The most newsworthy elements in this 147-page document detailing the vetting, appointment and severance of the ex-US ambassador were the eye-watering £75,000 payoff Peter Mandelson received for being sacked - he had asked for near £550,000 - and the revelation the prime minister's national security adviser Jonathan Powell thought the process was "unusual" and "weirdly rushed". We already knew, because the PM admitted it in the House of Commons, that Sir Keir Starmer was aware of an "ongoing relationship" between Lord Mandelson and the paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein. Politics Hub: Follow latest reaction But to see in black and white the red flags being raised in a two-page due diligence report put together by the cabinet office was damning for the PM. Because it confirms that the PM was told the relationship between the pair was "particularly close" and continued well after Epstein was "first convicted of procuring an underage girl in 2008" for sex. It was flagged to Sir Keir that "Mandelson reportedly stayed in Epstein's house while he was in jail in June 2009" and noted there was "general reputational risk" over his relationship with Epstein. It warned the PM that a political appointment - Lord Mandelson - rather than a diplomatic one was more risky: "If anything goes wrong, you could be more exposed as the individual is more connected to you personally." Concerns raised The Mandelson files also revealed that Mr Powell, one of Sir Keir's most trusted advisers, found Lord Mandelson's appointment in December 2024 was "weirdly rushed" and that he had been "particularly cautious about the appointment". Minutes of a call in September 2025 show that Mr Powell had "raised concerns about the individual and reputation" to Morgan McSweeney, the PM's then chief of staff, and adds: "MM responded that the issues had been addressed." Sir Philip Barton, the Foreign Office's top civil servant at the time of Lord Mandelson's appointment, "also had reservations", according to Mr Powell. That the report was only two pages long and didn't investigate more robustly Lord Mandelson's relationship with Epstein, raises obvious questions. 👉 Listen to This Is Why on your podcast app 👈 It was only after the drop of the Epstein files by the US Department of Justice that we learned of the full depth and intimacy of the friendship. These documents also led to the arrest of Lord Mandelson on suspicion of misconduct in public office after it emerged that he had allegedly shared confidential information with Epstein when serving in Gordon Brown's cabinet. Lord Mandelson has denied any wrongdoing. 'An inveterate liar' For his part, the prime minister says he was repeatedly lied to by Lord Mandelson, with No 10 stressing that follow-up questions were asked of the former Labour peer in light of the due diligence, which will back up Sir Keir's account. Frustratingly for No 10, those documents have been withheld by the Metropolitan Police as part of their investigation into Lord Mandelson to avoid prejudicing the investigation. But it goes back to the central point that, given the red flags, and Mr Powell's misgivings, why Sir Keir chose to press on with the appointment. Alex Burghart, shadow chancellor to the Duchy of Lancaster, was excoriating as he called this out in the House of Commons on Wednesday. "Now the prime minister claims that he was lied to. He wasn't lied to by this due diligence document. And it may be that Mandelson denied these claims. "And if so, maybe the prime minister was lied to, but he was lied to by an inveterate liar who had been fired twice before," said Mr Burghart across the despatch box. "And we're supposed to believe, that the prime minister, who was once the chief prosecutor in this country, couldn't see through this nonsense. It beggars belief." A potential powder keg We will have to wait for further releases to get a better understanding of what the PM was told and why he took the decisions he did. Only a small proportion of the documents - expected to run into the tens of thousands - was published on Wednesday, but Darren Jones said the government hope to publish the remainder "soon". It will give more momentum to a scandal that is hurting Sir Keir with ministers and MPs braced for the dropping of thousands more documents that - if they pass national security clearance - will detail messages between Lord Mandelson and senior government figures for six months before his appointment, and during his time as ambassador. It could prove a powder keg for already inflamed tensions between Washington and London over the war in Iran should delicate diplomatic communications be put into the public domain - only messages posing significant security concerns will be exempt. And it will be parliament's intelligence and security committee, not the government, that will adjudicate on that. PM battling to survive It could also raise conflicts of interest if it emerges that government correspondence was shared with Lord Mandelson before his appointment given his commercial interests in the time at Global Counsel, a lobbying firm he co-founded. Two key figures who supported the appointment of Lord Mandelson - Mr McSweeney and the PM's former director of communications, Matthew Doyle - have left government. But their former boss, who has been battling to survive, is now having to deal with the ongoing consequences of an appointment he clearly deeply regrets. All of it, as one senior MP told me on Wednesday night, adds to the "general despondency" around this administration. Sir Keir promised to clean up politics, and yet he finds himself in the centre of one of the biggest political scandals this century. He must rue the day he ever let Lord Mandelson back into government. But it's very difficult to see how he can make it right.

It's about one thing, and one thing only: Fashion. The world's most famous catwalk, it has the power to take a celebrity's style moment and elevate it into historical popular culture. So the pressure is on to make a statement and steal the spotlight. Whether stars opt to dazzle with opulence, impress with fine tailoring or shock with the unexpected, if their outfit's getting talked about, it's job done. So, as we get ready for the 2026 Academy Awards on Sunday, we're celebrating the red-carpet risk-takers and most memorable Oscar looks over the years.

The most newsworthy elements in this 147-page document detailing the vetting, appointment and severance of the ex-US ambassador were the eye-watering £75,000 payoff Peter Mandelson received for being sacked - he had asked for near £550,000 - and the revelation the prime minister's national security adviser Jonathan Powell thought the process was "unusual" and "weirdly rushed". We already knew, because the PM admitted it in the House of Commons, that Sir Keir Starmer was aware of an "ongoing relationship" between Lord Mandelson and the paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein. Politics Hub: Follow latest reaction But to see in black and white the red flags being raised in a two-page due diligence report put together by the cabinet office was damning for the PM. Because it confirms that the PM was told the relationship between the pair was "particularly close" and continued well after Epstein was "first convicted of procuring an underage girl in 2008" for sex. It was flagged to Sir Keir that "Mandelson reportedly stayed in Epstein's house while he was in jail in June 2009" and noted there was "general reputational risk" over his relationship with Epstein. It warned the PM that a political appointment - Lord Mandelson - rather than a diplomatic one was more risky: "If anything goes wrong, you could be more exposed as the individual is more connected to you personally." Concerns raised The Mandelson files also revealed that Mr Powell, one of Sir Keir's most trusted advisers, found Lord Mandelson's appointment in December 2024 was "weirdly rushed" and that he had been "particularly cautious about the appointment". Minutes of a call in September 2025 show that Mr Powell had "raised concerns about the individual and reputation" to Morgan McSweeney, the PM's then chief of staff, and adds: "MM responded that the issues had been addressed." Sir Philip Barton, the Foreign Office's top civil servant at the time of Lord Mandelson's appointment, "also had reservations", according to Mr Powell. That the report was only two pages long and didn't investigate more robustly Lord Mandelson's relationship with Epstein, raises obvious questions. 👉 Listen to This Is Why on your podcast app 👈 It was only after the drop of the Epstein files by the US Department of Justice that we learned of the full depth and intimacy of the friendship. These documents also led to the arrest of Lord Mandelson on suspicion of misconduct in public office after it emerged that he had allegedly shared confidential information with Epstein when serving in Gordon Brown's cabinet. Lord Mandelson has denied any wrongdoing. 'An inveterate liar' For his part, the prime minister says he was repeatedly lied to by Lord Mandelson, with No 10 stressing that follow-up questions were asked of the former Labour peer in light of the due diligence, which will back up Sir Keir's account. Frustratingly for No 10, those documents have been withheld by the Metropolitan Police as part of their investigation into Lord Mandelson to avoid prejudicing the investigation. But it goes back to the central point that, given the red flags, and Mr Powell's misgivings, why Sir Keir chose to press on with the appointment. Alex Burghart, shadow chancellor to the Duchy of Lancaster, was excoriating as he called this out in the House of Commons on Wednesday. "Now the prime minister claims that he was lied to. He wasn't lied to by this due diligence document. And it may be that Mandelson denied these claims. "And if so, maybe the prime minister was lied to, but he was lied to by an inveterate liar who had been fired twice before," said Mr Burghart across the despatch box. "And we're supposed to believe, that the prime minister, who was once the chief prosecutor in this country, couldn't see through this nonsense. It beggars belief." A potential powder keg We will have to wait for further releases to get a better understanding of what the PM was told and why he took the decisions he did. Only a small proportion of the documents - expected to run into the tens of thousands - was published on Wednesday, but Darren Jones said the government hope to publish the remainder "soon". It will give more momentum to a scandal that is hurting Sir Keir with ministers and MPs braced for the dropping of thousands more documents that - if they pass national security clearance - will detail messages between Lord Mandelson and senior government figures for six months before his appointment, and during his time as ambassador. It could prove a powder keg for already inflamed tensions between Washington and London over the war in Iran should delicate diplomatic communications be put into the public domain - only messages posing significant security concerns will be exempt. And it will be parliament's intelligence and security committee, not the government, that will adjudicate on that. PM battling to survive It could also raise conflicts of interest if it emerges that government correspondence was shared with Lord Mandelson before his appointment given his commercial interests in the time at Global Counsel, a lobbying firm he co-founded. Two key figures who supported the appointment of Lord Mandelson - Mr McSweeney and the PM's former director of communications, Matthew Doyle - have left government. But their former boss, who has been battling to survive, is now having to deal with the ongoing consequences of an appointment he clearly deeply regrets. All of it, as one senior MP told me on Wednesday night, adds to the "general despondency" around this administration. Sir Keir promised to clean up politics, and yet he finds himself in the centre of one of the biggest political scandals this century. He must rue the day he ever let Lord Mandelson back into government. But it's very difficult to see how he can make it right.

This was supposed to be an opportunity for Pep Guardiola's City side to stamp their authority on the tie with Kylian Mbappe and Jude Bellingham among those injured. Madrid made all the right noises about never being underdogs but their form had been a worry. Enter Valverde with a captain's effort. Talk about stepping up. He credited his teammates and the coaching staff afterwards, pointing to the passes that he received for his goals. Typical modesty but it hardly told the tale of what he did at the Bernabeu. It was special. Choose the Sky Sports push notifications you want! 🔔 The first goal owed everything to a sublime first touch, cushioning Thibaut Courtois' long ball expertly - and he still had to round Gianluigi Donnarumma. The second featured stellar movement and a finish on his weaker foot. The third was a goal for the ages. Valverde ran off the back of Rodri and made Marc Guehi look like a novice by lifting it over him and smashing the ball low into the corner. Bellingham could not believe it, watching on in the stands, giving it the 'we are not worthy' gesture and well he might. It completed only the fifth first-half hat-trick in the Champions League knockout stages and the first against English opposition since Lionel Messi did for Arsenal 16 years ago. But Valverde's hat-trick display was very different to those that have come before it. He is not really a goal scorer at all, even though City fans will remember his outrageous volley against them in 2024 that won Champions League goal of the season. That was one of only three goals in his previous 75 appearances in the competition for Madrid. But that is part of what made this performance so extraordinary. Valverde did so much more than score. He also made more tackles than anyone else on the pitch. Indeed, his total of four was twice as many as any hat-trick scorer in the Champions League this decade. There was a moment during the first half when he tracked back to cover for Trent Alexander-Arnold. In the second, he could be seen slotting into the full-back position when the England international had ventured forward. No wonder his teammate adores him. "I am running out of words to describe him," Alexander-Arnold told CBS afterwards. "I think he is the most underrated footballer on the planet and he has been for years. Even when I wasn't here I admired his game so much because there is no flaw in him. "There is nothing he can't do. The energy and what he brings to the team is absolutely immense. He pushes himself to the limit game in and game out. It is an incredible trait to have. Whether people agree or not, he is in the top tier of midfielders on the planet." Maybe it is that unfussy attitude that makes him an untypical superstar. "He never moans," noted Alexander-Arnold. Galacticos tend not to be shunted around. "It does not matter where you put him," said Real Madrid head coach Alvaro Arbeloa afterwards. Valverde won his first Champions League on the wing and his second in midfield but has spent much of his time at right-back too. He can do that because of his physicality and that was a feature of this performance. He outclassed City and he outmuscled them. Supporters love that and it is why so many Valverde shirts pepper the crowd. They know. It is an often overlooked side of Real Madrid that for all the glamour they, like most fans, also define themselves and their club by their fighting spirit. The Uruguayan typifies it. It is the reason why, not for the first time, Arbeloa evoked the memory of the late Juan Gomez, better known as Juanito, when praising Valverde after the game. "He is the Juanito of the 21st century. Valverde is everything a Real Madrid player should be." Juanito has become a symbol of Madrid's spirit. After a two-goal defeat to Inter in the first leg of the 1985 UEFA Cup semi-final, he famously said that 90 minutes is a very long time in the Bernabeu. So it proved as Madrid won 3-0 and went on to lift the trophy. This victory by the same scoreline was inspired even more directly by Valverde. At 27, he is a player in his prime and in the absence of Mbappe and Bellingham finally getting his flowers. "He deserves a night like this," said Arbeloa. He is Madrid's underrated Galactico. The pictures within this article were taken by OPPO Find X9 Pro. OPPO has partnered with UEFA Champions League since 2022 and currently serves as the Official Smartphone Product Partner.

"We stopped all humanitarian activity. We cannot work. All the offices are closing because of the drones - some of the area has been evacuated. WFP staff left two days ago from the area, anticipating drone strikes," he says. Drone warfare has made Sudan's war a death trap for a population of more than 46 million people as the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) battle for territory. The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data, an independent global monitor, has documented at least 198 drone strikes in Sudan launched by both sides in the first two months of 2026. At least 52 of them involved civilian casualties, killing 478 people. "For us, when we hear the sound - we just rush and hide ourselves. We run to the river, and sometimes we can go into our foxhole. We go to the town and go to where there are no buildings sometimes," says Zaki. The area he operates in has been ravaged by armed rebellion and state violence for decades, but this time is different. A dangerous new depth to warfare "This war is quite different. This time they are using too many drones. Before - 20 years or 30 years ago - they did not use these drones, it was just a normal clash," he says. Drone warfare has added dangerous depth to Sudan's humanitarian catastrophe by making safe aid delivery and emergency response virtually impossible in some of the hardest-hit areas. "No food, no medical care, no sanitation," says Zaki. People scrambling to safety are left with little to no option of sanctuary. :: Have drones changed war forever? Sky News analysis and mapping of ACLED data has found that deadly drone attacks are spread across Sudan and the number of civilian casualties is rapidly rising. For the third consecutive day of new drone strikes on the southern White Nile state, an RSF drone hit a secondary school and shelter killing at least 17 people - mostly school girls - and injuring 10 others on Wednesday. In just a two-day window in mid-February, more than 60 people were reported to have been killed by drones launched by both sides, with at least 15 children killed in a single Sudanese military drone strike on a shelter. In January, a drone strike on N'djamena market in South Kordofan's Dilling county killed 13 people and a month earlier, a triple drone strike by the RSF on a kindergarten and hospital in the same state killed 114 people - including 43 children. Detentions and deportations The walls are closing in on civilians dealing with escalating violence as borders close. Drone strikes are spread across the eastern border to the west - even hitting the territory of neighbouring Chad which hosts close to a million Sudanese refugees. Chad recently closed its border with Sudan after multiple cross-border attacks by the RSF. Other neighbouring countries like South Sudan, Ethiopia, and Libya are dealing with the danger of their own civil wars and are increasingly unsafe for refugees. Egypt, a key safe haven for Sudanese refugees, is now deporting them en masse. Hundreds of thousands are now facing fear of detention, deportation, and death as Egyptian authorities unleash a brutal crackdown. The Sudanese embassy in Cairo has said that 578 Sudanese citizens have been deported back to Sudan in December and January. Affected families have told Sky News that their status as asylum seekers with the United Nations Refugee agency (UNHCR) is often ignored as their loved ones are picked up. Dozens of missing person posts are being shared on Facebook to trace those suspected of being detained or deported. "They took us to prison, and we were terrified. I have never been imprisoned before - in Sudan or elsewhere - and was shocked by the sight of the prison. It felt like we were in a soap opera," a Sudanese refugee who was detained by the Egyptian authorities told Sky News. He was a taxi driver in the Sudanese city of Al Fashir. He eventually fled the regional capital - where the RSF are accused of committing genocide and killing 6,000 people in just three days of capture - and went to Egypt for his safety. "They split us up into four groups, and we were around 110 to a single cell. There was violence from the police and then violence within the cell from embedded guards. You are constantly dodging both." An 18-year-old called Al-Nazeer Al Sadiq was also kept in one of these cells. He was arrested from a neighbourhood in Cairo and the three friends with him at the time were deported. He eventually died in detention. "He did not have any illness - he was healthy when they picked him up," his brother tells us from Sudan's capital Khartoum. "The first day my mother visited him he was mentally exhausted and not at peace. There were three visits and each time he was deteriorating more and more - right until he died." Al-Nazeer's family have returned to Sudan, despite the risks. The Egyptian government did not respond to our request for comment. Read more from Sky News:Thousands killed in three days1,000 days of war in SudanUN sees 'hallmarks of genocide' UK's asylum crackdown brought into focus Here in the UK, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood implemented an emergency ban on study visas for students from Afghanistan, Myanmar, Cameroon, and Sudan to slow asylum claims. This has meant that Sudan's best and brightest minds - at least 210 students - are being prevented from pursuing scholarships to some of the UK's best universities. At least 22 of them were meant to study at the University of Oxford, and 39 of them were accepted in a UK government-funded Chevening scholarship for emerging leaders. On the ban, Ms Mahmood said: "Britain will always provide refuge to people fleeing war and persecution, but our visa system must not be abused. That is why I am taking the unprecedented decision to refuse visas for those nationals seeking to exploit our generosity. I will restore order and control to our borders." But the students impacted believe that they are facing the compounded cruelty of Sudan's war. 'It's heartbreaking' "What's especially painful about the current situation is that the data simply doesn't justify a blanket decision like this," says Rawan, who has been blocked from enrolling in her dream masters programme in international health at the University of Oxford after being accepted. "The Home Office has pointed to a 300% increase in asylum claims from Sudanese students, from 30 to 120 cases over five years. But when you look at the bigger picture, those 120 cases represent only about 0.1% of total asylum claims in the UK." She continued: "It's heartbreaking to see how we're also villainising the students who sought asylum as they are not manipulating the system, they are fleeing one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world, with more than 14 million Sudanese people displaced by the war. "There is definitely a general sense of helplessness." This war is becoming a dead end as borders close and drones stalk the skies. Aid workers like Zaki do not know what to tell the people scrambling for safety. "They get confused about where they can go to feel peace - they go to South Sudan, there is a problem. They go to Ethiopia, there is a problem," says Zaki.

The rapper, who performs under the stage name Mo Chara, was charged in May 2025 with the alleged display of a flag in support of the proscribed terrorist group Hezbollah at a gig in London on 21 November 2024. But the case against the Belfast-born Kneecap rapper was dismissed last September on technical grounds. At the time, chief magistrate Paul Goldspring told Woolwich Crown Court that the charge was "unlawful" and he had no jurisdiction to try the case - but prosecutors appealed against the decision. The High Court ruling was handed down remotely on Wednesday afternoon. Lord Justice Edis, sitting with Mr Justice Linden, said that "the judge was right to hold that he had no jurisdiction to try any summary-only offence alleged to have been committed on that date". In the 13-page decision, Lord Justice Edis said their decision "turned on a very narrow and technical legal issue and has nothing to do with whether the respondent committed the offence set out in the charge". In a statement released through his lawyers, O hAnnaidh said: "This entire process was never about me, never about any threat to the public and never about 'terrorism', a word used by the British government to discredit people you oppress both in Ireland and across the world. "It was always about Palestine and about what happens if you dare to speak up. About what happens if you can reach large groups of people and expose their hypocrisy." Speaking at a news conference in Belfast shortly after the ruling, O hAnnaidh added: "This is bigger than us - whatever kind of stress that we felt, it's minimal compared to the stress put on the families in Gaza." He said the band has "lost gigs" and been "restricted" as a result of the court proceedings, but will continue to use their platform to talk about Palestine as they no longer fear "repercussions". Following the decision, a CPS spokesperson said: "The High Court has clarified how the law applies to the issuing of written charges in summary offences where attorney general permission was required for the director of public prosecutions to consent to a prosecution. "We accept the judgment and will update our processes accordingly." Read more from Sky News:Weather warnings for strong winds issuedVan driven into barricade near White House, police say After O hAnnaidh was charged, he first appeared in court in June. At a second hearing in August, the rapper's lawyers argued prosecutors should have sought the permission of the attorney general, the chief legal adviser to the Crown, to charge him with a terror offence before informing him of the decision on 21 May last year. This permission was instead given the following day, which meant it fell outside the six-month timeframe in which criminal charges against a defendant can be brought for this type of offence, the court was told.

The investigation will put further pressure on the government to relieve the burden on young people. Politics Hub: Follow the latest The Treasury Committee, a cross-party group, said it's responding to people who are "intensely dissatisfied with the terms" of their loans, after the chancellor announced she'll freeze repayment thresholds from next year. "This inquiry is about fairness," said Labour MP and committee chair, Dame Meg Hillier. "Fundamentally, what we're asking is: have the goalposts been moved in a way which is unfair to graduates?" The debate around plan 2 loans - given to young people who went to university between 2012 and 2023 - has intensified since Rachel Reeves' budget in November last year. Since then, a growing number of Labour MPs have urged the government to change course, while the Conservatives - to calls of hypocrisy - have said they'd cut the amount of interest owed. What's the deal with plan 2 loans? These loans are especially controversial because of the high interest rates. According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), plan 2 students now leave university with more than £50,000 in student loan debt. A graduate pays back 9% of their monthly earnings when their salary gets above the £28,470 threshold. Typically, interest is then charged at the Retail Price Index (RPI) rate of inflation, plus around 3%. It means that many see their debt increase, despite regular monthly repayments. Labour will increase the repayment threshold next month and then freeze it for three years. It's the freeze that many backbenchers and graduates want to see reversed. One Labour MP who wants the system changed said: "With 10 million people set to have student debt by the next general election, easing the burden for young professionals needs to be made a priority and treated with the urgency it deserves. "Under the previous government, young people were often the last to feel the benefits and the first to feel the brunt of policy decisions - this government now has the opportunity to break this pattern." Another Labour MP, who has a plan 2 loan, told Sky News that Labour MPs are pushing hard behind the scenes for reforms that would be cost-neutral, to save the Treasury from spending any more money. But will the government act? A number of organisations have suggested possible options for the Treasury and Department for Education, including lowering the repayment rate from 9% to 6% and extending the loan term from 30 to 39 years. But, being questioned by the Treasury Committee on Tuesday, Chancellor Rachael Reeves appeared to water down suggestions she could be about to make any quick decisions, while acknowledging the government "inherited a broken system". "The truth is, we can't do everything straight away," Ms Reeves said. "I do believe the priorities of investing in the NHS and in defence, but also in the most recent spring forecast to put aside much-needed money for SEND, are the right policies and the right approach." Read more:You could pay £10,000 extra after student loan changeHow to spare your child crippling student debt The government has made some changes, like re-introducing means-tested maintenance grants from 2028/2029, and is understood to be "looking at" possible reforms. The chancellor also said the government will help ease graduate repayments by "bringing down inflation and interest rates". But Ms Reeves added: "Any change we make has to be fully costed and fully funded." The inquiry by the cross-party group will accept evidence until Tuesday 14 April, and will cover issues of loan interest, how its fixed, and if governments should be able to change the terms once they have been introduced. Consumer champion Martin Lewis has weighed into the recent debate, arguing that lowering the interest rate will only help graduates who can clear their loans within 30 years, and that the repayment thresholds should be increased to help lower and middle earning graduates. National Union of Students (NUS) president Amira Campbell said: "This parliamentary inquiry is the clear result of sustained pressure from students and graduates. "The Treasury Committee is showing the leadership that students, graduates, and young people need from the chancellor, and at NUS we are ready to take this opportunity to work together to fix student loans now."

Draper came through a gripping match lasting more than two-and-a-half hours in a deciding tiebreak to win 4-6 6-4 7-6 7-5) as he beat Djokovic for the first time in his career. The 24-year-old will face Daniil Medvedev in the last eight on Thursday night, live on Sky Sports Tennis, at midnight before compatriot Cameron Norrie faces Carlos Alcaraz. What tennis is live on Sky Sports 🎾📺Latest tennis scores, results and upcoming matchesDownload Sky Sports app for analysis, news and videoNot got Sky? Get Sky Sports or stream contract-free "Just an incredible feeling," said Draper, who only returned to the ATP Tour in late February following eight months out with injury. "I'm out here against Novak, to me the greatest tennis player there is, and someone I've been admiring and watching since I was a little kid. "So to do that, I was just incredibly proud of myself. It gives me so much confidence. I still don't feel like I'm playing anywhere near the way I want to play. "I came out here tonight and I won that match through determination and trying to problem solve and do my best and have a great attitude." How Draper came back to beat Djokovic Djokovic took a hard-fought opening set 6-4 but Draper responded by taking a second break point in the opening game of the second. The Serbian broke back and Draper appeared in trouble in the eighth game when he was pegged back from 40-0 to deuce before eventually holding. A powerful forehand winner down the line in the next earned Draper three break points at 0-40 and he broke with the first when Djokovic netted. Djokovic refused to roll over and saved two set points before an ace finally drew the left-hander level. Djokovic began to look exhausted in the decider as a number of gruelling points took their toll, and having held serve in a riveting opening game that featured a 26-shot rally, he found himself 0-30 down in his next service game before Draper took another lengthy exchange to earn two break points. The 24-time Grand Slam champion regularly leaned on his racquet between points as Draper broke but the Briton was unable to see the contest out as, serving for match, he hit a wild backhand wide, double-faulted and prodded a tame drop shot into net, with a magnificent Djokovic drop shot seeing him take the second break point. Djokovic sent a backhand long to hand Draper a first match point in the tiebreak and netted a backhand to hand the Briton one of the most significant wins of his career. Kartal retires due to back problem against Rybakina Earlier, Britain's Sonay Kartal finally succumbed to her ongoing back problems as her run at Indian Wells ended against Elena Rybakina in the last 16. The British No 2 had defied pain in her back to record impressive wins over Emma Navarro and Madison Keys but, despite competing gamely against the world number three, retired while trailing 6-4 4-3. Kartal was broken in the third game of the match and went two breaks down after a video replay showed her top had made contact with the net at break point in the fifth. However, Kartal rallied to get a break back despite needing treatment from the physio between games and put the Rybakina serve under pressure before the Kazakhstani held to take the first set. The second set was going on serve until Kartal stretched for a return while break point down at 3-3 and, in clear discomfort, made her way to the net to shake hands. "Definitely not the way I wanted to finish the match, of course (I wish her a) speedy recovery," said reigning Australian Open champion Rybakina. "It's not easy, these kind of injuries. It was a tough match anyway. I'm glad I'm through to the next one." Watch the BNP Paribas Open at Indian Wells this week live on Sky Sports with the finals on Sunday. Stream tennis with NOW, contract-free.