to the fore in the final. Athapaththu has made an impact with the ball – she is the tournament’s joint-highest wicket-taker – but her batting is yet to click. She has crossed 30 only once in four matches, in the opener against UAE. A noteworthy contribution with the bat, to go with her threat with the ball, could give Sri Lanka the spark they need against India.
India have fielded an unchanged XI in the tournament so far and, barring injuries, should do the same.
India Women (probable): Smriti Mandhana, Shafali Verma, Pratika Rawal, Harmanpreet Kaur (capt), Richa Ghosh (wk), Bharti Fulmali, Deepti Sharma, Prema Rawat, Kranti Gaud, N Shree Charani, Nandani Sharma
Sri Lanka have used 14 of their 17 players. In the semi-final against Pakistan, they left out Vishmi Gunaratne and Chethana Vimukthi for Hasini Perera and Mithali Ayodhya, which might be their ideal XI.
Sri Lanka Women (probable): Imesha Dulani, Chamari Athapaththu (capt), Sanjana Kavindi, Harsthitha Samarawickrama, Hasini Perera, Kavisha Dilhari, Nilakshika Silva, Kaushini Nuthyangana (wk), Sugandika Kumari, Chamudi Praboda, Mithali Ayodhya
Latest News
ITS Giuseppe Garibaldi’ departs Colombo
The Italian Naval Vessel ‘ITS Giuseppe Garibaldi’ departed the Port of Colombo today, 12 September 2026, after completing a replenishment stop for logistics and services.
During the ship’s stay, the Commanding Officer of ITS Giuseppe Garibaldi, Captain Marco GUERRIERO, called on the Commander Western Naval Area, Rear Admiral Harsha De Silva, at the Western Naval Command Headquarters.
Members of the visiting crew also toured several tourist attractions across the Colombo area during their port call.
-
Sports3 days agoDDS set to lose Test captaincy
-
Features7 days agoAfter the parade: What a traffic OIC’s walk-out tells us
-
Editorial7 days agoArrests as theatre
-
News6 days agoThailand shuts door on undesirables from Sri Lanka
-
Latest News6 days agoHarshitha’s composed knock seals Sri Lanka’s semi-final berth
-
News3 days agoSri Lanka faces new grid challenge as rooftop solar surges: former CEB GM
-
Business6 days agoCEB successor company breaks into top three in competitive BESS tender
-
News7 days ago‘Choka Malli’ slips out of country before travel ban
