reach

Victor Osimhen starred as Nigeria became the second qualifiers for the Africa Cup of Nations knockout stage after Egypt by surviving a late Tunisia onslaught to win 3-2 in Fes.

The Super Eagles were cruising to victory on Saturday, leading 3-0 through goals from Osimhen, captain Wilfred Ndidi and Ademola Lookman.

But Tunisia refused to surrender in the top-of-the-table Group C clash, and Montassar Talbi and Ali Abdi scored to set up a tense finish.

Tunisia had two chances to level during seven minutes of added time, but a header from captain Ferjani Sassi and a shot by substitute Ismael Gharbi were just off target.

Nigeria have six points, Tunisia three, and Tanzania and Uganda one each, with the final round of group matches set for Tuesday.

The showdown was the seventh time the Super Eagles and the Carthage Eagles had faced each other at an AFCON.

Nigeria won three times, and Tunisia once. Another two meetings went to penalty shootouts, with each nation winning one.

After performing well below par when edging Tanzania in the opening round, Nigeria were a transformed team against Tunisia, dominating the first 30 minutes in the northern city.

Osimhen was outstanding, particularly in aerial duels, while Tunisia were forced to constantly defend against the three-time champions.

The Galatasaray striker, wearing his trademark mask, headed just over after nine minutes, and came close again soon after as he rose to meet a corner kick.

Osimhen had the ball in the net after 17 minutes, but was rightly ruled offside. Big-screen replays showed the 2023 African player of the year timing his run too early.

Tunisia midfielder Hannibal Mejbri was lucky to escape a yellow card for dissent after reacting angrily when a Nigerian took a foul throw, flinging the ball into the ground.

Osimhen was wide with another headed goal attempt, then left the pitch temporarily so that the medical staff could apply a spray to his leg.

Tunisia finally broke out of a defensive shell on 32 minutes and forced a corner. The set-piece ended with the ball coming back to Abdi, whose shot flew well over.

Several Tunisian raids reaped no reward, and on 44 minutes, the goalless deadlock was broken, with Osimhen, predictably, the scorer.

The goal involved two former African players of the year, with 2024 winner Lookman crossing the ball and Osimhen rising between Abdi and Talbi to head powerfully into the net.

Just five minutes into the second half, Nigeria stretched their lead to two goals, as they once again exposed the aerial weaknesses of the Tunisian defence.

Atalanta striker Lookman was the architect again, floating a corner into the heart of the goalmouth, where Ndidi soared to beat goalkeeper Aymen Dahmen and score his first international goal.

After creating the first two goals, Lookman scored the third on 67 minutes, after being set up by Osimhen. He had time to control the ball in the box before slamming it into the net off the post.

Tunisia pulled one goal back with 16 minutes remaining. The North Africans finally got the better of an aerial duel, and Talbi nodded a Mejbri free-kick into the net.

The goal had a dramatic effect as Tunisia took control and scored again with three minutes left, when Abdi converted a penalty awarded after a VAR review showed Bright Samuel handled.

Uganda spurn penalty chance to beat Tanzania

Uganda’s Allan Okello missed a late penalty as his side had to settle for a 1-1 draw against East African neighbours Tanzania at the Africa Cup of Nations earlier on Saturday.

Okello’s failure to convert from the spot denied Uganda a precious victory in the Group C clash after Uche Ikpeazu had scored a late equaliser for the Cranes in front of 10,540 fans at Al Medina Stadium in Rabat.

Before that, it looked like Tanzania, winless in 10 previous matches across four AFCON tournaments, might finally break their duck when Simon Msuva put them in front from the penalty spot.

But Ikpeazu, who plays in the Scottish second tier for St Johnstone, headed in a cross by fellow substitute Denis Omedi to level the scores with 10 minutes remaining.

“I have a very bad feeling, because I think we didn’t deserve this draw. I think we had more opportunities,” said Uganda coach Paul Put.

Of the missed penalty, he said, “That is very, very painful, but that is also football.”

The deadlock between the regional rivals, who will co-host the 2027 Cup of Nations with Kenya, does little to help their chances of progressing to the last 16 from Group C.

Both have one point from two matches and trail Nigeria and Tunisia, with the two former champions facing off later on Saturday in Fes.

“It is not in our hands, but we have to believe,” said Put, whose team play Nigeria next.

Uganda, who have just one AFCON win of their own across three tournament appearances since losing the 1978 final, came closest to scoring in the first half.

An Aziz Kayondo cross from the left was met by the head of Rogers Mato, whose effort came back off the underside of the crossbar.

Tanzania were awarded a spot-kick just before the hour mark, when a shot by Alphonce Msanga struck the arm of Uganda’s Baba Alhassan.

The experienced Msuva, who plays club football in Iraq, made no mistake from the spot and has now scored goals at three different AFCON tournaments.

However, a dramatic finish to the game amid a torrential downpour saw Tanzania squander the lead and then breathe a big sigh of relief as Uganda missed the opportunity to claim victory.

Ikpeazu made it 1-1, and Uganda won a penalty when James Bogere went down as his shirt was pulled by Tanzania defender Haji Mnoga of Salford City.

With the game in the 90th minute, Okello stepped up and was perhaps put off by a huge clap of thunder just before he took his kick, which went over the bar.

“I am a little bit disappointed with the result, because we tried to win the game, but we also could have lost it in the last five minutes,” said Tanzania coach Miguel Angel Gamondi.

“We wanted our first win at the Africa Cup of Nations, and I am very sorry for all the Tanzanian people.”

The family of pitcher Tyler Skaggs and the Angels reached a settlement Friday, ending a contentious trial as jurors had begun a third day of deliberations regarding Skaggs’ drug-related death on the road with the team. Terms of the agreement, which followed 31 days of testimony and four years of legal wrangling, were not immediately available.

Jury foreman Richard Chung said after the settlement was announced that the panel had agreed to award Skaggs’ family roughly $100 million when they were told to cease deliberations — $60 million to $80 million for economic damages, $5 million to $15 million for emotional distress damages and $10 million to $20 million for punitive damages.

Rusty Hardin, the Skaggs family’s lead attorney, told The Times that although he could not reveal the amount of the agreement, “the Skaggs family is extremely happy with the settlement.”

Early efforts to settle the case had been unsuccessful, with the Angels’ legal team and its insurance carriers rebuffing overtures from the lawyers representing Tyler Skaggs’ widow Carli Skaggs and parents Debbie Hetman and Darrell Skaggs. As recently as Tuesday evening, after the jury had begun deliberations, the lead attorneys from each side met but gained little traction toward a settlement.

The equation changed Wednesday when jurors asked the judge to read back testimony from experts on Skaggs’ future earnings had he lived. The request suggested that that the jury had determined the Angels were responsible for at least a percentage of economic damages. The jury also asked whether it was charged with determining the amount of punitive damages, adding to speculation that it might hand the Skaggs family an award beyond economic and emotional distress damage.

Roughly 95% of civil suits nationwide reach a settlement ahead of or during trial. Plaintiffs and defendants alike overwhelmingly prefer to eliminate the risk of an all-or-nothing jury verdict by agreeing on a compromise dollar figure.

Attorney Rusty Hardin, center, addresses the media Friday on behalf of the Skaggs family after a settlement was reached in their wrongful death lawsuit against the Angels.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Sources on the Skaggs family legal team said they were amenable to a settlement to eliminate the chance of the jury determining the Angels weren’t responsible for Skaggs’ death and denying any award. Also, while either side could have appealed a jury verdict, the settlement ended the case.

Carli Skaggs and Hetman hugged their lawyers and each other when Judge H. Shaina Colover announced that a settlement had been reached and jurors were excused.

“The Skaggs family has reached a confidential settlement with Angels Baseball that brings to a close a difficult six-year process, allowing our families to focus on healing,” the family said in a statement. “We are deeply grateful to the members of this jury, and to our legal team. Their engagement and focus gave us faith, and now we have finality.

“This trial exposed the truth and we hope Major League Baseball will now do its part in holding the Angels accountable. While nothing can bring Tyler back, we will continue to honor his memory.”

MLB declined to comment on the settlement.

A jury verdict favoring the Angels also would have meant the high-powered Skaggs legal team that has spent thousands of hours on the case wouldn’t have been paid. Their contingency fee — typically at least 40% of an award — would have been zero.

Skaggs died July 1, 2019, during an Angels road trip in Texas after snorting an illicit pain pill that was laced with fentanyl.

The pill was given to Skaggs by Angels communications director Eric Kay, who is serving 22 years in federal prison for his role in the pitcher’s death. Skaggs was discovered in his Southlake, Texas, hotel room the next morning, and an autopsy concluded he accidentally died of asphyxia after aspirating his own vomit.

“The death of Tyler Skaggs remains a tragedy, and this trial sheds light on the dangers of opioid use and the devastating effects it can have,” the Angels said Friday in a statement.

Each juror had to fill out a 26-question verdict form during deliberations. The first batch of questions focused on Kay, asking jurors whether the Angels were negligent in their supervision of him, whether the team knew he was distributing illicit pills and whether he was operating within the scope of his employment when he did so.

Carli Skaggs, Tyler Skaggs’ widow, with attorney Rusty Hardin in court Friday in Santa Ana.

(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)

If jurors answered “yes” to any of those questions, they were then asked whether the Angels’ negligence and Kay’s “unfitness or incompetence” were substantial factors in the death of Skaggs, as well as harm to his iPad.

Consideration of the iPad, which Skaggs used as a surface to chop up drugs, was related solely to punitive damages.

The first damages the jury considered were economic. Experts for the Skaggs family lawyers testified that he would have made an estimated $102 million had he lived and continued to pitch. Experts for the Angels said his earnings wouldn’t have been more than $30 million.

During closing statements, Skaggs family attorney Daniel Dutko suggested that the Angels were 70 to 90 percent responsible for his death, and that Kay and Skaggs could each be assigned about 10 percent of the blame. Angels attorney Todd Theodora did not suggest a specific percentage, but conceded the jury might find Kay partially responsible for Skaggs’ death.

Also during closing statements, Dutko and Theodora each walked the jury through the nine-page verdict form, suggesting how questions should be answered based on testimony that supported their arguments. While criminal cases require a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, civil cases require only a preponderance of the evidence. At least nine of the 12 jurors are required to agree on a verdict.

Dutko said the Angels for years were negligent in dealing with Kay, a team employee since 1996 whose illicit opioid use became apparent as early as 2009, according to testimony. Evidence showed the Angels concealed Kay’s addiction rather than follow team and Major League Baseball policies in reporting it and punishing Kay, Dutko told the jury.

“Is that reasonable, is that how we want companies in our country to run?” Dutko said. “They didn’t monitor anything. They didn’t do anything.”

“There is no doubt that if Eric Kay wasn’t employed by the Angels, if he wasn’t in that clubhouse, Tyler Skaggs would be alive.”

Kay entered outpatient rehab for substance abuse in the spring of 2019 and returned to work just weeks before he was sent with the Angels to Texas. Skaggs quickly texted Kay asking for oxycodone pills. Theodora argued that the messages showed Skaggs was an uncontrollable addict who had little regard for Kay’s well-being.

Theodora showed the jury a pyramid-shaped graphic with Skaggs at the top and players who evidence had shown were given opioids by Skaggs under him, and argued that Skaggs was as complicit in distributing the drugs as Kay.

The Angels attorney told the jury that the plaintiffs’ stance that Kay should have been fired applied to Skaggs as well. “What you see here is a classic double standard,” Theodora said.

Dutko delivered a rebuttal to Theodora’s closing statement, returning to the theme that the Angels never took any responsibility for Skaggs’ death and told jurors that they can make that clear by reaching a verdict in favor of his wife and parents.

“The only reason Tyler Skaggs is dead is the Angels,” Dutko said. “We have fought for Tyler Skaggs and I will continue to fight for Tyler Skaggs as long as I’m alive. I need you to fight for him, please.”

The jury was close to a verdict that would have favored Skaggs’ family. Chung said the panel was discussing apportionment of responsibility and would have been done by the noon lunch break had they not been told to cease deliberations around 9:30 a.m.

He said his own determination was that the Angels bore 50% of the responsibility for Skaggs’ death while Kay was responsible for 35% and Skaggs for 15%.

“Ultimately, we felt the Angels needed to know that they were at fault,” Chung said. “Just to say, ‘Do better.’ They needed to do better.”