As Iran’s religious, political and military elite turned out to pay their respects to the country’s former supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, one figure was conspicuously absent.

Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, who succeeded his father as the de facto head of the Islamic Republic, has not been seen in public since being targeted by joint US-Israeli air strikes on the first day of the war. Believed to be seriously injured in the strike that killed his father, his absence has “raised questions about who is really running the country, and allowed extraordinary open divisions to fester”, said Farnaz Fassihi in The New York Times.

What did the commentators say?
If the week-long funeral for Ali Khamenei represents a “calculated projection of strength by a regime determined to demonstrate continuity and resilience despite an extraordinary crisis”, it has done little to quell questions “over the country’s political succession”, said France 24.

In the void left by the killing of a supreme leader “who exerted absolute power over all important decisions” and the greatly diminished influence of his successor, the conservative faction has “split”, said Fassihi. Generals in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps have “consolidated power, effectively running the country”.

For the 36 years of the previous ayatollah’s reign, “whenever the US confronted Iran, American policymakers knew it was Khamenei who would make the final decision”, said Joshua Keating for Vox. But now “they’re no longer so sure”.

“There’s no one commander in chief,” said Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East programme at Chatham House. “It is a system that is commanding collectively for the time being.”

What next?
Khamenei’s funeral is a “grand reminder that the old guard has given way to the new,” said BBC diplomatic correspondent Paul Adams. “And with the new faces comes a new approach with its own implications.”

The new leadership is not made up of ageing ideologues “but of generally post-revolutionary leaders ruthlessly focused on preserving the state and willing to act more decisively than their predecessors”, said international affairs professor Vali Nasr. “They have a very clear agenda. They managed the war and now they’re going to manage the peace as well.”

A “political row” about football’s “drinking culture” is now “in full swing”, said Politico, after Andy Burnham said a ban on football fans drinking alcohol in the stands is “wrong”. The prime minister in waiting is considering lifting the ban, but the current PM is standing by it.

What are the current laws?
The Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol etc.) Act 1985 was passed in response to concerns about booze-fuelled football hooliganism. It bans the consumption of alcohol at football games in stands or anywhere within sight of the pitch at stadiums in England and Wales.

In Scotland, the rules are even stricter: alcohol cannot be sold or consumed anywhere in the stadium, with limited exceptions in hospitality areas.

What’s the problem?
Critics say that the English law means that fans end up drinking more quickly during half-time because they have only around 15 minutes before returning to the stands. This encourages increasing consumption rather than moderating it, it has been argued.

There’s also the question of whether it is fair to single out football, when data suggests that football crowds are far less violent than in the 1980s. Spectators can drink alcohol in their seats at rugby union, rugby league, cricket, horse racing, tennis, darts and other events.

In many other countries in Europe, including Germany and the Netherlands, football fans can drink in their seats, although rules are often tightened for derby matches and other fixtures that are deemed high risk.

Will Burnham change the rules?
The likely new prime minister hinted over the weekend that he might overturn the ban, saying there was “something wrong” with a ban on football fans drinking in view of the pitch, while rugby fans are allowed to do so.

The legislation has already been reviewed by parliamentary committees, football authorities and supporter groups. A fan-led review of football governance in 2021 called for the law to be re-examined.

However, Keir Starmer has “pushed back” at the suggestion that a reform is due, said Politico. “Police chiefs have warned against the relaxing rules of drinking in the stands, and we think that’s sensible to follow,” said a spokesperson for Starmer.

A heifer leaps over spectators huddled in the entrance to the bullring in Pamplona during the annual San Fermin festival. The “running of the bulls” sees young animals charge from their corral to the bullring through the crowded streets of the old Spanish city.

Cesar Manso / AFP / Getty Images

“For centuries, the Cerne Abbas Giant has been hard to miss,” said the BBC. The 55-foot chalk outline of a “naked, club-wielding man” cut into a hillside in the Dorset countryside is “one of the UK’s most instantly recognisable historic landmarks”. Scientific analysis suggests the giant was “probably first cut in the late Saxon period, between 700 and 1100 AD”.

Britain is “seared with chalk figures” like this one, said Matthew Green in The Telegraph. From “fantastical beasts” to “beguiling symbols”, the roots of many of these “unsettling and beautiful” shapes “cut into the bedrock of chalky hills” remain a mystery.

Among the most “striking” is the Uffington White Horse in Oxfordshire. Best seen from the car park above Dragon Hill, it’s “more of a spectral echo of a horse than a horse”: the chalky outline doesn’t have hooves, its mouth looks like a beak, and it has a “ghastly, ghostly eye”. Just over the border in Wiltshire is the Alton Barnes White Horse, which is carved into Milk Hill, and another gleaming white horse is cut into Cherhill Down near Oldbury Castle.

In East Sussex, on a “steep scarp of the South Downs”, you’ll find the Long Man of Wilmington trekking over the hill, said Jon Woolcott in The Guardian. Possibly Anglo-Saxon in origin, the “mysterious” carving has “fascinated” artists and writers for hundreds of years. Like the 40 or so other chalk figures that mark the British landscape, “their appearance enlivens walks and invites conjecture” to this day.

People keep asking me why I’m choosing to have a caesarean – here are my reasons
Sharon Gaffka in The Guardian
I’ve chosen to have a caesarean and it’s “worth talking honestly” about “why”, says Sharon Gaffka. Black and Asian women experience “worse outcomes” in pregnancy and as a British Asian woman reading these statistics while pregnant, they “suddenly” became “personal”. Reviews of maternity services have delivered “damning” verdicts, so “I started asking myself if I would really be listened to during birth”. I’m not “too posh to push” but everything I’ve “heard”, “read” and “experienced” suggested a caesarean would give me “the greatest sense of calm”.

Prince Harry’s just realised he’ll never win over Palace – it’s a bitter pill to swallow
Rebecca Russell in the Daily Express
Prince Harry has “just learnt once again that the House of Windsor will always win”, says Rebecca Russell. The Palace “does not engage in drama” or “respond when fringe members of the Firm are throwing their toys out of the pram” and it doesn’t “need to have the last word”. The “real tragedy” is that Harry doesn’t understand that “the institution has marched on without him” and “does not collapse under the weight of his attacks”.

Nigel Farage’s dodgy dealings are finally pushing him to the brink
David Aaronovitch on The Independent
What “stands out” with the Harborne affair is Nigel Farage’s “belief” he “could get away with it” and his “anger that anyone might think that he shouldn’t”, says David Aaronovitch. But he “can’t” because the by-election in Clacton will “damage a Reform party that seems to have passed its peak”. It “suggests an attitude towards public service” that is “unattractively mercenary” – he thought “toleration” of Donald Trump’s “shamelessness” might “travel to these shores”. It also suggests he is a “strangely half-hearted would-be prime minister”.