River Plate defender Jonatan Maidana is eyeing a meeting with Real Madrid after his team’s Copa Libertadores success on Sunday.A 3-1 second-leg win over rivals Boca Juniors in Madrid saw River seal a 5-3 aggregate success.That sent Marcelo Gallardo’s men to the United Arab Emirates for the Club World Cup, where they will face ES Tunis, Al Ain or Team Wellington before a potential meeting with European champions Madrid. Article continues below Editors’ Picks Man Utd ready to spend big on Sancho and Haaland in January Who is Marcus Thuram? Lilian’s son who is top of the Bundesliga with Borussia Monchengladbach Brazil, beware! Messi and Argentina out for revenge after Copa controversy Best player in MLS? Zlatan wasn’t even the best player in LA! Maidana said River were targeting a clash against the La Liga giants later this month.”Now we go for Real Madrid, our next goal,” the defender said, via TyC Sports.”We won a fair final, now to celebrate the achievement.” Lo mejor del 3-1 de @CARPoficial ante @BocaJrsOficial para consagrarse campeón de la #CONMEBOLLibertadores pic.twitter.com/SIxHzoxGEh— CONMEBOL Libertadores (@Libertadores) December 10, 2018River had to come from behind in the second leg, Lucas Pratto cancelling out Dario Benedetto’s opener to force extra time.Wilmar Barrios’ red card turned the game in River’s favour and they made the most of their numerical advantage, goals from Juan Quintero and Gonzalo Martinez securing their win.”A lot of the match was very even,” Maidana said. “After the equaliser, we managed well and we could win it.”In the second half we improved because in the first we made a big mistake. We talked at half-time and we tried not to miss so many passes and we achieved [our goal] because we dominated the game.”
Remarkable, but the NCAA tournament tops itself almost every year. This version of March Madness produced countless dramatic finishes, upsets, surprises and heroes. Only a quartet of teams remaimn standing, a Final Four in Texas that has the makings for something special.Here’s how No 1. Florida, Wisconsin, Kentucky and Connecticut advanced to the biggest weekend of A NCAA basketball season, where the Gators will face surprising UConn, and UK, with five freshmen starters, will take on the deliberate Badgers:* Kentucky outlasted Michigan, 75-72, on Aaron Harrison’s 25-foot three-point shot with 2.6 seconds remaining. It was a thrilling game that put the Wildcats in rarified air: The Wildcats are the first set of five freshmen starters to advance to the Final Four since Michigan’s renown “Fab Five” in 1992. Also, Kentucky is the first team in NCAA Tournament history to defeat both participants of the previous year’s championship game (Michigan and Louisville).* Shabazz Napier of Connecticut was dazzling in leading UConn to a 60-54 victory over Michigan State, the team picked by many to win the title. Napier scored 17 of his 25 points in the final 20 minutes. His three free throws with 37.6 seconds left were typical of the clutch play he exhibited. And so, the Huskies came back from nine down in the second half to make it to next week against Florida.* Florida was too big, too strong, too talented and too determined to allow Dayton to derail the Gators’ championship aspirations. Florida won 62-52, and the outcome never really was in doubt. Florida controlled the pace of the game and limited Dayton’s transition opportunities. The Flyers had been running and gunning in their three previous tournament wins, but scored just eight transition points on Saturday thanks to Florida’s full-court pressure defense.* Wisconsin’s tough defense and deliberate pace were key factors in the Badgers advancing past No. 1-seed Arizona, 64-63, in overtime. Center Frank Kaminsky had 28 points, six in OT, and 11 rebounds and scored from inside and outside, including three 3-pointers, for the No. 2 seed Badgers (30-7). It’s Wisconsin’s first Final Four appearance since 2000, and first for 66-year-old coach Bo Ryan, who earned his 704th career victory.
Concern among residents regarding electric scooters, after two men are seriously injured over the weekend. What do you think … is it the scooters or the riders? @KUSINews pic.twitter.com/LE8AYRuDlS— Ashlie Rodriguez (@AshlieSanDiego) April 2, 2019 KUSI Newsroom, March 31, 2019 KUSI Newsroom 00:00 00:00 spaceplay / pause qunload | stop ffullscreenshift + ←→slower / faster ↑↓volume mmute ←→seek . seek to previous 12… 6 seek to 10%, 20% … 60% XColor SettingsAaAaAaAaTextBackgroundOpacity SettingsTextOpaqueSemi-TransparentBackgroundSemi-TransparentOpaqueTransparentFont SettingsSize||TypeSerif MonospaceSerifSans Serif MonospaceSans SerifCasualCursiveSmallCapsResetSave SettingsSAN DIEGO (KUSI) – Two men riding motorized scooters suffered serious injuries in two separate incidents in Mission Beach late last night and early this morning, police said today.In the first incident, a 39-year-old man received severe head injuries when he fell off a scooter he had been riding a little before 10 p.m. Saturday in the 3300 block of Oceanfront Walk, said Officer Robert Heims of the San Diego Police Department.The rider veered to his right for an unknown reason and fell off his scooter, Heims said. He was taken to an area hospital with life- threatening injuries. The next crash happened less than three hours later and under a mile away. Around 12:30 a.m. Sunday, a 62-year-old man apparently lost control of his motorized scooter in the 3800 block of Bayside Walk and crashed into a sidewalk, according to San Diego police Officer Dino Delimitros.The force of the crash caused the man to suffer a neck fracture and facial abrasions.Traffic detectives were investigating both crashes. Posted: March 31, 2019 Man faces life-threatening injuries after San Diego scooter crash Updated: 9:52 AM Categories: Local San Diego News, Traffic & Accidents FacebookTwitter
Demonstrators chanting during a #NoMuslimBanEver rally and march “to protest discriminatory policies that unlawfully target and hurt American Muslim and immigrant communities across the country” in Washington, DC. AFP file photoThe US Supreme Court said Monday that the government could fully enforce a revised ban on travelers from six mainly Muslim countries pending appeal, backing President Donald Trump in the year-long battle over the controversial measure.The court stayed October rulings from two lower courts that had blocked implementation of the ban on visitors from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen while legal challenges to it continued.The third version of Trump’s travel ban, unveiled in September, drew immediate challenges in federal appeals courts in Richmond, Virginia and San Francisco, California.Plaintiffs argued that the measure targets Muslims in violation of the US Constitution and did not advance security goals as the government claimed.The challengers convinced the lower courts to put implementation on hold while they and government lawyers fight out the legality of the policy.But the Trump administration, which says the ban is crucial to protect US national security and deter terror attacks, secured strong support from the Supreme Court in a 7-2 vote to let the government move ahead while the appeals continue.“We are not surprised by today’s Supreme Court decision permitting immediate enforcement of the President’s proclamation limiting travel from countries presenting heightened risks of terrorism,” the White House said.“The proclamation is lawful and essential to protecting our homeland. We look forward to presenting a fuller defense of the proclamation as the pending cases work their way through the courts,” it added.The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, criticized the ruling.“This decision ignores the very real human consequences to American citizens and their families abroad imposed by President Trump’s Muslim Ban 3.0,” said CAIR National Litigation Director Lena Masri.The Supreme Court justices said they expect the lower appeals courts to expedite their decisions, leaving open the possibility that the policy could return to the Supreme Court in yet another legal challenge to the White House.The San Francisco court will hear the case on Wednesday and the Richmond court on Friday.Open-ended banThe ban also covers people from North Korea and a selection of senior officials from Venezuela, but its main focus is travelers from the six mainly Muslim countries.Trump has battled to implement a travel ban since just after he became president on January 20, after having repeatedly promised during last year’s election campaign to ban all Muslims from entering the United States.Those promises have undermined the administration’s argument in a series of court challenges that its policy is not Muslim-focused but rather based on security needs.After Monday’s court ruling the Department of Homeland Security said: “the administration’s common sense travel restrictions on countries that do not meet basic security standards and do not share critical information with us about terrorists and criminals are designed to defend the homeland and keep Americans safe.”The initial ban was to be for 90 days, ostensibly to give the US and the targeted countries time to implement tougher and more thorough vetting procedures for visitors.After rolling court battles, the 90 day ban was finally allowed in June. Meanwhile, vetting for US-bound travelers from every country has intensified.But when the six-country ban expired in September, the administration sought to replace it with an open-ended ban, with Chad added to the list while Sudan was removed, and North Korea and Venezuela appended as well.Immigration and civil rights activists maintain it still essentially targets Muslims, which would violate the US Constitution’s guarantees of religious rights.When Trump last week retweeted three video clips from an extremist British group that vilified Muslims, his critics said it supported the idea that his immigration policies were anti-Muslim.“President Trump’s anti-Muslim prejudice is no secret-he has repeatedly confirmed it, including just last week on Twitter,” said Omar Jadwat, director of the Immigrants’ Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union.“It’s unfortunate that the full ban can move forward for now, but this order does not address the merits of our claims. We continue to stand for freedom, equality, and for those who are unfairly being separated from their loved ones.”