Your browser does not support the audio element

first_img Your browser does not support the audio element. Derrick Hall satisfied with D-backs’ buying and selling Grace expects Greinke trade to have emotional impact If you’d like to comprehend what having 4.28-second speed in the 40-yard dash feels like, then soak in Arizona Cardinals receiver J.J. Nelson’s account of his 57-yard reception this past weekend against the Chargers.Nelson made an appearance on the “Off the Edge” show on Arizona Sports 98.7 and explained how he had to catch up to an overthrown ball by quarterback Carson Palmer.The more ridiculous part of it? Former Cardinals kicker Phil Dawson retires Top Stories LISTEN: J.J. Nelson – Cardinals’ wide receiver Nelson said he ended up over-running the throw.“First, like you say, it was a go ball,” Nelson told “Off the Edge’s” Bertrand Berry. “The defender, he was off coverage at least 10 yards. I got to break this cushion. After I broke the cushion, I looked up for the ball, and it looked like it was going to sail over my head. So I was like, ‘man, I got to accelerate, I got to find a way to get to this ball.’ So when I looked back, I felt like I overran the ball — that’s what made me catch it like by my hip and I ended up falling.”Palmer said after the game that he believed he’d overthrown Nelson and that the rookie wideout put on the nitrous to catch up to the ball.The video backs Nelson’s explanation. If Palmer indeed overthrew the ball then Nelson, who clocked a 4.28 seconds in the NFL Combine’s 40-yard draft this year, somehow made up ground and then some.“I wish I stayed on my feet and got into the endzone,” Nelson added. “At that point in time, I was like, ‘I just got to make this play.’” – / 28 The 5: Takeaways from the Coyotes’ introduction of Alex Meruelo Arizona Cardinals wide receiver J.J. Nelson (14) pulls in a pass as San Diego Chargers cornerback Richard Crawford (35) defends during the first half of an NFL preseason football game, Saturday, Aug. 22, 2015, in Glendale, Ariz. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin) Comments   Share   last_img read more

Read More

Andrew Neil questions to Ben Shapiro were legitimate

first_imgAndrew Neil 1:43 Andrew Neil: questions to Ben Shapiro were legitimate Share on Facebook BBC presenter says interview style not aimed at ‘destroying’ anyone after criticism Play Video Seeing Ben Shapiro flounder might be fun, but far-right celebrities are no joke Sun 12 May 2019 08.42 EDT Share on Messenger Share on Facebook Since you’re here… Share on Twitter Support The Guardian Last modified on Sun 12 May 2019 16.10 EDT Share via Email Play VideoPlayCurrent Time 0:00/Duration Time 0:00Loaded: 0%Progress: 0%FullscreenMuteEmbedThis is a modal window.Embed code Andrew Neil has defended his interviewing style following criticism from supporters of the conservative US pundit Ben Shapiro, who said the veteran broadcaster “destroyed” him in a spiky exchange that went viral.The BBC presenter said on social media it was legitimate to ask Shapiro, who was calling for more civilised political discourse, whether he believed he had fuelled anger in US politics.The interview, which aired on Friday, became acrimonious as Neil robustly interrogated Shapiro about previous remarks such as “Israelis like to build, Arabs like to bomb crap”. Shapiro accused Neil of being a “lefty” and ended the interview prematurely. Topics Nesrine Malik Read more Andrew Neil Reuse this contentcenter_img Facebook Twitter This article is more than 2 months old Share via Email On Saturday evening, he said on Twitter: “Mr Shapiro is not the first person to think they can discern my own views from the questions I ask. It’s a mistake but one folks make all the time, especially on Twitter.”He added: “I tend to take the opposite position from those I interview. It’s a useful way to test their positions. It tells you nothing of my own views. What do American interviewers do?”Neil then declared he had not expressed a position on any matter of public debate for more than a decade, “as befits a BBC presenter”. @matthabusby This article is more than 2 months old BBC Shapiro later apologised for misinterpreting Neil’s “antagonism as political leftism” and conceded that he had been “destroyed” in the debate, adding he had not properly prepared for the interview.Josh Hammer, the editor-at-large of the Daily Wire channel, which broadcasts The Ben Shapiro Show, described the interview as a “hostile dredging up of nine-year-old (repudiated!) tweets” and questioned why Neil had not focused on Shapiro’s new book.Neil responded on Twitter: “He did not repudiate statements I put to him. It was legitimate to ask, since he’s calling for more civilised discourse, if he wasn’t a cause of the coarsening of said discourse. My interviews not designed to destroy anyone.”Shapiro became agitated after Neil highlighted his support for new hardline abortion laws in Georgia, failing to properly respond to questions before accusing Neil of harbouring leftwing sympathies.Neil, the chair of the group that owns the rightwing magazine the Spectator, responded: “If you only knew how ridiculous that statement is you wouldn’t have said it, so let’s move on.” US conservative pundit Ben Shapiro ends interview with BBC’s Andrew Neil – video Andrew Neil ridicules American conspiracy theorist on Sunday Politics Pinterest Share on Twitter Mattha Busby Share on WhatsApp news Share on Pinterest Share on LinkedIn … we have a small favour to ask. The Guardian will engage with the most critical issues of our time – from the escalating climate catastrophe to widespread inequality to the influence of big tech on our lives. At a time when factual information is a necessity, we believe that each of us, around the world, deserves access to accurate reporting with integrity at its heart.More people are reading and supporting The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism than ever before. And unlike many news organisations, we have chosen an approach that allows us to keep our journalism accessible to all, regardless of where they live or what they can afford. But we need your ongoing support to keep working as we do.Our editorial independence means we set our own agenda and voice our own opinions. Guardian journalism is free from commercial and political bias and not influenced by billionaire owners or shareholders. This means we can give a voice to those less heard, explore where others turn away, and rigorously challenge those in power.We need your support to keep delivering quality journalism, to maintain our openness and to protect our precious independence. Every reader contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support The Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you. Shares159159last_img read more

Read More