Black Immigrant Daily News

NewsAmericasNow.com

Black Immigrant Daily News

The crisis crept up on Gareth Southgate.

Just 14 months ago, England were playing in a European Championship final — and coming oh-so-close to winning it — backed by fans who rediscovered their connection with the national team.

Fast forward to the last few days when Southgate’s players — without a win in five games or an open-play goal getting on for 500 minutes — were holding private meetings without any coaches present.

Jeered by England supporters in the team’s most recent home game, a scarcely believable 4-0 loss to Hungary in June, Southgate knew he would be facing even more vitriol if Germany, England’s fierce rival, came away from Wembley Stadium with a victory on Monday.

So, how should the wild 3-3 draw in what in sporting terms was an unimportant Nations League group game be viewed?

The Southgate believers will say it showed a team playing for its coach, especially with England 2-0 down after 70 minutes and looking on course to be heading into the World Cup with another morale-sapping defeat.

The growing number of Southgate’s critics, however, will argue the chaotic 12-minute period — from the 71st to the 83rd — when England scored three goals from three shots to move into a 3-2 lead simply papered over the cracks.

The truth might be somewhere in between.

For now, the storm around Southgate and his players has relented, even if another might be just around the corner in Qatar.

“You can try and avoid pressure but it’s coming,” Southgate said. “Maybe it’s the third group game, maybe it’s a quarterfinal . . . whatever it might be, it’s coming.

“So, better that we feel it and we learn how to deal with it. We talked about how we needed to react if Germany scored and the players reacted in the right way.”

Indeed, things had gotten so bad for England that Southgate said, perhaps tongue in cheek, he had almost forgotten what it felt like to see his team score a goal.

So when Luke Shaw scored to make it 2-1 with his first goal for club or country since that Euro 2020 final, in doing so ending England’s 565-minute drought without a goal from open play, Southgate’s team was energized.

There followed a curler into the top corner from Mason Mount and a clinically dispatched penalty from Harry Kane and, suddenly, England were awash with belief, looking much more at home as a front-foot team than one sitting back and relying on their creaking defense.

And, despite that recent lack of goals, it is the defense which is Southgate’s major worry heading to Qatar.

On no one will the scrutiny be fiercer than Harry Maguire, at fault for two of the goals against Germany and seemingly a player bereft of confidence after being dropped by his club, Manchester United.

For the moment, Maguire still has the backing of his national coach but the next few weeks at United seem key to his chances of still being in the lineup for England’s World Cup opener against Iran on Nov. 21.

“In these moments, we’ve got to back our best and our most experienced players,” Southgate said, “unless we’re in a situation where, you know, it’s almost untenable and impossible to pick them.”

A shortage of other top center backs may save Maguire, especially with John Stones limping off with a hamstring injury against Germany.

Similarly, at left back or left wing back, Luke Shaw continues to be first choice despite also dropping out of United’s team in recent weeks. Ben Chilwell, a potential replacement, doesn’t appear fully sharp after a long-term injury and didn’t play a minute in this international break.

With the World Cup looming, the big loser over the last few days might have been Trent Alexander-Arnold who, to many, has redefined the role of a right back with his playmaking performances for Liverpool in recent years. With Alexander-Arnold’s defensive ability increasingly questioned, though, Southgate clearly has his doubts and didn’t even include him in the matchday squad of 23 against Germany.

Alexander-Arnold, somehow, looks to be the fourth-choice right back for England and might not make the World Cup squad.

On the other hand, central midfielder Jude Bellingham maybe secured a starting spot against Iran, injury permitting, with a strong display against Germany that improved as the match went.

At 19, Bellingham — a regular starter for Borussia Dortmund — has a long future ahead of him with England.

The same maybe cannot be said of Maguire, and perhaps even Southgate if England doesn’t build on those wild 13 minutes against Germany when the team gets to Qatar.

NewsAmericasNow.com

Black Immigrant Daily News

News

Sweet potato fries.

A Customs and Excise order which did not classify frozen potato wedges as french fries, which attract a higher tariff, has been quashed by a High Court judge.

On Monday, Justice Carol Gobin said the policy, made in 2020, was inconsistent, as it included products of different cuts and sizes in the description of french fries, while excluding wedges.

She also said classification for exemption should not rely on the manufacturer’s marketing choices –as had been done in this case – suggesting that using the certification from health officials at the port of export could carry more weight.

Gobin was asked to review the policy of the Comptroller of Customs implemented in 2020, when it was revealed wedges were wrongly classified and were not french fries, so did not qualify for a reduced tariff of five per cent, but 20 per cent.

The judicial review claim was brought by Westco Food Unlimited after it was told the wrong code had been used in its paperwork. Demands were made for the payment of the duty from 2011-2018.

From 2010-2017, duties on frozen french fries were either suspended entirely or varied from 20 per cent to five per cent and since 2011, Westco applied the code used for french fried potatoes to include wedges.

The forms submitted were scrutinised by customs and approved and the importer paid the relevant duties.

The judgment said the division then did a post-clearance audit and determined that importers, not only Westco, were incorrectly classifying wedges as french fries.

However, in her ruling, Gobin rejected the justification the division gave for doing post-clearance audits.

“Post-clearance audits are not incorporated into the published policy guidelines of the division. The actions of the defendant in conducting a post-clearance audit in the manner it did and years after goods were cleared, verified and delivered, only served to defeat the salutary objectives above of facilitating trade, reducing time, and its claim to be entitled to do this at all injects a level of uncertainty for importers which is highly prejudicial, unfair, and which offends against commercial sense.”

She said the role of the division was to facilitate trade for the benefit of citizens who relied on imported commodities and to encourage legitimate business and investment.

“Customs best fulfils this role by ensuring that imports move as quickly as possible to achieve the efficient release of goods, while at the same time it adopts and maintains procedures, simple though stringent enough, to ensure and certify the proper collection of revenue according to applicable classifications and tariffs.”

For importers, she said,” the certainty of supply, fixed classifications for tariff purposes, and the application of appropriate rates of duty are key to fixing prices of goods, and stability in the local market supply chain and business.”

Gobin held the division could not demand the recovery of short-levied duty from Westco, since no offence had been identified, nor was there notice of any investigation or charge.

She said while the Customs Act did not stipulate a time frame for paying duty erroneously short-levied, “In my opinion, the comptroller cannot claim up to seven years for recovery where there has been no offence.

“The defendant has no roving jurisdiction to simply embark on a reclassification exercise and to demand further duty where an importer has complied with all the guidelines and duty has been assessed and paid and delivery of goods has been allowed.”

She said it would be “a recipe for confusion in the marketplace” if customs could arbitrarily do classification exercises years after goods had been processed and delivered.

“To allow the defendant to do this in the absence of express statutory power would defeat the statutory objectives of efficiency and ease of business.”

She suggested six months to make demands for payment or revisit clearances.

In quashing the 2020 order, she also held the decision was illegal, irrational, procedurally improper and of no effect.

The comptroller was further directed to reconsider its decision in the order.

Westco was represented by attorneys Jagdeo Singh, Leon Kalicharan, Savitri Samaroo and Karina Singh. Representing the comptroller were Karlene Seenath, Maria Belmar, Nicol Yee Fung, Amrita Ramsook, and Kezia Redhead.

NewsAmericasNow.com