Controversial former NHL star Tim Thomas offered his first public comments in several years on Wednesday, after being named to the U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame.

"Everybody probably knows nowadays I don't have that much to say, at least publicly," said Thomas, the former Boston Bruins goalie who stepped away from public life after his final NHL season in 2013-14. "I've decided to keep whatever I've been doing in my life to myself, probably forever."

Thomas' career saw him rise from journeyman status to become a two-time Vezina Trophy winner and Stanley Cup champion. But a decision in 2012 to boycott the Bruins' visit to the White House transformed him from a hockey folk hero to a lightning rod of political controversy.

Thomas hadn't spoken to reporters in several years, and he reiterated during a conference call Wednesday that his private life would remain private. As for hockey, Thomas told ESPN that last season's Stanley Cup playoffs, in which the Bruins advanced to the Final, marked the first time he had consumed the NHL on a regular basis.

"I personally don't have any relationship with the game," Thomas said. "My focus is on learning about other stuff. I think I learned as much from hockey as I could."

The University of Vermont standout played in the minor leagues for years, and he first appeared in the NHL as a 28-year-old rookie in 2002-03 -- not becoming a regular with Boston until the 2005-06 season.

In 378 games with the Bruins, Thomas posted a 196-121-45 record. He became one of the league's top goaltenders, winning the Vezina Trophy in 2009 and 2011. He captured the Conn Smythe Trophy as playoff MVP in 2011, leading the Bruins to the Stanley Cup with a 1.98 goals-against average, a .940 save percentage and a victory on the road in Game 7 in Vancouver.

Public perception of Thomas, however, changed after that championship when he opted not to accompany the team to meet President Barack Obama at the White House the following January.

A Tea Party supporter, Thomas posted on Facebook that "the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People" and "this was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an individual."

That decision led to public criticism from fans and politicians, including then- Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick and Sen. Scott Brown. At the 2012 NHL All-Star Game, Thomas called the controversy a "media-driven" one.

"I would really appreciate if people would leave my teammates and my family out of it," Thomas said then.

He last played during the 2013-14 NHL season at age 39, splitting 48 games between the Florida Panthers and Dallas Stars. After that, he stepped away from the NHL. There was speculation he might rejoin his 2011 Bruins teammates at a reunion in May, but Thomas stayed away.

Could he envision a return to Boston at some point?

"That's a tough one. With the state of my nervousness since I retired, I wouldn't be able to handle the crowd. It isn't as simple as it may seem," Thomas said. "It's not fun for me to travel anymore. It has nothing to do with the Boston Bruins or Boston fans. They loved the crap out of me when I was there."

Thomas is scheduled to travel in December to the U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame ceremony in Washington, D.C. He will be inducted along with NHL commissioner Gary Bettman, longtime NHL forward Brian Gionta, Washington youth hockey figure Neal Henderson and U.S women's star Krissy Wendell at an event on Dec. 12.

A section of Inter Milan ultras have defended the Cagliari fans who racially abused Romelu Lukaku when the two sides met at the Sardegna Arena on Sunday.

Monkey chants could be heard as Lukaku stepped up to take a penalty, which he scored to give Inter a 2-1 victory. On Monday, the Belgium international called on his fellow players to show unity in the fight against racism.

However, Inter's Curva Nord -- the club's primary ultra organisation -- have released a statement in which they denied Italy is a racist country and defended the right of fans to demonstrate that kind of abuse in the context of a football match.

The intro in the group's Facebook post reads: "Open letter to Romelu Lukaku. Italians are not racist.

"After the latest theatre show surrounding ultras' apparent racism by those who want to pick up the easy popularity points which are borne out of ignorance, Milan's Curva Nord has once again decided to repeat the difference between real racism and the "instrumented" version which do not concern the ultras -- as all the fake moralists out there love to make out in order to create needless panic and freely condemn our world..."

The letter then begins: "Hi Romelu. We are writing you on behalf of Curva Nord, yes the guys who welcomed you at your arrival in Milan.

"We are really sorry you thought that what happened in Cagliari was racist. You have to understand that Italy is not like many other north European countries where racism is a REAL problem. We understand that it could have seemed racist to you but it is not like that.

"In Italy we use some 'ways' only to 'help our teams' and to try to make our opponents nervous, not for racism but to mess them up. We are a multiethnic fans organisation and we have always welcomed players from everywhere. However, we have always used that 'way' with other teams' players in the past and we probably will in the future."

However, the Fare Network responded to this statement and the Lukaku situation as a whole with a much different tone later on Wednesday.

The group, whose purpose is to fight inequality in European football, issued a statement calling for strong action to be taken against anyone involved in the incident.

The statement read: "We have been appalled to see yet another incident of racism in Italy in the form of abuse aimed at Inter Milan forward Romelu Lukaku at the Cagliari v Inter Milan Serie A game.

"The abuse directed at Lukaku is one in a long list of incidents in Italian football over the past year and highlights the repeated failure to protect minority players and to tackle what is a systemic issue in Italian football.

"Sundays events have followed a familiar pattern in Italy in which players are abused, the referee fails to protect them and the authorities take insufficient action.

"The response from Cagliari, the Italian FA and Inter Milan ultras has been to deny its significance and take ineffective action.

"Videos circulating on social media show that monkey chants are clearly audible. The Italian FA and Serie A have this footage, it is clear evidence and the basis on which to take action that sends a strong message.

"We believe that dealing with racism should be a priority for the the Italian FA. A plan of action monitored by international governing bodies, UEFA and FIFA is needed. If such a plan is not developed they should face special measures and ultimately suspension."

In December 2018, Inter were hit with a two-match stadium closure for aiming monkey chants at Napoli defender Kalidou Koulibaly, and, upon being allowed back, the Curva Nord criticised the club for failing to defend supporters in the wake of the incident.

Inter Milan declined to comment when contacted by ESPN FC.

Spain coach Robert Moreno said he is prepared to adopt a policy of alternating goalkeepers.

Manchester United goalkeeper David De Gea has been Spain's No. 1 choice since Euro 2016 but Chelsea's Kepa Arrizabalaga has started in Spain's last three games.

Moreno intends to alternate between De Gea and Kepa in goal, a situation that he believes will benefit the national team.

Speaking ahead of Thursday's Euro 2020 qualifier at Romania, Moreno said in a news conference:"If the goalkeepers are at the level that they have shown up to now, it's possible to alternate them. I don't believe that in a national team it's crucial that the same goalkeeper plays all the games."

Thursday's encounter will be Moreno's first game in charge of Spain since taking over from Luis Enrique on June 19. Moreno had overseen first-team duties in the previous two Euro 2020 qualifiers, a 4-1 win at Faroe Islands and a 3-0 triumph at home to Sweden, after Luis Enrique took a leave of absence to care for his youngest daughter.

Looking ahead to the game, Moreno, 41, said: "I'm expectant but I don't see it as a debut having felt that way against the Faroe Islands and Sweden. I'm looking forward to the game and to do well."

Spain have won all four of their qualifiers and lead Group F, five points clear of Romania.

One day, we might look back upon the 2019 summer transfer window and view it as a turning point. Maybe it will be the moment that clubs woke up to the reality of inflated contracts and fees, or perhaps realized that adding talent for the sake of it is only worthwhile if the price is right.

What is certain is that we have never had a summer like this, with a transfer market in which so many high-earning superstars were up for sale.

Gareth Bale, Paulo Dybala, Neymar, James Rodriguez, Christian Eriksen, Radja Nainggolan, Philippe Coutinho, Mario Mandzukic, Alexis Sanchez, Romelu Lukaku, Toby Alderweireld, Ivan Rakitic, Mauro Icardi, Emre Can, Chris Smalling, Ousmane Dembele, Danny Rose, Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Ivan Perisic, Jerome Boateng, Blaise Matuidi; the list of those available goes on.

Some moved, though all but Lukaku did so on loan: Icardi to Paris Saint-Germain, Sanchez to Inter, Smalling and Mkhitaryan to Roma, Nainggolan to Cagliari, Perisic and Coutinho to Bayern. All but the latter three moved in the final days of the transfer window, after their clubs spent much of the summer trying to offload them, but most stayed put, which begs the question: Why?

Why, at a time when Europe's top clubs are hugely profitable and enjoy a massive competitive advantage, would they not look to strengthen further? Why would clubs happily announce to the world that their employees are available for transfer, knowing that doing so would diminish their value?

Every case is different, both in terms of why a player became available and to what degree he was available, but each of the players above competed for a club that was willing to listen to offers and, in some cases, explicitly told their man that his services were no longer needed. Zinedine Zidane did it with James and Bale, Inter did it with Icardi, Perisic and Nainggolan, Manchester United with Lukau. Others were more subtle, but, still, the fact that we had so many in one go is unprecedented.

The consensus among a number of executives interviewed for this column was that this was a "market correction." Clubs had overextended themselves; the gap between the very richest 10 or 12 had grown so large that the biggest found themselves with excess inventory.

"Most of the players you mention have very high wages and long contracts; they are simply beyond the budget of all but a handful of clubs," Umberto Gandini, former Roma chief executive and European Clubs Association vice-president, said. "So it's a supply and demand situation."

When a factory has excess inventory, it can sell at a large discount. But a player is -- generally -- a sentient human being, not a crate of ball bearings, and as such can turn down a deal. Moreover, unlike the crate of ball bearings or, even, in another sport like the NFL, where unwanted personnel can be cut, footballers have to be paid. If he has a long-term contract and is unwilling to take a pay cut, buyers might be simply unable to afford him, even if there is a deep discount on the fee.

Gandini added: "Maybe in the past you might have had a club in the next tier down deciding to take a risk -- and it is a risk when you consider the fee, the wages, the length of contract and the reduced resale value if it's a veteran, it's a massive risk -- but with Financial Fair Play that's not going to be possible in many cases."

Indeed, FFP has created a whole cohort of clubs just below the highest echelon who have to watch their spending like never before. The heavy investment that might have once allowed a quantum leap to the top tier is no longer possible when you are dealing with "break-even requirements."

It is not a coincidence, then, that a number of moves were loans with the loaning club subsidising the move in some cases. When a team takes a player in this way, they are either not convinced they want to invest in him or they cannot afford him.

The parent club, meanwhile, gets all or part of his wages off the books, while hoping he will have a great season and someone will want him in 12 months. It's the equivalent of those infomercials where you can try the StepMaster 3000 for free at home for three months and if you are not absolutely satisfied, simply send it back. Try before you buy, as it were.

There is another element at work, as far as the biggest clubs are concerned. While you may disagree on some of the names above, there is little question that most of them, in absolute terms, would make any club better. By how much and at what cost, though?

"Those few clubs that can afford them are already very strong and, relative to the costs involved, they don't feel that another very expensive signing, especially a veteran with little resale value, will move the needle," Michael Emenalo, former Chelsea and Monaco technical director, says. "It might make them a little better, it could make no difference at all, but relative to the cost, it's not worth the risk."

- Marcotti: Why did Premier League team spend less in this window?
- Ames: European transfer window winners and losers
- Luck Index 2019: Man United lucky? Man City, Aguero unlucky?

The view is echoed by Gandini.

"The biggest clubs are entertainment brands as much as they're clubs," he said. "And I think they're being more careful about how they operate. They think more carefully about how much a player adds to the club, both on the pitch and as a brand and they put a number on it. And if they don't think they'll get a return, they don't act."

To some that might be a little chilling, but you can see the logic. Take Neymar, whose proposed transfer from Paris Saint-Germain to Barcelona fell through. He is a massive brand and a great footballer, but how much less of a brand is Barcelona (or Manchester United or Bayern Munich) without him? If that number is substantially less than what he would cost, well, you can see why potential buyers would go in another direction.

The case of Mathijs De Ligt illustrates another factor in the window that was. The Ajax defender was on the market and Juventus eventually beat Barcelona for his signature, which cost 75m Euros (around $80m). But there were other clubs that might have had a need for his services.

Manchester City and Liverpool, for example, enjoyed successful seasons, but both could have used a new central defender, given that Vincent Kompany left the former and Joel Matip had a year left on his deal at the start of the summer. Neither the Premier League nor European champions showed much interest in De Ligt, though.

Why? Possibly because both have hugely powerful and successful managers with very specific ideas about what they want. Adding De Ligt makes you more talented, sure, but it can also be disruptive to bed in a player after a season in which you gained 98 (City) and 97 points (Liverpool) and combined to win three other cup competitions.

Even if he does bring about improvement, are those clubs going to surpass last season's achievements? Probably not. And because managers are evaluated not just on results, but on results relative to spending, such a massive signing, coupled with only marginal improvement (or, more likely a step backwards) is not going to help.

Emenalo cites Rodri -- by no means cheap at 70m Euros ($74m) when he moved from Atletico Madrid to Manchester City -- as the kind of signing managers like Pep Guardiola or Jurgen Klopp are likelier to make.

"Clubs realize that you can't win everything every year and, more importantly, you don't need to win everything every year to preserve your standing as a club, the strength of your brand or the revenue you earn," Emenalo said. "If the right player comes along, who fills a specific need then they might sign him, maybe even at great expense to get him in early. But if they are already strong and competitive, they are reluctant to go to great expense to sign even a very talented player if it means disrupting what they have. That's a relatively new phenomenon, I think."

Viewed through one lens, the "Great Correction of 2019" is a positive. Clubs are smarter about how they pay players, and are less willing to take risks and throw money around. (It is obviously due in part to Chelsea's transfer ban, but the net spend of the Premier League's six biggest clubs was the lowest it has been since 2012).

Equally, though, if it means "doing just enough" to stay on top while also ensuring owner-investors continue to earn handsome profits, that might not sit well with everyone.

"I heard somebody say that there used to be professional clubs and amateur clubs," Gandini said. "Now we have amateur clubs, a large group of professional clubs just trying to survive and a smaller group of professional clubs who maybe have an illustrious past and are desperately trying to move to the top tier but finding it very difficult.

"And then we have the ones at the top, which aren't clubs at all, but entertainment brands," he added. "They are made up of entertainers and they act like entertainers. It may be an exaggeration, but not by much."

Sri Lanka's Kusal Mendis and Shehan Jayasuriya are unlikely to be fit for the third T20I against New Zealand, to be played on Friday - both of them picked up knee injuries after an on-field collision in the final over of the second T20I on Tuesday.

Jayasuriya was running from long on, and Mendis from midwicket, in order to intercept an aerial Mitchell Santner hit that, if caught, could have turned the game in Sri Lanka's favour. As it transpired, Jayasuriya did catch the ball, but as he was still running, was tripped up by the onrushing Mendis, and sent crashing into the boundary. That turned what could have been a wicket into a six, Jayasuriya unable to jettison the ball before he made contact with the rope.

Mendis also fell to the ground outside the boundary, and both men were clearly in significant pain. They took several minutes before being helped up.

"Mendis has suffered an injury on his knee on the right leg, while Jayasuriya has sustained an injury above the knee on his right leg," an SLC statement said. "Mendis has undergone an MRI scan today and the report is due later in the day."

No replacements will be named, according to chief selector and team manager Ashantha de Mel, even though Sri Lanka only have one extra batsman - Danushka Gunathilaka - in the squad.

Sri Lanka have already lost the three-match series 2-0.

The Pakistan Cricket Board appears to have made peace with potential conflicts of interest with the appointment of Misbah-ul-Haq as the head coach and chief selector.

Though it has not been made public or official yet, Misbah is also on the verge of becoming the PSL franchise Islamabad United's head coach but the PCB contends that allowing him to coach at the PSL will ultimately be to "Pakistan's benefit". That by itself would represent somewhat of a U-turn by the board, given that PCB chairman Ehsan Mani has, in the recent past, spoken about looking at such cases and acting on it.

The issue had come under the scanner with Misbah's predecessor Mickey Arthur, who was also head coach at Karachi Kings, as well as Azhar Mahmood, who was Pakistan's bowling coach as well as Karachi Kings'.

"We have reviewed the policy and made a strategic decision by allowing Misbah to have coaching exposure elsewhere," Wasim Khan, the PCB chief executive officer, said. "He has been a world-class player, he has captained elite players but he didn't work enough as coach so it's good for him to have coaching opportunities.

"It's for Pakistan's benefit because he will work in high-pressure games and get experience. Otherwise out of 365 days Pakistan is going to play only 42 days of international cricket. For the sake of Pakistan's success and the bigger picture it's good to have him get experience so we have discussed and reviewed it and decided to give him the opportunity."

Mani, who was not part of the board when Arthur took over as Pakistan coach in 2016, had questioned the decision to allow Arthur in both roles at the time. After becoming chairman, Mani took up the issue to try and form a policy against such instances. Mani had said he would look at it on a "case-by-case" basis.

It is understood that PCB has now found middle ground not only with Misbah but a junior team selector, Arshad Khan, who is also head coach of Balochistan, although now with the precedent set, the PCB will not be able to restrict other officials who wish to play such dual roles in both the national set-up and the PSL.

Last year, the PCB, under Mani, had removed chief selector Inzamam-ul-Haq from the PSL player draft committee because of a potential conflict of interest since he was involved in a talent-hunt programme run by one of the tournament's franchises, Lahore Qalandars. Tauseef Ahmed, who was part of the national selection committee while also serving as Islamabad United's spin coach, was also left out of the PSL draft committee.

Sheldon Jackson has questioned India's selectors over the absence of players from his domestic side Saurashtra in the recent India A squads.

In a series of tweets, the middle-order batsman said it was inexplicable that despite Saurashtra's three Ranji Trophy finals appearances since 2012-13 - including last season - no players from the team were picked for 'A' squads, and wondered whether the selectors attached any importance to the feat.

1/1 Saurashtra has played the ranji trophy finals this year, and surprisingly still no player even after performing at all platforms, dont get picked for the A series. so is the importance of playing the Ranji trophy finals zero.

— Sheldon Jackson (@ShelJackson27) September 2, 2019

2/2 or is that small state sides arnt taken seriously coz in the last 5 years @saucricket has played 3 finals under sitanshu kotaks coaching, (we have some very good performers since recent years with the bat and ball. ) but not got the deserved credit.

— Sheldon Jackson (@ShelJackson27) September 2, 2019

i am told not to question, but i strongly believe that we represent this beautiful organisation and association and we as players surely deserve to know why, and where we lack , orelse our carriers are just to goin to end wondering why. selectors should be transparent.

— Sheldon Jackson (@ShelJackson27) September 2, 2019

Jackson, 32, was part of the Saurashtra team that reached the Ranji Trophy 2018-19 final too, where they lost to Vidarbha in a tightly contested game. He was Saurashtra's leading run-scorer in the season, with 854 runs in 11 matches at an average of 47.44. His tally was the fifth-highest among the Elite teams, comprising Groups A, B and C.

However, he wasn't selected in the squads for the ongoing Duleep Trophy. While team-mates Dharmendrasinh Jadeja and Jaydev Unadkat are part of Duleep Trophy, and playing in the final, neither of them was selected in the squads that will face South Africa A in two unofficial Tests later this month.

Wicketkeeper Snell Patel was the other Saurashtra player included in the Duleep Trophy.

Jadeja and Unadkat both had standout seasons in 2018-19. Jadeja took 59 wickets, at an average of 27.16, to top the wicket-takers' charts among the Elite teams. In addition, he also scored 277 runs at an average of 21.30, and struck two half-centuries.

Unadkat, who had also assumed captaincy midway through the season when Jaydev Shah retired, spearheaded the attack with 39 wickets at an average of 17.17. His returns with the bat were modest, but included a vital 46 from No. 10 in the final.

Unadkat last played for India A in the longer format in 2013, while Jadeja has never represented India A.

Jackson has played one game for India A in four-day matches and been part of the Duleep Trophy only once, in 2016-17, when he ended the tournament with 368 runs in five innings at an average of 122.66. His last appearance for India A in a 50-over match was in a warm-up game against an England XI in January 2017, when he scored 59 off 56 as the entire top order came good to chase down 283 in less than 40 overs.

You wouldn't normally think that Boris Johnson and David Warner had much in common. But, as Warner trudged off the pitch at Old Trafford on Wednesday, he could be forgiven for identifying with Johnson and ruing how hard it can be to leave something. Even if you really want to do so.

For the second time this series, Warner had been dismissed trying to leave but failing. Perhaps more revealingly, it was the fifth time in the series - so the fifth time in seven innings (and 87 balls) - he had fallen to Stuart Broad. This time it took Broad only two balls to get him.

That marks quite a turnaround in the head-to-head record between the two players. Going into this series, Broad had taken Warner's wicket only five times in total - that's five times in 29 innings (and 527 balls) - with each wicket costing him 64.80 runs. In this series, Warner's wicket is costing him just 6.40 runs each time.

Key to this change in the balance of power has been Broad's decision to aim more at Warner's stumps. He has, in the past, looked to find the outside edge of Warner's bat. And while he has alternated between bowling round and over the wicket to him, in this series Broad has operated exclusively round the wicket to Warner, angling the ball and testing both edges of the bat. Broad had never previously dismissed Warner while bowling round the wicket.

At the same time, Broad is also bowling fuller than ever. Prompted by the coach and analyst at Nottinghamshire, Broad realised his leave percentage - the number of deliveries which batsmen were able to leave against him - was too high and resolved to bowl fuller more often. He has never exceeded the percentage of full deliveries he has bowled this series in any previous home summer - 37 percent - and, perhaps tellingly, he has never enjoyed a better average (currently 20.39) or strike rate (38.10), either. He reckons he is bowling better - and quicker - than for three or four years. He may be something of an old dog, in cricket terms, but he has shown he has the hunger to learn new tricks.

"Up until this series, Warner has had the better of me, really," Broad admitted ahead of this game. "I'd always focussed on his outside edge thinking running the ball across him would bring in the slips.

"I had a change of mindset in this series a little bit to try and bring the stumps into play more to him. I'm looking to nip it back onto off-stump. Then, if it holds its line, it brings the outside edge into play and that actually limits the scoring options slightly."

There are other factors at play. Conditions in England at present - the pitches, the weather and the balls - have all combined to make life desperately tough for opening batsmen of both sides. Over the last two seasons, opening batsmen in Tests in England dare averaging a meagre 22 - almost half the figure it was between 2000 and 2009 when it was 40 - with the England bowlers mastering the wobble-seam delivery that gives the batsmen few of the clues of conventional swing or seam bowling. You have to go back to 1932 to find a summer in which opening batsmen have averaged lower.

"I don't want to take too much credit for out-thinking him or anything," Broad admitted. "The fact is it's been a really good time to bowl with that new ball. And the pitches have been in our favour, too."

All this has created something of a perfect storm for Warner. Already standing out of his ground in an attempt to negate the lateral movement of the ball, Warner has given himself less time to judge which way the ball will move and, as a consequence, is increasingly unsure which balls to leave or play. The crisp, certain movements that have typified his career have been replaced by hesitancy and timidity. Here, where he lasted just two balls, he looked confused and muddled.

That is borne out by the manner of Warner's dismissals to Broad. Three times Warner has been dismissed by the ball angled in to him - twice leg before; once bowled - while the other two occasions have seen him caught in two minds; knowing, on one hand, that he should be leaving the balls outside off stump but unsure, on the other, if they were the ones jagging back into him. The result has been two tentative leaves, with the ball brushing the edge of the bat as the batsman half-heartedly tried to withdraw it.

The emergence of Marnus Labuschagne and the sustained excellence of Steve Smith have allowed Australia to cope with Warner's decline. But in one key battle, England clearly have the edge.