The Southern Section has no authority to tell a school to get rid of a coach. It has no control over personnel matters. But there’s precedent that when a coach knowingly plays an ineligible player, it expects a school district to take appropriate action.
In the case with Inglewood football coach Mil’von James, he has a history of using ineligible players. James came to Inglewood, which is 4-1 this season, after being fired at Hawkins in 2016 following the discovery of ineligible players, resulting in Hawkins forfeiting all of its games to finish 0-13. Since then, the City Section established a rule that teams must exchange rosters before games to verify that players are eligible, known as the “Hawkins rule.”
Inglewood Unified School District administrator James Morris told the Daily Breeze that James is scheduled to return to coach on Friday after missing last week’s game against Long Beach Poly at SoFi. That means he received a two-game suspension for using two ineligible players in a game last month, since it is believed he also didn’t coach a game against Elk Grove Franklin.
James appears to have knowingly played two players listed on the Southern Section transfer portal that had not been cleared when Inglewood played in Austin, Texas, on Aug. 28. Video obtained by The Times shows the players in the game.
Add to that, both players’ names and numbers were missing from Inglewood’s MaxPreps’ roster, something that was also a tactic when James coached at Hawkins and resulted in the new City Section rule to exchange roster before games.
Shame on the Inglewood Unified School District for failing to hold its coach accountable for a serious violation of CIF rules.
If the two-game suspension stands, shame on the Southern Section, too. The message being sent to other coaches and other schools is that it’s OK to cheat as long as you don’t get caught, and if you get caught and only get suspended for two games, it’s worth it.
The Southern Section, under commissioner Mike West, went out of its way to try to catch those breaking transfer rules last year. It was a sign maybe things were changing and people were paying attention to the games being played with more than 17,000 transfers in California. But if the Southern Section settles for a two-game suspension for James, it will lose credibility among coaches and programs trying to follow CIF rules.
Southern Section spokesman Thom Simmons has declined comment and declined to make West available.
As always, they’re afraid of legal action. And it must be pointed out again the Southern Section has no authority to discipline coaches. But at some point, to save credibility, they will need to address this breaking of rules that goes to the core of what the CIF is supposed to guard against.
The Southern Section Council has a meeting on Thursday. If any of the representatives have concerns, maybe then they’ll get to ask West how this could be acceptable.
In 2014 Long Beach Unified suspended Long Beach Poly basketball coach Sharrief Metoyer for one year for after he was caught using an ineligible player during a state basketball playoff game. He did it on purpose being frustrated at the CIF transfer policies. The CIF could not tell administrators what to do. But if they did nothing or put in only a two-game suspension, there’s no doubt that the Southern Section leadership had the authority to take action.
According to Southern Section’s Blue Book rule 500.5, “Any school knowingly or unknowingly violating the rule may be suspended from membership in the CIF Southern Section.”
Hopefully the Southern Section is keeping its options open, but it’s time for West, the commissioner since 2023, to get his credibility back. If not, it’s up to the Southern Section Executive Committee to launch its own investigation of what the section is supposed to do when schools and districts don’t take their rules seriously.
RIYADH: TikTok has taken down 15,519,240 videos across Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Oman, Iraq, Morocco, Lebanon and Sudan during the first quarter for Community Guidelines violations.
The move reflects the scale of the platform’s enforcement efforts and its focus on maintaining safety and accountability across the Middle East and North Africa region, a statement said.
As part of its broader efforts to promote age-appropriate and “authentic experiences” on the platform, TikTok removed 86,288,705 fake accounts and 25,764,372 accounts suspected of belonging to users under the age of 13 globally during the first quarter of 2026.
“These actions reflect the scale of TikTok’s efforts to identify and remove accounts that may not meet its platform requirements, while strengthening safeguards for younger members of its community,” TikTok said.
“Through a combination of automated detection, account-level enforcement, and human review, TikTok continues to reinforce the systems designed to support a safer and more age-appropriate experience.”
Globally, the platform suspended more than 50 million LIVE sessions from January to March, an 18.6 percent increase from the previous quarter. A further 58 million sessions were subject to demonetization or warnings, while 21,966,667 LIVE creators were also demonetized or warned.
Across the eight MENA markets, TikTok said it proactively interrupted millions of livestreams and banned hundreds of thousands of LIVE hosts for violating its guidelines.
In Saudi Arabia, TikTok removed 2,811,302 videos in Q1 2026, with a proactive removal rate of 98.2 percent and 92.8 percent of violative content taken down within 24 hours of being reported. The platform restored 150,916 videos following successful appeals, and also banned 48,106 LIVE hosts while interrupting 371,758 livestreams.
Iraq recorded the highest removal volume in the region. TikTok removed 5,253,566 videos that violated its Community Guidelines during the quarter, with a proactive removal rate of 99.4 percent and 95 percent of violative videos taken down within 24 hours of being reported.
The anti-immigration Reform UK party said two of its senior officials had stepped down on Friday, following allegations that they were secretly filmed appearing to discuss ways to circumvent UK electoral laws on foreign donations.
The far-right party, whose popularity has soared in the past two years, is already embroiled in several other funding scandals involving its leader Nigel Farage. On Friday, it announced an internal probe into the latest case, which was brought to light by a Channel 4 investigation.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Reform is currently holding its annual party conference in Birmingham, central England.
Here’s what we know about the foreign funding claims and how they could affect British politics.
What did the Channel 4 investigation show?
Channel 4, an independent broadcaster, aired footage of senior Reform officials Dan Jukes and James Orr meeting with undercover reporters who were posing as prospective Reform backers from the United States.
In one instance during the programme, which was broadcast on Thursday night, footage was shown of Jukes appearing to talk about a proposal for Reform to receive a 500,000-pound ($675,000) donation from one of the men, who was presenting himself as an American financier, through his son, who he said lives in the UK.
The “son” was actually another journalist from investigative group Verbatim, which recorded the exchange.
In separate footage, Orr appeared to discuss a plan for the US donor to fund opinion polls for Reform UK rather than donating the money directly.
He told the undercover reporter that “we just don’t have British-resident donors, British entities, that would support us”.
During the investigation, Verbatim reported that Reform officials arranged for the US donor to pay more than 30,000 pounds ($40,500) to fund three opinion polls, without disclosing the source of the funds.
Channel 4 said it had verified the findings from Verbatim, an offshoot of the Centre for Climate Reporting.
What are the UK’s rules against foreign funding for political parties?
Under UK electoral law, political parties may only accept donations from British voters or UK-registered businesses. Donations from individuals or organisations based overseas are strictly forbidden.
In a statement on Friday, a UK Electoral Commission spokesperson said political parties must report all “permissible donations” they accept exceeding 11,180 pounds ($15,120) and all “impermissible donations” exceeding 500 pounds ($676).
“Parties are responsible for ensuring their internal processes and controls are fit for purpose,” the spokesperson said. “Information about any potential attempt to evade the controls on donations is for the police to consider.”
How has Reform responded to the allegations?
Following the programme’s broadcast, Reform initially issued a statement denying any wrongdoing and claiming the allegations were a hoax.
In a later statement, however, the party said it was conducting an internal probe and that Orr and Jukes had stepped down pending its outcome.
Orr, the party’s policy head, said he had agreed to step down temporarily and would “cooperate fully” with the investigation.
Jukes, Farage’s long-term aide, denied any wrongdoing but said he had “stepped back from politics in order to clear my name”.
Advisor Dan Jukes speaks to UK Reform party leader Nigel Farage [File: Hollie Adams/Reuters]
Farage accused the undercover journalists of “entrapment” and told broadcaster LBC, “they got a couple of our contractors to say things that perhaps should not have been said”.
“And as a result of that, you know, they have been removed this morning. And yeah, you know, I’m not happy about it,” Farage said.
“The party has broken no laws, the party has not taken any dodgy money or anything like that whatsoever,” Farage insisted.
Will Reform face legal consequences?
It remains to be seen. The UK’s ruling Labour Party has written to the police asking them to investigate possible criminal offences.
The Metropolitan Police said it was aware of the allegations in the broadcast and would assess any information provided to them.
This does not amount to the formal launch of an investigation.
Why does this matter?
The latest donation scandal is another blow for Reform, which has seen its place as the UK’s most popular party slip in opinion polls in recent months.
Last year, polling by YouGov suggested that Reform had become the most popular political party, and would likely win a UK general election if one had been held then. At that point, Labour was trailing far behind in the polls – projected to win just 27.3 percent of parliamentary seats, compared with Reform’s 41.7 percent. The former ruling Conservative Party stood at just 7 percent.
But a poll this week by YouGov showed Reform now tied with the UK’s left-wing Labour Party with 23 percent support each. The Conservatives have caught up with 20 percent.
This is not the first funding scandal Reform has grappled with, either. In July, Farage dramatically stepped down as Member of Parliament for Clacton amid allegations, also revealed in the UK media, that convicted fraudster George Cottrell, 32, recruited and paid three staff to work on Farage’s social media before the 2024 general election and has continued to allow Farage to use a five-storey Georgian townhouse he rented near Buckingham Palace.
Farage ultimately re-won his seat in Clacton at a by-election but still faces the prospect of a parliamentary inquiry into undeclared funding of 5 million pounds ($6.7m) from Thailand-based billionaire and crypto investor Christopher Harborne, who paid for Farage’s personal security before he announced his candidacy in the 2024 general election. So far, Farage denies all wrongdoing.
This week, Farage told the BBC that the parliamentary inquiry was unfair. He said there was a “wilful attempt, and it’s gone on now for months, to say that everything to do with Reform, that every individual involved with Reform is somehow a crook”.
This is evidence of “the establishment in a very coordinated way fighting back”, he claimed.
However, Justin Fisher, professor of political science at Brunel University of London, told Al Jazeera Reform’s latest donation scandal would further hurt Farage’s standing both within and outside his party, and could cost Reform votes in the next elections.
“If this was an isolated incident, then Reform would probably be able to brush it off,” said Fisher. “But it comes on top of serious questions about a donation to Nigel Farage, and a donation to Reform which allegedly had overseas links. This all contributes to a narrative which Reform is having great difficulty avoiding.”
Commentary: Southern Section needs to regain credibility in dealing with schools violating rules
The Southern Section has no authority to tell a school to get rid of a coach. It has no control over personnel matters. But there’s precedent that when a coach knowingly plays an ineligible player, it expects a school district to take appropriate action.
In the case with Inglewood football coach Mil’von James, he has a history of using ineligible players. James came to Inglewood, which is 4-1 this season, after being fired at Hawkins in 2016 following the discovery of ineligible players, resulting in Hawkins forfeiting all of its games to finish 0-13. Since then, the City Section established a rule that teams must exchange rosters before games to verify that players are eligible, known as the “Hawkins rule.”
Inglewood Unified School District administrator James Morris told the Daily Breeze that James is scheduled to return to coach on Friday after missing last week’s game against Long Beach Poly at SoFi. That means he received a two-game suspension for using two ineligible players in a game last month, since it is believed he also didn’t coach a game against Elk Grove Franklin.
James appears to have knowingly played two players listed on the Southern Section transfer portal that had not been cleared when Inglewood played in Austin, Texas, on Aug. 28. Video obtained by The Times shows the players in the game.
Add to that, both players’ names and numbers were missing from Inglewood’s MaxPreps’ roster, something that was also a tactic when James coached at Hawkins and resulted in the new City Section rule to exchange roster before games.
Shame on the Inglewood Unified School District for failing to hold its coach accountable for a serious violation of CIF rules.
If the two-game suspension stands, shame on the Southern Section, too. The message being sent to other coaches and other schools is that it’s OK to cheat as long as you don’t get caught, and if you get caught and only get suspended for two games, it’s worth it.
The Southern Section, under commissioner Mike West, went out of its way to try to catch those breaking transfer rules last year. It was a sign maybe things were changing and people were paying attention to the games being played with more than 17,000 transfers in California. But if the Southern Section settles for a two-game suspension for James, it will lose credibility among coaches and programs trying to follow CIF rules.
Southern Section spokesman Thom Simmons has declined comment and declined to make West available.
As always, they’re afraid of legal action. And it must be pointed out again the Southern Section has no authority to discipline coaches. But at some point, to save credibility, they will need to address this breaking of rules that goes to the core of what the CIF is supposed to guard against.
The Southern Section Council has a meeting on Thursday. If any of the representatives have concerns, maybe then they’ll get to ask West how this could be acceptable.
In 2014 Long Beach Unified suspended Long Beach Poly basketball coach Sharrief Metoyer for one year for after he was caught using an ineligible player during a state basketball playoff game. He did it on purpose being frustrated at the CIF transfer policies. The CIF could not tell administrators what to do. But if they did nothing or put in only a two-game suspension, there’s no doubt that the Southern Section leadership had the authority to take action.
According to Southern Section’s Blue Book rule 500.5, “Any school knowingly or unknowingly violating the rule may be suspended from membership in the CIF Southern Section.”
Hopefully the Southern Section is keeping its options open, but it’s time for West, the commissioner since 2023, to get his credibility back. If not, it’s up to the Southern Section Executive Committee to launch its own investigation of what the section is supposed to do when schools and districts don’t take their rules seriously.
Source link
Arab News | TikTok takes down more than 15.5m videos violating platform policies in MENA
RIYADH: TikTok has taken down 15,519,240 videos across Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Oman, Iraq, Morocco, Lebanon and Sudan during the first quarter for Community Guidelines violations.
The move reflects the scale of the platform’s enforcement efforts and its focus on maintaining safety and accountability across the Middle East and North Africa region, a statement said.
As part of its broader efforts to promote age-appropriate and “authentic experiences” on the platform, TikTok removed 86,288,705 fake accounts and 25,764,372 accounts suspected of belonging to users under the age of 13 globally during the first quarter of 2026.
“These actions reflect the scale of TikTok’s efforts to identify and remove accounts that may not meet its platform requirements, while strengthening safeguards for younger members of its community,” TikTok said.
“Through a combination of automated detection, account-level enforcement, and human review, TikTok continues to reinforce the systems designed to support a safer and more age-appropriate experience.”
Globally, the platform suspended more than 50 million LIVE sessions from January to March, an 18.6 percent increase from the previous quarter. A further 58 million sessions were subject to demonetization or warnings, while 21,966,667 LIVE creators were also demonetized or warned.
Across the eight MENA markets, TikTok said it proactively interrupted millions of livestreams and banned hundreds of thousands of LIVE hosts for violating its guidelines.
In Saudi Arabia, TikTok removed 2,811,302 videos in Q1 2026, with a proactive removal rate of 98.2 percent and 92.8 percent of violative content taken down within 24 hours of being reported. The platform restored 150,916 videos following successful appeals, and also banned 48,106 LIVE hosts while interrupting 371,758 livestreams.
Iraq recorded the highest removal volume in the region. TikTok removed 5,253,566 videos that violated its Community Guidelines during the quarter, with a proactive removal rate of 99.4 percent and 95 percent of violative videos taken down within 24 hours of being reported.
Source link
Why is Farage’s Reform accused of violating the UK’s foreign funding rules? | Elections News
The anti-immigration Reform UK party said two of its senior officials had stepped down on Friday, following allegations that they were secretly filmed appearing to discuss ways to circumvent UK electoral laws on foreign donations.
The far-right party, whose popularity has soared in the past two years, is already embroiled in several other funding scandals involving its leader Nigel Farage. On Friday, it announced an internal probe into the latest case, which was brought to light by a Channel 4 investigation.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Reform is currently holding its annual party conference in Birmingham, central England.
Here’s what we know about the foreign funding claims and how they could affect British politics.
What did the Channel 4 investigation show?
Channel 4, an independent broadcaster, aired footage of senior Reform officials Dan Jukes and James Orr meeting with undercover reporters who were posing as prospective Reform backers from the United States.
In one instance during the programme, which was broadcast on Thursday night, footage was shown of Jukes appearing to talk about a proposal for Reform to receive a 500,000-pound ($675,000) donation from one of the men, who was presenting himself as an American financier, through his son, who he said lives in the UK.
The “son” was actually another journalist from investigative group Verbatim, which recorded the exchange.
In separate footage, Orr appeared to discuss a plan for the US donor to fund opinion polls for Reform UK rather than donating the money directly.
He told the undercover reporter that “we just don’t have British-resident donors, British entities, that would support us”.
During the investigation, Verbatim reported that Reform officials arranged for the US donor to pay more than 30,000 pounds ($40,500) to fund three opinion polls, without disclosing the source of the funds.
Channel 4 said it had verified the findings from Verbatim, an offshoot of the Centre for Climate Reporting.
What are the UK’s rules against foreign funding for political parties?
Under UK electoral law, political parties may only accept donations from British voters or UK-registered businesses. Donations from individuals or organisations based overseas are strictly forbidden.
In a statement on Friday, a UK Electoral Commission spokesperson said political parties must report all “permissible donations” they accept exceeding 11,180 pounds ($15,120) and all “impermissible donations” exceeding 500 pounds ($676).
“Parties are responsible for ensuring their internal processes and controls are fit for purpose,” the spokesperson said. “Information about any potential attempt to evade the controls on donations is for the police to consider.”
How has Reform responded to the allegations?
Following the programme’s broadcast, Reform initially issued a statement denying any wrongdoing and claiming the allegations were a hoax.
In a later statement, however, the party said it was conducting an internal probe and that Orr and Jukes had stepped down pending its outcome.
Orr, the party’s policy head, said he had agreed to step down temporarily and would “cooperate fully” with the investigation.
Jukes, Farage’s long-term aide, denied any wrongdoing but said he had “stepped back from politics in order to clear my name”.
Farage accused the undercover journalists of “entrapment” and told broadcaster LBC, “they got a couple of our contractors to say things that perhaps should not have been said”.
“And as a result of that, you know, they have been removed this morning. And yeah, you know, I’m not happy about it,” Farage said.
“The party has broken no laws, the party has not taken any dodgy money or anything like that whatsoever,” Farage insisted.
Will Reform face legal consequences?
It remains to be seen. The UK’s ruling Labour Party has written to the police asking them to investigate possible criminal offences.
The Metropolitan Police said it was aware of the allegations in the broadcast and would assess any information provided to them.
This does not amount to the formal launch of an investigation.
Why does this matter?
The latest donation scandal is another blow for Reform, which has seen its place as the UK’s most popular party slip in opinion polls in recent months.
Last year, polling by YouGov suggested that Reform had become the most popular political party, and would likely win a UK general election if one had been held then. At that point, Labour was trailing far behind in the polls – projected to win just 27.3 percent of parliamentary seats, compared with Reform’s 41.7 percent. The former ruling Conservative Party stood at just 7 percent.
But a poll this week by YouGov showed Reform now tied with the UK’s left-wing Labour Party with 23 percent support each. The Conservatives have caught up with 20 percent.
This is not the first funding scandal Reform has grappled with, either. In July, Farage dramatically stepped down as Member of Parliament for Clacton amid allegations, also revealed in the UK media, that convicted fraudster George Cottrell, 32, recruited and paid three staff to work on Farage’s social media before the 2024 general election and has continued to allow Farage to use a five-storey Georgian townhouse he rented near Buckingham Palace.
Farage ultimately re-won his seat in Clacton at a by-election but still faces the prospect of a parliamentary inquiry into undeclared funding of 5 million pounds ($6.7m) from Thailand-based billionaire and crypto investor Christopher Harborne, who paid for Farage’s personal security before he announced his candidacy in the 2024 general election. So far, Farage denies all wrongdoing.
This week, Farage told the BBC that the parliamentary inquiry was unfair. He said there was a “wilful attempt, and it’s gone on now for months, to say that everything to do with Reform, that every individual involved with Reform is somehow a crook”.
This is evidence of “the establishment in a very coordinated way fighting back”, he claimed.
However, Justin Fisher, professor of political science at Brunel University of London, told Al Jazeera Reform’s latest donation scandal would further hurt Farage’s standing both within and outside his party, and could cost Reform votes in the next elections.
“If this was an isolated incident, then Reform would probably be able to brush it off,” said Fisher. “But it comes on top of serious questions about a donation to Nigel Farage, and a donation to Reform which allegedly had overseas links. This all contributes to a narrative which Reform is having great difficulty avoiding.”
Source link