Venezuelan parents watch from home as their son is buried in Texas after drowning
Gustavo Alfonso Garcia Olivares died at 24, drowning in the Rio Grande not far from where he was buried Thursday at the Maverick County Cemetery in Eagle Pass.
Congress unveils spending plan after Trump calls on Republicans to avoid government shutdown
Congressional negotiators have released a bill that, if passed, will avert a partial government shutdown during the first 100 days of President Donald Trump’s term. The 100-page legislation would roughly maintain current government funding levels through the beginning of fiscal year (FY) 2026, which begins Oct. 1. The current deadline to avert a shutdown is Friday, March 14. House GOP leaders are confident that they can pass a bill to keep the government funded with Republican votes alone, something that has not been achieved since they took over the chamber majority in January 2023. But on a call with reporters on Saturday morning, House Republican leadership aides emphasized that the bill was “closely coordinated” with the White House – while stopping short of saying Trump backed the measure completely, noting he has not reviewed the specific pages yet. DEMOCRATS PRIVATELY REBUKE PARTY MEMBERS WHO JEERED TRUMP DURING SPEECH TO CONGRESS: REPORT Defense spending would increase by roughly $6 billion from FY 2024, while non-defense spending that Congress annually appropriates would decrease by about $13 billion. There’s also an added $6 billion for healthcare for veterans. The White House has requested additional spending in areas that were not present in the last government funding extension, known as “anomalies.” Among the anomalies requested by Trump and being fulfilled by the bill is added funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Aides said the funding is meant to meet “an operations shortfall that goes back to the Biden administration.” “That money, most of that, has already been obligated prior to the start of this administration. So that request reflects an existing hole,” a source said. The bill also ensures that spending caps placed under a prior bipartisan agreement, the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA), are followed. The FRA mandated no more than a 1% federal spending increase in FY 2025. Cuts to non-defense discretionary spending would be found by eliminating some “side deals” made during FRA negotiations, House GOP leadership aides said. Lawmakers would also not be given an opportunity to request funding for special pet projects in their districts known as earmarks, another area that Republicans are classifying as savings. Overall, it provides for $892.5 billion in discretionary federal defense spending, and $708 billion in non-defense discretionary spending. “Discretionary spending” refers to dollars allocated by Congress on an annual basis, rather than mandatory spending obligations like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. The bill is what’s known as a continuing resolution (CR), which differs from Congress’ annual appropriations bills in that it just extends the previous fiscal year’s government funding levels and priorities. It would be the third and final CR extending FY 2024 numbers, through the remainder of FY 2025. Republicans believe it will put them in the best possible position to negotiate conservative government funding priorities in time for Oct. 1. The previous two extensions were passed under the Biden administration, when Democrats controlled the Senate. And while some Democratic support is needed to reach the Senate’s 60-vote threshold, it’s very possible Republicans will have to carry it through the House alone with their razor-thin majority. DEMOCRATS PRIVATELY REBUKE PARTY MEMBERS WHO JEERED TRUMP DURING SPEECH TO CONGRESS: REPORT House Democrats traditionally vote to avoid government shutdowns. Now, however, Democratic leaders are directing lawmakers in the lower chamber to oppose the Republican CR. In a joint letter to colleagues sent on Friday, House Democratic leaders accused Republicans of trying to cut Medicare and Medicaid through their CR – despite it being the wrong mechanism to alter such funds. “Republicans have decided to introduce a partisan continuing resolution that threatens to cut funding for healthcare, nutritional assistance and veterans benefits through the end of the current fiscal year,” the statement said. “House Democrats would enthusiastically support a bill that protects Social Security, Medicare, veterans health and Medicaid, but Republicans have chosen to put them on the chopping block to pay for billionaire tax cuts.” But House GOP leaders will need to work to convince nearly all Republican lawmakers to support the bill – despite a history of dozens of conservative defections on CRs over the last two years. At least one Republican has already signaled he will oppose it. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, who has voted against CRs previously, wrote on X last week, “I am a NO on the CR. Congress needs to do its job and pass a conservative budget! CR’s are code for Continued Rubberstamp of fraud, waste, and abuse.” GOP leaders are hoping their close coordination with the White House and a blessing from Trump, however, will be enough to sway remaining holdouts. While he has not weighed in on the specific bill, Trump posted on Truth Social this week, “I am working with the GREAT House Republicans on a Continuing Resolution to fund the Government until September to give us some needed time to work on our Agenda.” “Conservatives will love this Bill, because it sets us up to cut Taxes and Spending in Reconciliation, all while effectively FREEZING Spending this year,” Trump wrote.
‘Registration for Mahila Samridhi Yojana will begin soon’: Delhi CM Rekha Gupta
Delhi Cabinet on Saturday (March 8, 2025) approved the ‘Mahila Samridhi Yojana’ to provide Rs 2,500 per month to women.
ICE raids at schools: Federal judge gives green light
A federal judge has ruled against the Denver public schools system’s attempts to block immigration officials from carrying out raids on school grounds, marking a win for the Trump administration as it looks to ramp up its deportation efforts. U.S. District Judge Daniel Domenico said Denver Public Schools failed to prove that a recent drop in student attendance at schools was due to the Trump administration reversing a 2021 Biden-era policy of protecting schools — and other sensitive areas like churches — from ICE raids. There are currently more than 1.4 million individuals on ICE’s final order of removal docket. Denver Public Schools filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem for reversing the policy, claiming the district was “hindered in fulfilling its mission” to students who didn’t turn up to school for fear of immigration enforcement. Denver Public Schools had sought a preliminary injunction barring the federal government from making arrests at sensitive locations, which was denied. Domenico also denied a request that he grant a nationwide preliminary injunction forcing immigration officials to revert to the 2021 guidance. COLORADO SCHOOL DISTRICT FIRST IN COUNTRY TO SUE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OVER FEARS OF ICE RAIDS ON CAMPUSES Besides a drop in attendance, Denver Public Schools said it had to divert resources to respond to fear among students and families over the lifting of longtime rules. The school system also argued that rescinding the policy had caused schools to devote time and resources to teaching students and staff how to remain safe from immigration enforcement. Denver Public Schools has trained staff on how to handle ICE officers if they show up at school, telling them to deny agents entry if they don’t have a warrant signed by a judge. Domenico, a Trump appointee and Colorado’s former solicitor general, said that it wasn’t clear how much of the fear surrounding possible enforcement actions in schools was really due to the new rules as opposed to broader concerns of increased immigration actions. He also pointed out that Denver Public Schools had not yet experienced any raids and noted that the head of ICE also issued a directive to its officers that immigration arrests at sensitive places still had to be approved by supervisors. The fear over the new rules, as well as the belief that the old rules provided protection to schools, both seem to be “overstated,” Domenico said. It wasn’t clear how much of the fear surrounding possible enforcement actions in schools was really due to the new rules as opposed to broader concerns of increased immigration actions, he said. Denver Public Schools issued a statement expressing disappointment with the ruling, while asserting that its lawsuit was successful in making public details of the Trump administration rules. The lawsuit was brought by the school district, not the city of Denver, which is a sanctuary city. The lawsuit stated that there were more than 90,000 students in the Denver Public Schools system during the 2023-2024 school year, and approximately 4,000 were immigrants. COLORADO COUNCILWOMAN ENCOURAGES PEOPLE TO ‘REPORT’ ICE ACTIVITY TO HELP ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AVOID CAPTURE The ruling came just days after Denver Mayor Mike Johnston and the Democratic leaders of other cities were grilled by Republican members of Congress about their so-called sanctuary city policies that they see as undermining Trump’s immigration and mass deportation efforts, as well as making such cities more dangerous. Since Jan. 20, ICE has arrested and deported thousands of people in the U.S. illegally – most of them being criminals with convictions in the U.S. or their home countries. Denver has seen a massive population jump in recent years as the city predicts nearly 43,000 people have arrived in the area from the southern border, the lawsuit said. The ruling also comes as the Trump administration has restarted the detention of illegal alien families that have deportation orders. Parents are now being detained, including with their children, at two ICE facilities in Texas. These are families who have already had their cases heard and have been ordered removed. Fox News is told ICE is now actively going into the interior of the U.S. and arresting migrant families that crossed the border illegally in years prior and have been ordered deported from the U.S. by a Justice Department immigration judge. This is known as a final order of removal, of which there are currently more than 1.4 million individuals on ICE’s docket. Border Patrol data shows more than 2 million migrant family units were apprehended while crossing the southern border illegally during the Biden administration. Fox News’ Bille Melugin and Elizabeth Pritchett as well as The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Democrat strategists reveal what Dem lawmakers should have done differently for Trump’s speech
Democratic strategists argue it would have been better for Democratic lawmakers to skip President Donald Trump’s joint address to Congress than to cause disruptions, which have since reportedly caused tensions with party leadership. “I think it would have been smarter to just boycott the speech,” Jim Manley, a Democratic political strategist, told Fox News Digital. “Showing up gave Trump legitimacy that he doesn’t deserve.” Asked if he thought the Democrats interrupting the president’s speech was a good strategy, Andrew Bates, who served as senior White House deputy press secretary for former President Joe Biden, told Fox News Digital “no.” “The protests preached to the choir, when we need to grow the congregation — like [Democratic Michigan Sen. Elissa] Slotkin did when she said Republicans will make you pay more “in every part of your life” in order to cut taxes for the rich,” Bates said. DEMOCRATS PRIVATELY REBUKE PARTY MEMBERS WHO JEERED TRUMP DURING SPEECH TO CONGRESS: REPORT Democratic House leadership is reportedly “very unhappy” with the interruptions made by lawmakers during the speech, which included yelling and holding up paddles that read “Musk steals,” and called on several of them to attend a “come to Jesus meeting” to discuss their behavior, a House Democrat told Axios. “I didn’t think the Democratic reaction in the room went very well. It just contributed to the theatrics,” Brad Bannon, president of Bannon Communications Research, a political consulting firm, told Fox in an interview. “No one can beat Trump at theatrics. I’m sorry, I love my congressional Democrats, but when it comes to theatrics, they don’t come close.” “It would have made more sense, in my opinion, to let Trump’s words soak in and not act as a distraction to the lies and falsehoods he told,” Bannon added. “So I don’t think the Democratic reaction in the room was good.” One strategist shared with Fox that they saw private data demonstrating that voters did not like the protests. FETTERMAN DISMAYED BY DEMS DISSING ‘TOUCHING MOMENT’ AT TRUMP SPEECH Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, stood up during Trump’s address and refused to sit down, leading to Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., ordering the Sergeant at Arms to remove him from the chamber. Democratic strategist David Axelrod told Politico that Green’s protest likely “got plenty of attaboys from the base,” but didn’t resonate with most Americans. “But with many other Americans — and not just Republicans — it was no more appealing than [GOP Reps.] Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert heckling Biden,” Axelrod said in an interview. “It’s just not particularly helpful.” Democrats were also criticized for not standing up while the president introduced DJ Daniel, a 13-year-old cancer survivor, during the joint address. “You know, that is a very individual thing. And aren’t there a lot of other things we can be focusing on, as I would think?” Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, said when asked why Democratic members did not stand for Daniel. “The word ‘betrayal’ comes to mind with regard to the president.” Another Democrat, Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt., told Fox News Digital that it “was a moving story,” but that “what Trump left out, of course, is he’s cutting research for cancer, which is pretty, pretty bad.” However, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., broke with his party on the issue. “I don’t know why we can’t fully celebrate,” Fetterman told Nicholas Ballasy for Fox. “I mean, I have a 13-year-old myself, and thank God she’s never had cancer, but I think that’s something we can all celebrate there. And I think it was a touching moment. And, like I said, that’s part of the best of the American experience.”
Georgia Republicans don’t rule out Senate bids as popular GOP governor remains undecided
Multiple Republicans in Georgia aren’t ruling out running for Senate in 2026 to take on vulnerable Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff—but they’re making it very clear that the nomination belongs to popular GOP Gov. Brian Kemp, if he wants it. “We always consider everything. I’m a moneyball kind of guy,’ Rep. Rich McCormick, R-Ga., told Fox News Digital. He pointed to Republicans’ overperformance in his district, part of which is located in the Atlanta suburbs. “Most people realize that we have the highest voter participation in Georgia in our district,” the congressman said. “So of course we’re going to be discussed in this conversation.” GOP’S TWO TOP DEM SENATE TARGETS JUSTIFY BLOCKING BILL TO BAR MEN FROM WOMEN’S SPORTS Rep. Mike Collins, R-Ga., also isn’t taking himself out of the equation. “If options come about, like this seat that I hold right now, and I see that I can win, and I see that I can make a difference, then, sure, you’re going to take a hard look at it,” he told Fox News Digital. However, both men stated in no uncertain terms that if Kemp chooses to run, the nomination is his. “He could win that seat very easily. He could walk away with it,” said Collins. “If Governor Kemp gets involved in that race, hands down, I’ll support him,” McCormick explained. “He would win that race both in the primary and the general. So, I want to be very, very specific on that.” Ossoff’s Senate seat is rated a “Toss Up” by nonpartisan political handicapper the Cook Political Report. Coming off of President Trump’s significant win in Georgia in 2024, Republicans are preparing to spare no expense on winning the Senate seat back. TRUMP FDA NOMINEE TURNS VACCINE QUESTION ON DEM, RECALLING CONTROVERSIAL BIDEN DECISION Kemp is the GOP favorite to compete with Ossoff for the battleground state’s Senate seat, but he hasn’t said whether he wants to launch a bid for it. “The governor has been clear and consistent on his timeline for making a decision about the U.S. Senate race in 2026. There is no doubt that Georgia Republicans will be united to defeat Jon Ossoff and finally have a voice that reflects our state’s values in the U.S. Senate,” Cody Hall, a senior advisor to Kemp, told Fox News Digital in a statement. In a recent interview with Fox News Digital, Kemp explained, “I’m in the middle of my legislative session. We’ve got a big tort reform fight going on. I’m chairing the Republican Governors Association. I made a commitment on that.” “I know I can’t keep holding out forever, so we’ll have something to say on that down the road,” he added. In case Kemp doesn’t choose to run, both McCormick and Collins signaled their own candidacy as possibilities. “But at the end of the day, you know, if he doesn’t run, the nominee that’ll get it will be the one that Donald Trump picks,” Collins predicted. TRUMP’S BIPARTISAN-BACKED LABOR PICK CLEARS LAST HURDLE BEFORE CABINET CONFIRMATION As to whether President Trump will weigh into the Georgia Senate Republican primary, as he did previously, former Trump campaign political director James Blair, now White House deputy chief of staff for legislative, political and public affairs, did not immediately provide comment to Fox News Digital. In 2022, Trump endorsed gubernatorial candidate David Perdue over Kemp, with whom he has had a strained relationship over the years. Kemp ultimately still won the nomination and the governorship, surviving the battle against a Trump-endorsed candidate, which many have fallen to. Trump also involved himself in the Georgia Senate race, endorsing former NFL player Herschel Walker early on to face now-Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga. Warnock won a runoff election against Walker, 51.37% to 48.63%. INSIDE ELON MUSK’S HUDDLE WITH GOP SENATORS: DOGE HEAD TOUTS $4M SAVINGS PER DAY “It’s going to be a fight,” McCormick previewed the 2026 race. “It’s going to be maybe a half $1 billion race, which means a lot of money and a lot of things are gonna be said.” “We need to make sure our message is clear and that what we’re trying to represent appeals to the Georgia voters,” he added. Ossoff’s campaign did not provide comment to Fox News Digital in time for publication.
White House unleashes on ‘rogue bureaucrats’ after agency head refuses DOGE entry to headquarters
The White House is calling out “rogue bureaucrats” at a small federal agency for attempting to bar members of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from entering their headquarters this week. Elon Musk’s DOGE team members and acting head of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Peter Marocco, in accordance with President Donald Trump’s executive order to downsize the federal government, sought to enter the U.S. African Development Foundation (USADF) building on Wednesday, but were denied entry after reportedly being intentionally locked out by members of the staff. The cost-cutting team returned to USADF the next day with U.S. marshals after the Department of Justice (DOJ) determined that they had a right to enter the building, a White House official told Fox News Digital, prompting a lawsuit from USADF President Ward Brehm, who asked a district court to bar the administration from removing him from his position. Brehm, who admitted to directing employees to deny DOGE entry, is attempting to block DOGE from entering the USADF offices, but the White House responded that “entitled, rogue bureaucrats have no authority to defy executive orders by the President of the United States or physically bar his representatives from entering the agencies they run.” DOGE SAYS GOVERNMENT PAYING FOR 11,020 ADOBE ACROBAT LICENSES WITH ZERO USERS, PLUS MORE ‘IDLE’ ACCOUNTS “President Trump signed an executive order to reduce the federal bureaucracy, which reduced the USADF to its statutory minimum, and appointed Peter Marocco as acting Chairman of the Board,” White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said in a statement shared with Fox News Digital. In the lawsuit, filed on Thursday, Brehm alleges “unlawful overreach” from DOGE and asks the court to give him a “clear entitlement to remain in his office as the President of USADF” after Trump, according to the White House, appointed Marocco to serve as acting Chairman of the Board. CNN STUNNED BY ‘SHOCKING’ POLL NUMBERS SHOWING PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR DOGE SPENDING CUTS “The threatened termination of Brehm from his position as President of USADF, whether by Marocco, President Trump, Director Gao, or any of the remaining Defendants, is unlawful,” the 26-page complaint reads. On Friday, District Judge Richard J. Leon in Washington, D.C., issued a temporary restraining order preventing Brehm’s removal. Trump has applauded DOGE’s efforts to cut hundreds of millions of dollars in “waste” from the federal government as he makes “bold and profound change” within the federal government. “My administration will reclaim power from this unaccountable bureaucracy, and we will restore true democracy to America again,” Trump said during his address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday. “Any federal bureaucrat who resists this change will be removed from office immediately, because we are draining the swamp. It’s very simple,” the president said. “The days of rule by unelected bureaucrats are over.” Fox News Digital reached out to Brehm and USADF for comment, but did not receive a response by the time of publication.
Women on the front line
On International Women’s Day, Al Jazeera’s journalists Teresa Bo, Fahmida Miller, and Maram Humaid reflect on what it’s like to report from some of the world’s most challenging regions. From their experience, it’s clear that women’s voices are not only vital in journalism but also in the communities they serve. Adblock test (Why?)
International Women’s Day is for the few, not the many
Every March 8, the world is flooded with glossy campaigns urging us to “accelerate action” and “inspire inclusion”. International Women’s Day has become a polished, PR-friendly spectacle where corporate sponsors preach empowerment while the women most in need of solidarity are left to fend for themselves. I can only hope that this year’s call to “accelerate action” means action for all women – not just those who fit neatly into corporate feminism, media-friendly activism, and elite success stories. But if history is any guide, the only action that will be accelerated is the branding of feminism as a marketable commodity, while the women enduring war, occupation, and systemic violence face erasure. Year after year, International Women’s Day is paraded as a global moment of solidarity, yet its priorities are carefully curated. The feminist establishment rallies behind causes that are palatable, media-friendly, and politically convenient- where women’s struggles can be framed as individual success stories, not systemic injustices. Advertisement When Iranian women burned their hijabs in protest, they were met with widespread Western support. When Ukrainian women took up arms, they were hailed as symbols of resilience. But when Palestinian women dig through rubble to pull their children’s bodies from the ruins of their homes, they are met with silence or, worse, suspicion. The same feminist institutions that mobilise against “violence against women” struggle to even utter the words “Gaza” or “genocide”. In the UK, in the run-up to this year’s International Women’s Day, an MP and feminist organisations have hosted an event on “Giving a Voice to Silenced Women in Afghanistan”, featuring feminists who had spent months calling for boycotts of the Afghan cricket team. Because, of course, that’s how you take on the Taliban – by making sure they can’t play a game of cricket. This is what passes for international solidarity: Symbolic gestures that do nothing for the women suffering under oppressive regimes but make Western politicians feel morally superior. Let me be clear: Afghan women deserve every ounce of solidarity and support. Their struggle against an oppressive regime is real, urgent, and devastating – and yes, what they are enduring is gender apartheid. But acknowledging their suffering does not excuse the rank hypocrisy of those who wield feminism as a political tool, showing up for Afghan women while staying silent on the Palestinian women being starved, bombed, and brutalised before our eyes. The Taliban’s rise was not some act of nature – it was a direct product of UK and US intervention. After 20 years of occupation, after handing Afghan women back to the very men the West once armed and enabled, these same voices now weep over their fate. Advertisement Where were these women MPs, prominent feminists, and mainstream feminist organisations when pregnant Palestinian women were giving birth in the streets of Gaza because hospitals had been bombed? Where was the outcry when Israeli snipers targeted women journalists, like Shireen Abu Akleh? Where were the boycotts when Palestinian girls were pulled from the rubble of their homes, killed by US-made bombs? Time and time again, we see the same pattern: Feminist outrage is conditional, activism is selective, and solidarity is reserved for those whose struggles do not challenge Western power. Afghan women deserve support. But so do Palestinian women, Sudanese women, Yemeni women. Instead, their suffering is met with silence, suspicion, or outright erasure. International Women’s Day, once a radical call for equality, has become a hollow spectacle – one where feminist organisations and politicians pick and choose which women deserve justice and which women can be sacrificed at the altar of Western interests. Feminism has long been wielded by the powerful as a tool to justify empire, war, and occupation – all under the pretence of “saving women”. During the Algerian War of Independence, the French launched a campaign to “liberate” Algerian women from the veil, parading unveiled women in propaganda ceremonies while simultaneously brutalising and raping them in detention centres. The French, of course, were never concerned about gender equality in Algeria; they readily restricted education and employment for Algerian women. Their actions under the guise of helping women were about domination. Advertisement This same narrative of the helpless brown woman in need of white saviours has been used to justify even more recent Western military interventions, from Afghanistan to Iraq. Today, we see the same playbook in Palestine, as well. The West frames Palestinian women as victims – but not of bombs, displacement, or starvation. No, the real problem, we are told, is Palestinian men. Israeli officials and their Western allies rehash the same Orientalist trope: Palestinian women must be saved from their own culture, from their own people, while their actual suffering under occupation is ignored or dismissed. The systematic slaughter of women and children is treated as an unfortunate footnote to the conflict, rather than its central atrocity. We see the same pattern again and again – concern for women’s rights only when it serves a political agenda, silence when those rights are crushed under the weight of Western-backed airstrikes and military occupation. This is not solidarity. It is complicity wrapped in feminist rhetoric. So, who will actually benefit from International Women’s Day this year? Will it be the women whose oppression fits neatly into Western feminist narratives, allowing politicians, feminist organisations, and mainstream women’s advocacy groups to bask in their self-congratulatory glow? Or will it be the women who have been silenced, erased, and dehumanised – those for whom “accelerate action” has meant 17 months of genocide and 76 years of settler colonial violence? Is this just another “feel-good” exercise, where you can claim to support women across the world without confronting the fact that your feminism has limits? Because if this is truly about accelerating action, then after 17 months of bombing, starvation, and displacement, we should finally hear you stand for Palestinian women. Advertisement But we know how this goes. The speeches will be made, the hashtags will trend, the panel discussions will be held – but
ICC Champions Trophy 2025 final: India have ‘no advantage’ over New Zealand
India’s batting coach Sitanshu Kotak blasts back at assertion that India’s Champions Trophy hopes boosted by Dubai venue. India playing all their Champions Trophy matches in Dubai was a pre-tournament decision, and talk of it giving India an unfair advantage is baseless, the team’s batting coach says as he blasts back against the criticism. Rohit Sharma’s India face New Zealand in the title clash on Sunday at the Dubai International Stadium, where the tournament favourites have been unbeaten in their four matches. India refused to tour hosts Pakistan in the eight-nation tournament due to political tensions and were given Dubai as their venue in the United Arab Emirates. “The draw that happened, it happened before,” batting coach Sitanshu Kotak told reporters before the final. “After India winning four matches, if people feel that there is an advantage, then I don’t know what to say about it.” The tournament’s tangled schedule with teams flying in and out of the UAE from Pakistan while India have stayed put has been controversial. South Africa batsman David Miller said “it was not an ideal situation” for his team to fly to Dubai to wait on India’s semifinal opponent and then fly back to Lahore in less than 24 hours. Advertisement Even nominal hosts Pakistan had to jump on a jet and fly to Dubai to play India rather than face them on home soil. India’s Virat Kohli salutes the crowd in Dubai after achieving a century against Australia in the semifinal [Christopher Pike/AP] The pitches have been vastly different in the two countries. Pakistan tracks produced big totals in contrast to the slow and turning decks of the Dubai stadium. “End of the day, I think in a game you have to play good cricket every day when you turn up,” Kotak said. “So the only thing they [critics] may say is that we play here. But that is how the draw is.” “So nothing else can happen in that. It is not that after coming here, they changed something, and we got an advantage,” he added. India have been the team to beat after they topped Group A, in which they faced New Zealand, Pakistan and Bangladesh. They then beat Australia in the first semifinal. New Zealand, led by Mitchell Santner, lost the last group game to India by 44 runs before they beat South Africa in the second semifinal in Lahore. India’s Varun Chakravarthy, centre, celebrates the wicket of New Zealand’s Glenn Phillips , right, in Dubai during the final Champions Trophy group-stage match [Altaf Qadri/AP] Kotak said the previous result between the two teams will have no bearing on their mindset going into the final. “That depends how the New Zealand team thinks, but I think we should not think that,” Kotak said. “We should just try and turn up and play a good game of cricket because there is no use thinking about the last match.” Advertisement New Zealand head coach Gary Stead said they are not too worried about India’s advantage. “I mean, look, the decision around that’s out of our hands,” Stead said. “So it’s not something we worry about too much. India have got to play all their games here in Dubai. But as you said, we have had a game here, and we’ll learn very quickly from that experience there as well.” “And if we’re good enough to beat India on Sunday, then I’m sure we’ll be very, very happy,” he added. Adblock test (Why?)