doctor, thank you very much. england wicketkeeper sarah taylor has retired from international cricket because of her ongoing issues with anxiety. she previously took a break from the game in 2016, returning to win the world cup with england in 2017. she's been named the best women's t20 player in the world three times, and is second on the england women's list of run—scorers. here she is talking to the bbc when she took a break from cricket the first time. it happened mainly when i was just about to bat, that kind of expectation of wanting to score runs. that was the hardest. the nerves would hit me, but it would be a nerves plus something else. i was oi’ a nerves plus something else. i was or is confused as to what it was. now i know. it is a genuine kind of panic, the heart races, you kinda feel faint. and those are just a little things i go through. there are times when i have had to run off

into the changing rooms and be sick, sometimesjust through into the changing rooms and be sick, sometimes just through sheer panic. and that is where it has got to really in terms of my cricket. like i say, that in turn affected my performance and it had to be addressed. sony and walt disney have reached a deal to continue the spiderman movie series. the companies have said that sony — which owns the film rights to the spider—man character — and disney — which owns marvel studios — had previously said an agreement could not be reached for the future of the character, so it would no longer feature in its own marvel franchise or movies like the avengers. now it's time for newswatch. here's samira ahmed. welcome to newswatch with me samira ahmed. a public backlash after the

bbc uphold a complaint against brea kfast bbc uphold a complaint against breakfast presenter naga munchetty for comments about racism. who was wrong? in a week of anger and argument at westminster, a row has been developing here at the bbc. brea kfast been developing here at the bbc. breakfast presenter naga munchetty has been found by the corporation's executive complaints unit to have breached bbc guidelines in comments she made on air injuly. they were pa rt she made on air injuly. they were part of a conversation initiated by co—presenter dan walker after president trump had told four democratic congress women to go back to the places from which they came. it is, it is the president. that was the most telling quote for me last night. i can't remember who said, but she said she had been told to go home times, to go back to where she came from. now she is being told by the man in the oval office. every timel the man in the oval office. every time i have been told, as he woman

of colour, to go back to where i came from, that was embedded in racism. i am came from, that was embedded in racism. lam not came from, that was embedded in racism. i am not accusing anyone of anything here, but you know what certain phrases mean. you still hear that quite regularly? not regularly, but every so often. you are sitting here not giving an opinion, but how do you feel as someone who has been told that before... furious, absolutely furious. i can imagine that lots of people in this country will be feeling absolutely furious that a man in that position feels it is ok to skirt the lines with using language like that. do you feel that his use of that, because that is the point i was trying to make, then legitimises other people to use that? and as our guest was saying there, feels like a thought out strategy to strengthen his position. it is not enough to do itjust to get attention. he is in a response or position. look, i am get attention. he is in a response or position. look, lam not get attention. he is in a response or position. look, i am not here to give my opinion. although bbc brea kfast give my opinion. although bbc breakfast promoted that, one person

pursued that to the final arbiter of complaints in—house at the bbc. they ruled that... the bbc added... but the emergence of that decision on wednesday unleashed an angry response from politicians, other journalist, inside and outside the bbc, and also from members of the audience. a twitter user posted this...

this twitter user agreed. responding in this way... other viewers echoed those thoughts with jonathan writing... well, to discuss this, i am joined david jordan, the bbc‘s director of editorial policy and standards. thank you for coming on newswatch.

it's not ok for news presenters to talk about personal opinions when discussing the stories? it shouldn't be ok to talk about personal opinions, but it should be ok to talk about personal experience. i wa nt to talk about personal experience. i want to make it clear that what naga munchetty did when she responded to the questions she was asked and suggested that the statement being made was racist, and her response as a person who has had that kind of horrible things said to her in her lifetime, was completely ok, the executive complaints unit which came to this finding had no objection to either of those statements. those people who have interpreted this finding as somehow ruling out either of those two things are wrong, they are people who have interpreted the statement suggesting the bbc is impartial and racism are also wrong. that isn't the case. some viewers, as you heard in those e—mails, said, "why is naga munchetty being singled out placencia when many older white male presenters aren't? " it is not a good look for the bbc.”

male presenters aren't? " it is not a good look for the bbc. i am afraid that the executive contains unit deals with the complaints it gets. some people say why isn't dan walker being singled out in the same way as naga munchetty? the symbol fact is that we haven't had a complaint. the complainant didn't mention dan walker at all? there were quite a lot of complaints at the time it was made. a lot of people disagree with your audience murmurs about what she said at the time. only one of those, as you correctly said, made its way to the executive complaints unit. then they are obliged to deal with a complaint they have and not complaints they might like to have or other complaints that might be available. that is what they did in this instance. one might wonder how they came to the decision, because could they not look at the context? evenif could they not look at the context? even if the complaint was just about naga munchetty, you said they didn't mention dan walker, can they not look at the fact he initiated the conversation? there is a mention of dan walker in the finding that they have put together in the letter to

the complainant. and it does indicate that than water's dilution was not helpful in the conversation. dan walker led naga munchetty to the conclusion is that she eventually made, including the statement bite naga munchetty herself. so it is a more complex and nuanced situation and some of the people who have reacted to the headlines in the newspapers and other and elsewhere have appreciated. what puzzle some viewers as well if that's naga munchetty physically said in the clip was that she specifically wasn't accusing anyone of anything. out of the ecu come to the conclusion that somehow her comments crossed a line and it seems to be accusing trump? she said that at the outset but, unfortunately, toward the end of the discussion, she eventually ventured into speculating about what president trump's motors what might have been in making the comment that he made. there is no doubt that the committee made is racist, to say to anybody from a minority ethnic community or from an immigrant community that they should

go back to where they came from is just ignorant prejudice and is racism. and she was right to identify it as such. so there is no doubt that the comment was racist, but that she went on to say together with dan walker later in the conversation was what was motivating that wasn't being done to attract attention orfor some that wasn't being done to attract attention or for some other reason. dan walker, his first comments did specifically bring up president trump and his possible motivation. so again, i think some viewers are puzzled as to why the complaints unit has chosen to leave him out of their assessment. only because naga munchetty‘s contribution was what was complained about, not dan walker's. but they did actually mention dan walker in their findings. so they did not in the direction that you are suggesting by indicating that his role perhaps wasn't as harmful as it might have been. is that enough, or should the bbc‘s complaints unit have actually chosen actively to look at dan walker's rolling rather than going with what the complainants raised?

under the current rules which are available publicly, that isn't possible. could you tell us a bit about the process that the executive complaints unit would have used in analysing this debate? did the interview anyone or get any expert opinion or talk to any of those involved? they have been in contact with news who act on behalf of all of their presenters and reporters if there is a complaint that is being entertained by the executive complaints unit. and talk to them about it and have been in touch with naga munchetty herself about the finding. so they talk to those people. but what they are doing, it is an objective process, what they are doing if they are looking at whether or not what was done matches the requirements of editorial guidelines. so that is the process they go through and require us to call in independent experts because we are not—like if we are not experts on our guidelines, then what are we? that is the process they go through and they write an

independentjudgment as through and they write an independent judgment as to through and they write an independentjudgment as to whether that has been fulfilled. a number of prominent broadcasters and viewers like lenny henry and pat young have publicly said that the bbc has got this badly wrong. will you reconsider the decision to uphold this complaint? i don't think in a lot of the comment that i have seen, u nfortu nately, lot of the comment that i have seen, unfortunately, that people are focusing on the whole of the judgment. they are focusing on an idea that naga munchetty has not been allowed to make a statement about the racist nature of the comment that was made and not been allowed to talk about her personal experience of having had that kind of comment made to her. this complaint in the guardian was that the whole decision was wrong and that the bbc should reconsider it.|j have read it, and unfortunately, there still seems to be confusing things for example, three suggesting that the bbc is impartial on the issue of racism, which is to be not true. our impartiality values are not value free, they do encompass

freedom of expression, they encompass democratic rights, the right, the rule of law. you can't have those if you have a society based on racism. and excluding some voices on the basis of rights. so our impartiality is not value free and we are not impartial on the issue of racism. thank you. thank you. thank you for all of your comments this week. please get in touch with your opinions about what you see on bbc tv news online or bbc social media. you may even get to appear on the programme. you can e—mail prog—mac@bbc.co.uk or find appear on the programme. you can e—mail prog—mac@bbc.co.uk orfind us on twitter. you can call us. and if you have a look at our website. i am away next week but rebecca jones will be here at the normal time with more of your thoughts about bbc news coverage.

we are heading into a very turbulent weekend of weather. some heavy rain and strong winds in places. through the rest of this evening and tonight, we see further showers pushing from the west towards the east. some of these on the heavy side. some heavy spells in between, and whether winds are lighter across the north and north—west of scotland, it could get quite chilly for some. generally, temperatures holding between eight and i2 celsius. into tomorrow, quite a few showers around at first. but they should tend to ease in many areas of the day wears on. by the afternoon, afairamount of the day wears on. by the afternoon, a fair amount of dry weather and some spells of sunshine. afternoon temperatures ranging from 13 to 19 celsius. behind me, you see our next month of wet weather. that will drive its way north—eastward across england and wales during saturday night. there is the potentialfor localised flooding. the rain will be quite persistent. on the southern flank of this area of low pressure some strong and gusty winds. it stays wet and windy for many of us during sunday. the best chance of seeing dry weather across the north

of the uk.

this is bbc news. the headlines at 8.00pm. former cabinet minister amber rudd accuses number 10 of using words that could incite violence — but borisjohnson defends his comments yet again. can you use words like surrender to describe a certain act, a certain bill? quite frankly, i think that you can. nicola sturgeon says the snp could back a caretaker government led byjeremy corbyn — to prevent a no—deal brexit. "a broken force that's become a national disgrace." cleveland police becomes the first force in england and wales to be classed as "failing in all areas". pressure grows on the bbc to overturn its ruling on comments