Barclay Talks Sport

Terrific game. England outplayed almost the entire match but hung on in there and in the end, battled out a draw. I know it was desperate but in times gone by, we would have crumbled and it gives us great strength to hang on and see the expressions on the Aussie players' faces. Moral victory in the end and amazingly, we take momentum into 2nd Test at Lord's.

BUT. This does not disguise our shortcomings and they were many. I'll do a player by player summary cos that does it best. Oh, before that, one for the Aussie team: Excellent performance and deserved to win (snork!). Demonstrated how to bat in a test match and how to captain and declare with imagination. Bowling was OK but that's all it had to be because... see below:

Strauss - Captain but not in the same league as Ponting. Ponting is experienced but he is also very clever. Strauss should look there for lessons. Strauss got stuck too often not knowing what to do in the field and was not smart enough to try field changes to inspire pressure, or to bowl people like Pietersen and Bopara. Took him an age to go to Collingwood and the other two might have worked for him too. He has a lot to learn. As for his batting. Bounced out in the 1st inns and that's no shame, happens to all. 2nd inns, gave it away. Cutting the spinner very dangerous. Yes, we needed to score but we had all day. Poor shot choice. Retain.

Cook - His batting flaws exposed. Follows wide balls outside off stump and gets trapped in front because of where he plants his left leg. Needs to improve or be dropped, possibly even for Bell as opener. Keep him in for Lord's. He likes playing at Lord's. A lot.

Bopara - Such promise but got out-thought in the 1st Inns. Needs to remember he's not in a one day game. Not everything needs hitting for four. Unlucky to be LBW in 2nd. Ball too high. Retain.

Pietersen - sigh. Look. I get it that he's our best batter. He is incredibly exciting. But see above. This was a test match. Look at how the Aussies went about compiling centuries. His out shot in the 1st inns was utterly stupid and I don't care that 'that's the way he plays'. He's playing in a team. He is there to score big runs and sometimes, he needs to look further ahead than the next flash shot. Pietersen playing sensibly need never get out and would still score at four an over. 2nd inns... could have happened to anyone. Retain but remind about responsibilities to team as well as entertainment and celebrity.

Collingwood - Our best batter this test match. Should have made 100+ in 1st inns but was brilliant in 2nd inns and was the man who effectively saved us the match. Retain with a big pat on the back.

Prior - His keeping was pretty solid. Again, should have made 100+ in 1st inns. Out to a good ball but should have been defending with end of play so close. 2nd inns a stupid, stupid shot. Cutting a ball that was too close. Cutting... we're trying to save a game. Anyone heard of the leave and the straight bat? Retain.

Flintoff - He batted pretty well but got himself out both times. And his first spell of bowling was wonderful. But no other spell matched that pace or intensity. Questions have to be asked whether his body can take test match cricket anymore. I hate to say that his best days are behind him but he just was not the threat of 2005 and the news he's tweaked a knee was somehow no surprise. Retain (if genuinely fit) but we cannot rely on him the same way anymore.

Broad - Heart still rules head too much. A brilliant young cricketer and could be a genuine all-rounder. Batting was average for him and I think the Aussies know how to work him over. His bowling lacked penetration and his attempts to mix up length, line and pace didn't fool them. Needs to work on disguise. Retain because his runs are valuable and he will get better and better as a bowler.

Swann - Batting just excellent. Second only to Collingwood in that department. Obdurate and aggressive by turn. Many specialist batters in our team could learn a thing or two. Bowling was right off by his standards. Too many loose deliveries meant he got no pressure on their batters and hence no wickets to speak of. He can do much better. Retain as sole spinner for Lord's.

Anderson - As our premier bowler, he suffered from a lack of swing and, given that, a lack of variety. He was accurate enough but when the ball was straight, he had no proper variety. Nor did he go round the wicket enough. Needs to work on Yorkers, Slowers and Bouncers so he has a plan 'B'. batting was perfect for a number 10. He with Monty were brilliant in the final overs but let's remember, he should not have been put in that position. Stirring stuff nonetheless. Retain because he is our best fast bowler and still improving.

Panesar - He is predicatable because he is so one-paced. He needs to insert these variations we are told he has. Actually, he needed to do it in Cardiff. His only wicket was down to a mistake by Ponting who had already got to 150. He is not living up to his potential. 2nd inns batting was wonderful. Solid defence and real mental strength. But he is not in the team to bat. Sorry Monty. You need to sit the next one out. Drop for Harmison (though I fear it may be Onions even though we want pace and bounce at Lord's and Harmison can deliver that in spades).

Hmm interesting one this. Click here.

for the full article. In summary, Ponting was sour graping about England sending on physio and 12th man close to the end of play. I thought it was not the best move but all the overs were bowled and getting messages on to the pitch is utterly legit and the Aussies do it too.

What gets me is Ponting whining on about them playing within the rules. This is the same Ponting who practically exploded when his claim to have cuaght Collingwood bat pad was turned down. The ball missed the bat by inches. It was not even close. He would have known that. he watched the ball all the way from Collingwood's pad into his hand. Greenhouses and stones, Ponting.

Springboks coach De Villiers defends the indefensible

here..

Having heard the interview that he gave, the only conclusion left to draw is that De Villiers is a deluded egomaniac so puffed up with his own assumed greatness that he cannot separate honest hard rugby from repulsive foul play.

For those not in the know, Burger was found guilty of eye-gouging, surely the worst crime you can commit on a rugby pitch. Never mind that he was not given a straight red card at the time, or that his punishment of an eight week ban is not severe enough, what is truly galling is the reaction of his coach. This poor excuse for a human defended Burger's actions, saying [and I summarise here] that rugby is a contact sport and that is you don't like it, go and buy a tutu and do ballet.

De Villiers, you're a moron if that is what you truly believe. How can you defend an action which could have led to the blinding of another player? Sure, Burger isn't normally a dirty player but this was no accident. Gouging is never done by accident. Interesting that you have clearly examined the footage with only one-eye yourself if you feel your player's actions to be above reproach.

It's clearly time De Villiers left the rugby arena and took up something more suited to his view of the world. Staring at himself in the mirror perhaps.

The second test last Saturday was a fantastic game of rugby and it's rather sad this issue has overtaken that fact.

I wrote a piece for the Daily Mash (the excellent satirical website, see the link to the right) which they chose not to publish so I thought I'd sneak it up here. It's all in fun, all totally ficticious and not meant to cause offence etc etc, utterly harmless and I hope it makes you chortle a bit. It's in response to this article.

Enjoy

Leading premiership referee, Steve Bennett says he risks his life every time he takes the field because players want to sink their teeth into his flesh when he makes a contentious decision.

‘It’s just a matter of time before a referee is consumed live on Sky Sports on a Sunday afternoon,’ he said. ‘Not something you want to see on a mouthful of roast chicken and parsnips is it?’

Bennett says managers encourage players to consider cannibalism to get a decision changed by leaping up and down on the touchline like in some hideous tribal pre-dinner dance.

‘You think it’s sponge and spray in the trainer’s bag do you? Well I’ve seen inside. And it’s napkins and cruet sets. Salt and bastard pepper. Tesco finest onion fucking relish.’

‘I used to think being manhandled by angry players was some kind of homosexual advance. But it’s not. They’re feeling out the best cuts. Fucking hell, I’ve seen them lick their lips and salivate.’

‘They’re sharpening knives in the dressing rooms. Ice buckets are for my vital organs. Help me. For the love of God, help me!’ he added.

Referees’ boss, Keith Hackett commented. ‘Bennett’s a streaky piece of piss. It’s the lardy bloaters that have to worry. And the incompetent tossers who deserve nothing more than a set of gnashers in the neck.

‘Lord knows there are enough of those. Fuck ‘em. It’s a jungle out there. Live with it.’

A television spokesman added. ‘A blood-crazed gang of highly paid premiership footballers stalking and bringing down a referee in an orgy of gore and intestines would be fantastic for ratings.’

Sometimes you are left to wonder at the intelligence of football players, their clubs and their personal management. All right, often, you are left to wonder. No, sorry, you don't wonder any more, you just know they are all just stupid. This story seals it for me.

So. Liverpool players get burgled when they are playing football. Eight so far. It seems that some fiendishly clever crooks have worked out that when players are playing football in the evening, quite often live on telly, they aren't at home. Smart stuff.

Tragically, the players, staff and agents of Liverpool players appparently have not grasped that when players are playing football in the evening, quite often live on telly, their homes are vulnerable to fiendish crooks.

I know we only have eight examples and perhaps we should wait for the full first eleven but really, for pity's sake, have they really no answer? Is it too hard to organise private security to be in and around the properties of absent players, when players are playing football in the evening, quite often live on telly?

Is it just me, or should even Rio Ferdinand get this? I know he didn't understand having a wee at the training ground when told to but this is far, far simpler. And, on a serious note, for those Liverpool (and Man Utd or anyone come to that) players not yet victims, what about the wives and families in your houses? Keep them safe. You can afford it, really you can.

Jeez, must we lead them by the nose to everything except the trough of money?

This ruling by the FA's arbitration idiots allows anyone to blame anyone else for their short comings.

Let's get away from all the bluster about Carlos Tevez's transfer to West Ham a couple of seasons ago, its legality etc and look at what the judgement means. It means that Sheffield United can claim £30 million on the back of assumption and conjecture. Worse still, they have been allowed to blame their mulitple failings in their Premier League season on someone else.

To say that Carlos Tevez is the sole reason they got relegated is to view the rest of the season as some sort of fantasy land where results didn't matter. Sheffield United had 38 games in which to score enough points to stay up. They did not. Never mind what other teams didor did not do. They were not good enough to stay up.

Sure, West Ham staged a remarkable recovery but can it be proved beyond any doubt that this would not have happend without Tevez? Of course it can't. It's a kind of retrospective crystal ball gazing and does football no credit whatever. The fact is that the FA should have punished West Ham more severely during the season. They chose not to. Yes West Ham broke the rules and have already paid. Everything else is irrelevant and cannot be proved.

What next, a relegated club taking another side to court because they claim an injury to a player was instrumental in their downfall? Because fouling a player is against the riles too, is it not?

I am now considering launching an appeal against Ipswich Town's last relegation. I shall conveniently ignore the fact that we were bloody useless for half the season and examine footage until I discover an erroneous decision that might have prevented a goal that would therefore have changed a result and made someone lose and someone else win and so muck up someone's mental attitude so they lost their next match and so didn't get enough points and so we should have finished 17th. See?

Bollocks.

Andy Murray's phenomenal victory against Rafael Nadal has delivered the prospect of a first British singles Grand Slam winner since Fred Perry way back when tennis players wore long trousers and smoked cigarettes between games.

But never mind the history stuff. What this victory demonstrates is Murray's fantastic progress in the last six months. His fitness, speed, reactions, shot locker, serve, everything has improved to the extent that he can match and beat the very best in the world.

Peter Fleming called it a 'coming of age' and that's dead right. Murray out-muscled Nadal. I've not seen anyone do that before. His power hitting, his accuracy and his doggedness in defence proved a wining combination and it backs up my belief that he will reach number one in the world. Sooner rather than later. Way back in this blog I said he'd be no1 by the time he was 21. Well, he's reached no4 and he's lost almost a season through injury too. So I'm feeling relatively smug about my prediction.

Can he beat Federer? Yes. And if he plays like he did against Nadal (the extremely gracious and sporting Nadal, by the way) he will win. Simple as that. Nadal, world no1, had no consistent answer to Murray and Federer will wilt under the bombardmant. But the Swiss has experience and genius on his side. It should be a great US Open Final.

Oh, and a word on the anti-Murray morons. Fine. Have your opinion, just keep it to yourself. Y'know, I support teams who play Scotland at football but that doesn't stop me supporting a Scot who is flying Britain's flag whether he hates English football or not. He should do. He's Scottish for god's sake. Any parochial little England armchair sports prat who cannot see what a talent we have and is unable to support it needs to wonder why it is that so many British talents never make it.

People like you, that's why. Because you can't wait to find fault. Celebrate the success of this justly proud British Scotsman. Examine why he is on his way to the summmit of men's tennis. Yes he is arrogant. Thank heavens for that. Yes, he is grumpy and unlikeable at times. He's 21. Jeez. And you know, he isn't there to make everyone love him. He's there to win tennis matches. Bloody good at it he is too.

Come on, Andy.

Ever wondered why the English fail so often at the highest level? It's because fans and the media cannot see the upside to any change whatever. The latest one is the appointment of Kevin Pietersen as captain of all Englands cricket sides - test, one day, 20/20.

Sure it's a risk. Every captaincy appointment is a risk. But surely it's one worth taking. What grates with me is that so few pundits and fans are applauding the decision and getting behind him. I mean, he must have been delighted to wake the next morning to see and hear the whining worriers bothered about everything from his ego to his experience.

Yes, yes, he is inexperienced but he has players with huge experience all round him. Sorted.

Team play? Well perhaps he hasn't always done the best thing for the team while at the crease but now he will have to. Or be sacked. Sorted.

Batting to go into decline? Look. It may have happened to Botham and Vaughan but why does that mean KP will inevitably suffer? It doesn't. At all. If there is one thing of which we can be certain, it is that his confidence in his ability as a batsman will not suffer one iota. He has proved his ability to play the great innings when under the most enormous pressure as well as the ability to forget everything, including the match situation (!!) and do something daft. It sounds odd but even this latter point suggests he can put his cares aside when he bats.

Why are we so incapable of supporting decisions and getting behind our best talents? Sniping away before he's even taken the field as skipper is ridiculous.

So, whingers. Keep your Botham and Vaughan fears. I'll stick to my examples of why he will succeed. R Ponting (who became no 1 batsman while skipper of the Aussies). And G Smith. I note he got 150 not out in the innings that beat England last week to precipitate all this. Lack of confidence? Don't think so.

Shame on you De Villiers. Shame on every South African player who saw De V drop a slip catch, scoop it up and claim it as good. That means you, Mark Boucher and you, Graham Smith, the South African captain.

For those not in the know, I have just this minute witnessed Andrew Strauss edge to slips. The ball carried, was dropped and then claimed. This is cheating. It is low and it should result in an apology from the South Africans and a ban for De V. This sort of behavious has to be stamped out or cricket will go the same way as football and plumb the depths of unsporting behaviour in the pursuit of victory.

We all understand genuine errors but this incident was simply indefensible. I repeat. Cheating. Leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.

De V, look at yourself. Smith, think about how you skipper your side.

Wimbledon saw a match of true heroic stature today. And, unsually in this circumstance, it was the British player who came out on top.

I remember seeing Ian Wright doing a trail for the new series of the utterly pointless and puerile Gladiators in which he claimed it would be the TV event of the year. How wrong he was. Actually, he was wrong well before today on Centre Court but that's another story. Don't get me started about the spangly powder puff big cotton bud TV show he presents. Pathetic, worthless and immensely sad and an insult to the word 'garbage'.

Anyway... Andy Murray vs Richard Gasquet. Phenomonal and a true match of two halves. Lucky for Murray, only the second half counts. At two sets to love down, Murray was broken to trail 4-5. Gasquet came out to serve for the match. Murray had to break to survive. Something he had shown no signs of doing previously. When it really mattered, he did it. To 15 as well. It wasn't even close. that remarkable achievement could have been all for nought but that Murray then went on to force a tie break and win it with an astonishing shot from way, wayt out on his left hand side. Queue the roaring and shouting that would have had the English quailing had he been in a Mel Gibson film of a few years back.

We were then treated to two sets of powerful, skilful and relentless match play tennis from Murray in which the crowd were key and to which Gasquet had no answer. A more mature Murray seized the moment when he saw his opponent lose a little belief and he was utterly merciless. I'm not going to go in to boring detail about his array of shots and all that. Nor his fist pumping and magnificent exuberance. It was a joy to watch. Exciting, entertaining and requiring no lame attempts at looking tough into camera one.

What I want to say is this. Here we have a young British player (and I've heard all the moronic whining from English people refusing to support him because he said he wanted England to lose at football. Grow up. He has.) with the talent to match his belief. I remember saying he'd be Number 1 by the time he was 21. Well, that won't happen because of an injury hit last year but he's heading high right now. He has an all-court game that will test the best. He has fitness, he has power and he has speed. And most of all, he knows he is a potential great and is not embarrassed about it. Hew really can reach the top and go one better than Henman in winning a Grand Slam.

Gasquet played his part in a fantastic match of tennis and will consider himself very unlucky to lose. But we have seen the emergence of something special today. Win or lose against Nadal on Wednesday (and it may be a match too far this time around) it makes no difference. The progress Murray has made in the last ten days speaks volumes. He is a growing presence on the world stage now and no one will want to face him. He's got that ethereal thing that all the finest players have... he's dangerous and you've never beaten him until you've shaken hands with the umpire.

The dear old Beeb are doing their best. They're trying desperately to gather interest in Euro 2008 with their 'Who will you support?' campaign. And last Friday there was chatter on Five Live with various people saying things like... 'Actually, it'll be nice. No pressure, no heartache. I'm really looking forward to it. We can just watch a football tournament as neutrals and fans of the sport.'

What utter, utter bollocks.

Never mind that failure to qualify meant England could get shot of Maclaren, the fact is, as the tournament looms ever larger, the reality is starting to bite. We will not be there. Couldn't care less about the other home nations these days by the way. England aren't there and that renders the tournament dull and uninteresting. And there is no true England fan who would dispute that. I went to the World Cup Japan in 2002, to Euro 2004 in Portugal. And I'm upgrading to englandfans+ so I can go travelling again. All in the knowledge that abject failure is staring me in the face as it so often has...

Of course we wouldn't have won Euro 2008. Of course we'd have suffered penalty heartbreak. Of course we'd all have been put through the wringer as we got out of our group by the absolute skin of our teeth. This is what supporting England football is all about. And people are trying to say they won't miss it? Bull shit. I love that gut-wrenching agony. The nerves as kick off comes round and the spectre of depression looms just 90 minutes away. There's even a perverse part of me that enjoys the empty feeling after the inevitable quarter final elimination. The kindred spirits you see all about you with the long faces. The sad looking flags fluttering dispiritedly from the backs of cars from those who will not be bowed by defeat.

Who would not rather have all that to face than Lineker failing to get excited about Russia and Croatia playing teams we should have faced. Yes, we'd almost certainly under-achieve and darkness would grip the nation for a few days but always, always if you're in the tournament, there is a chance. And one day, my friends, one day...

So the ludicrous nature of football mangement comes to this. Avram Grant was sacked because John Terry slipped on a muddy piece of turf by a penalty spot. Let's not hide from this truth. Because had Chelsea won the Champs League, Abramovich, running the Thai bloke a close second in daftness, would not have been able to sack him.

And one of the most depressing about this sorry affair is that all the pundits I heard kept on saying. 'well, it was inevitable', shrugged their shoulders and started speculating about whether Ronaldo would go ro Real or not. Not a one mentioned that Grant's sacking is an absolute outrage with no basis in footballing terms whatever. Chelsea feel they have a divine right to win a trophy every season. They do not. What Grant did in his nine months in charge was take a team that was not his, get them to one domestic final, to the final day in the premiership with hope of winning it and to the final of the Champions League (something ego Jose failed to do), the blue riband event of European club football. This is a fantastic achievement and a more solid platform from which to win multiple trophies next season is difficult to build.

Yet he was sacked because of some mud. I note Arsenal won nothing this season. Wisely, they did not sack Wenger. And back in the days of Fergie's early tenure at Man Utd, they stuck with him when to sack him would not have been wholly unreasonable. It doesn't take a footballing genius, nor a statistician to work it out. Keep faith with a boss who is doing a good job and building for success and you will achieve success. Rocket science it ain't.

Sorry, Chelsea fans, but I hope your club has a dreadful, underperforming season next time round, I really do. Man Utd will be better than you. So will Arsenal and I hope both Liverpool and Everton nudge you aside too. How do you fancy the UEFA Cup in 2009/10? Perhaps you'll have to sweat on entry via the fair play league. So, no chance then.

Yesterday's bad news for Paula Radcliffe is far more long-term than Beijing 2012. It doesn't just represent a risk to one of our key medal hopes. Looking ahead, the real sadness here is that a truly great athlete faces ending her career without an Olympic marathon medal of any kind and that is truly unfortunate. The debacle of Greece aside, where all the reasons for her failure seem a little feeble, Paula Radcliffe has been a staggeringly good marathon runner with an almost peerless race record to go along with her world record.

But she has been unable to demonstrate her undeniable greatness on the most important stage of all. We can only hope that her assessment of her chances is more than a pipe-dream. With preparation time running out, pardon the pun, we are left fearing she will either be unable to be competitive or unable to run at all. I find it hard to believe she will still be at the top of her event when the games come to London in 2012 and that means Beijing is her last best chance of Olympic gold.

An athlete of her class needs these opportunities not to feel robbed at the end of their careers. And there will be a big hole in the centre of her trophy cabinet if she fails to make the games this year. My fingers are crossed. So should yours be.

The Champions League Final was a proper football match. Two teams trying to win, not trying to avoid defeat. It was nerveless English league football at its best. Ebb and flow, chances, petulant players, whining managers and some fabulous skill on display. But never mind that. Like so many big finals, this one had to be settled on penalties, reducing a team game to a one-on-one lottery. I find it unacceptable.

Yes, I know it's dramatic and all that but it isn't football. There are no team tactics, and the only skill is in hitting a ball from 12 yards and hoping your standing foot doesn't slide. Because in the end, this final was settled by a patch of mud beneath the boot of John Terry during an artificial ending to an exhilarating match. Shouldn't be this way, if you ask me. John Terry was disconsolate, clearly blaming himself for losing the match. Wrongly. He had a great game but he is now forced to carry the can for events beyond the final whistle.

So what should we do? Well, fundamentally, the game needs to go on until someone scores. But of course, there has to be a conclusion in a reasonable time. So, some artificiality is necessary but it must retain the team ethic and skill of player and manager. Tactics should be evident right until the end. Now this is not a new idea, but at the start of extra time, each team should be reduced to ten men (red cards not withstanding). Every ten minutes, a further player is withdrawn. The decisions on who is withdrawn will win the match for one side or another. They are not arbitrary and they do not leave one man carrying the can for a spot kick failure. Football is played until the game is decided by that single golden goal.

I think what's key to this is that at the outset, every player knows that the game will be settled during play, not by a fairground sideshow. So there is no 'playing for penalties'. This forces endeavour during extra time. Results will come quickly. Defending will win you nothing.

So, debate away... what are the strengths and flaws of this? Can it work?

Read this, laugh and then spare a thought for City fans

If true there can only be one conclusion, which is that the Thai bloke is a complete twat.

No one is going to claim that Rangers played pretty flowing football in their UEFA Cup Semi Final 2nd Leg against Fiorentina. The Italians had all the flair and passing and fleetness of foot you could want. They created many a chance. Trouble is, they didn't stick any of them in the net. Now that's not to say their strikers were inept athough a couple of the missed chances were pretty simple. What really happened was that Walter Smith and Ally McCoist manufactured a tactical masterpiece and their players followed the plan faithfully for every minute of the 120.

The defensive organisation should be studied for years to come. The sheer will not to conceed needs to be understood by psychologists and lectured to other football teams. And the raw energy, belief, heart, grit, determination and all the other words that mean 'precious little flair but plenty of basic football skill allied to desire' was uplifting, frankly.

I hadn't meant to watch this match but it became, as these games do, utterly compelling. And as the minutes ticked by, my desire not to see Rangers concede grew in concert. I love seeing sportspeople put themselves on the line. Really give absolutely everything in pursuit of their goal. I love it when genius is involved and I love it when strength of character is involved. And the bald fact was that Rangers did not want to concede more than Fiorentina wanted to score.

Thence to penalties and the lottery that this is. It was the level playing field Smith had been after. And despite Ferguson's early miss, there was always the knowledge that somehow, Rangers would prevail. And so they did. The Rangers keeper, Alexander (an ex-Ipswich man, by the way whom our Manager, Jim Magilton let go with his blessing to play on a bigger stage though under no pressure to sell) pulled off the one vital save and put enough pressure on Vieri for the once great man to miss over the bar. Nacho Novo finished the job with a coolly taken winning kick.

There may not have been guile and beauty in Rangers' victory but there were the mechanics of an astute plan deployed to perfection. And actually, who's to say that there is no beauty in that?

Well done, Rangers. Well done indeed.

This is, or should be, of deep concern. Sven Goran Erikson's possible departure could easily be the tip of the iceberg. I'm talking about rich owners of football clubs being utterly unable to see the facts in front of their face. The Thai bloke (and I won't quote his name as that might denote some form of respect for him) who owns Man City is demonstrating confounding ignorance. What Sven has done is turn a relegation threatened club into one that plays attractive football and will finish the season comfortably inside the top ten. This is a platform that gives the club real potential to get into Europe next season. Thai bloke apparently expected Europe, or maybe a cup or two, in his first season as owner. Pratt. Rather than applaud the progress, invest a little more and get a club built on strength, belief and respect, he is going to undermine a decent season and start again from scratch. I'd say I hope they fail next season but I don't bear Man City fans, the victims of this, such ill-fortune.

And perhaps as worrying are the rumblings that Avram Grant might be removed from the Chelsea helm if he doesn't win the Champions League. WHAT?? I despair. Into the last two games Chelsea are still in the Premiership race. He made the Carling Cup final and is in the final of the Champs league. How can this not be good enough for a man in his first season in charge? Dear God, save us from stupid club owners. Have neither of these people looked at why it is the Man Utd and Arsenal are so consistently successful? And why it is that Aston Villa are making quietly impressive progress?

It worries me because some are treating clubs like personal play things. Meddling in matters they plainly don't understand and displaying childish impatience that makes them unfit to be owners of our biggest clubs. As more and more clubs are sold to the super rich the problem will only get worse. And what no one wants to think about is what happens when these children tire of their toys and look for something newer and shinier to play with...

Look, it's quite simple. So simple, in fact, that even football players could understand it. When a foul is committed, the man who has committed the foul and his team captain are allowed to speak to the referee about it. No one else. That is because it is no one else's business. The player fouled need say nothing. After all, the referee has agreed that he has been fouled. None of his team need say anything either for exactly the same reason. Thus, the referee can talk to the offending player and his skipper in a calm and considered fashion (with only thirty thousand fans baying for blood) before explaining what action, if any, he is taking in addition to the free kick given.

If any other player decides to get involved, they should be booked. If they persist, they should be sent off (under current rules there is no sin bin and this is another place where a sin bin would be perfect, by the way). You could throw in this as an extra deterrent. If another player from the offending team joins in, the ball moves forward ten yards. If a player from the oppo gets involved, the decision is immediately reversed.

That's it. No more surrounding the ref brandishing imaginery cards. No more intimidation of the official. Let him do his job and he will do it better than he does now.

Great scott, how much simpler can it be? Is there anyone out there who doesn't understand this?

There I've said it. I didn't think the day would ever come but it has, courtesy of the extraordinary arrogance and greed of the Premier League. It's staggering when you sit and think about it. That any country should think their domestic league so important that it should be exported all over the world. How wrong can they get? Supporters across the world don't love the premier league, they love Chelsea, Man Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool. With the greatest respect, no one cares about Wigan and Bolton. And neither would they care about Ipswich if we were promoted either.

Let's get one thing straight. All these 'supporters' in far flung countries are really nothing of the kind (ex-pats excepted). They are armchair footie-watchers who buy shirts and put up posters of the better-looking players on their walls. They do not understand the culture that underpins English league football. They have no idea what it means for a proud Geordie to be a Newcastle fan and to watch his or her team at St. James's Park. They know nothing of the joy and pain of being a lifelong fan of your home team. And they never will.

On another tack, I'm trying to work out if these matches could be played at any other time than in a mid-season break. I don't think so. This is the mid-season break that is needed (so we are told) because it would reduce the number of injuries suffered in the latter months of the season due to the attritional nature of weekly football. Someone needs to tell me how these injuries would be helped by transatlantic flights, a game in God knows what climatic and pitch conditions, appearances, jet lag, acclimatisation training etc.

This is a plan that cares not about the players. It cares not about the home supporters who remain the lifeblood of every club. And it cares not about the essential fairness that MUST underpin a league championship. Look. In a league, every team plays each other home and away. This is fair and equitable. How can having another random round of games meaning you play one club three times be anything else than a mortal blow to the very basic ethic of league football?

It is simply a moronic idea that has the making of money as its only goal. Richard Scudamore would like you to think there is an element of missionary work involved... taking the great game to the provinces and all that. Bollocks. This is more like a crusade, looking to crush other countries' professional leagues under its steel shod boots. If the Premier League really wants to make money overseas, far better to suport the construction of properly supported pro leagues in places where beamed in TV from Europe makes them struggle so badly. Feeder clubs, places to loan your players, places to find new players for your team. All these can be achieved to the long-term benefit of our league. But it'll take a bit of altruism to achieve. And I suspect that is a word Scudamore would have to look up. Idiot.

Kevin Keegan's return to football management at all is good news for those of us who love the characters of the game. That he has come back to manage Newcastle is the perfect storm made flesh.

Whether he succeeds (and I hope he does) or fails, football lovers are in for some terrific times on and off the pitch. Keegan the manager will turn Newcastle into a dynamic footballing force. I'm predicting St James's Park becoming a true fortress for them once again. And on the road, just bags of goals at either end. At every club he's managed, this is what we have seen to a large extent and I don't see his style changing. It must be wonderful to be a Newcastle fan right now. Expect excitement... and rightly so. Expect success... well, a tougher challenge but if he can attract the right players, why not?

Keegan the media face has always been gold dust. He carries his passion for the game and his job to every interview, to every dugout, and he is unafraid to express himself. Most of us will recall the shattering of his dreams in the 'I would love it if we beat them!' interview when he had been well and truly 'Fergied'. I doubt we'll see such an outburst again. But having watched his press conference this afternoon, and seen the determination and the humour shine through, er are set for some really precious moments.

Gawd love 'im, it's great to have him back.

Almost a done deal, we are told. Here's why it is a good appointment:

1 - He has a phenomenal track record in club football. Proven to be able to win championships in extremely tough leagues like Spain and Italy.
2 - Not scared of players. If his reputation is true, we might actually see players willing to die for their shirt when they pull on the three lions. We won't see players shoe-horned into areas where they are not compfortable and we will play a recognisable system as a team. Hallelujah.
3 - Will not stand interference from the FA. This is a very good thing. He won't be a patsy or a puppet of the board. If they stick their noses in, he'll walk. We need a manager who will do it his way or not at all.
4 - He actually wants the job.
5 - But most importantly of all, and the reason he was the number one choice... his name is the greatest Christmas gift ever to the tabloid headline writers. Years and years of puns and plays on Fab and Cap and 'ello!'. They must be drooling with anticipation.

Reasons why we ought to be worried about this appointment:

1 - It has happened in a big rush. The root and branch investigation into English football's failings appears to have taken three weeks. And even if it is still ongoing, it will be shoved on to the back burner while the FA board cross their fingers and pray Capello delivers success on the field.
2 - It misses the point about the most successful England manager of recent times. Bobby Robson, that is. From small club on limited budget to England manager. The key skill of any national coach is to get the best out of the available talent. This is the same model operated by almost every club outside the top 4 in the premiership. A national manager cannot but in the big player. This is a test for a man like Capello. All very well having millions at Madrid. So we'll see ifa good CV really does make a good national manager.
3 - All England players will need to learn how to roll over six times following the briefest of contact with an opposition player, or failing that, a stiff blade of grass. Seriously though, I do fear an indulgence of play acting (worse than now...) when we really get to the bones of how to win football matches, Italian style.
4 - He knows nothing at all about English football or its players bar what he has seen on the telly. This was the same for Sven, of course. He didn't win us the world cup, did he?

Got to say I'm in favour of this move. I think Harry Redknapp would have made a fine choice too and his time will still come. But for now, this appointment will restore hope and that is exactly what English football needs just now.

Good

Oh, Blimey. Look, everyone. He's a decent coach, blah blah blah and that he has been approached is not at all surprising if it is true. But read further down the piece. The England job, it says, is not his first choice. That's what we want for our national side, is it? A coach who's eye will be forever on La Liga just in case a more attractive job turns up? It says absolutely everything about the commitment we would get from Jose right now. Let him play with Real Madrid. Now there is a cauldron. If he can succeed there, then yes, get him in to coach England if he would then be 100% commited. But not now, or we'll end up replacing a totally committed coach who was not good enough with a good enough coach not totally committed.

There's going to be a whole lot of fall out after England's failure to qualify for Euro 2008. A load of soul searching, star gazing. What I'm fearful of is that everything else other than the obvious will be blamed. The number of foreign players in the Premiership, the pitch, the occasion, the position of the planets, biorhythms. Whatever. The bare fact is that, we do not have enough players of the requisite quality to qualify for tournaments, forget winning them. We were without five of our first team last night and the holes they left were enormous.

It should be blindingly obvious to everyone that the reason there are so many foreign players in the Premiership is because they are BETTER THAN THE ENGLISH PLAYERS. Wake up. Our technical skills are woeful. Croatia gave us a lesson in how to play international football last night. Their players are not based in the Croatian league. They play in Holland, England, Italy... all over the place. If we really want English players in the Premiership in greater numbers, they have to prove themselves good enough. And cheap enough, for that matter.

It is clear that our coaching and schooling of young players is wrong at the most basic level. Youngsters should not play anything other than five a side until they are ten, or even older. Physical presence can be developed as a player grows into adolescence. What they need when they begin is to learn the abilities to trap, hold, pass, move, shield, press, control. I don't care how fast they can run or for how long. It is immaterial. I cringe with embarrassment too often seeing how 'lesser' countries are so comfortable on the ball. How easily they pass and move.

There is a reason why Owen Hargreaves is the best technical player in the England side. It is because he learned to play football in Germany.

You do the maths.

England 2, Croatia 3. Actually, you won't get the chance because he'll resign. Or he should. It barely matters that this was the game that decided our Euro 2008 fate. The fact is that it was so abject and depressing that had it been the first game, we'd have been howling for change. I'm not going to point the finger at individual players, that is pointless. The real problem is that in a game we only had to draw, we didn't ever look like doing anything but losing. The formation was wrong for 45 minutes, the players were lacklustre, scared I think. They played poorly (apart from Crouch). There was a fundamental failure in leadership and management here and Maclaren has to carry the can for that. We were given a second chance and we absolutely blew it.

I'm too disappointed to say anything clever and incisive. Next summer is going to be a desert for England fans. And that will hurt.

Stuart Pearce among many others is standing in support of Steve Maclaren. And, amazed though I am given my stance earlier in his tenure, I am too. We desperately need long-term continuity in the England set up. We've cast off the dull tired and negative tactics of Sven and have in recent games looked a decent side. Five straight 3-0 wins is good. Yes, losing to Russia was very disappointing but we look a side playing with some definable shape and purpose now. And we are scoring plenty of goals.

It is traditional to call for the manager's head at times like this and Mac did have a slow start. But he's into his stride now and dumping him will not help anyone. And who will do a better job? Martin O'Neill. Well, possibly but does he want it? And it isnn't like Villa are challenging for the title. And don't anybody say 'well he doesn't have the players' because it is exactly that situation he will face with England. Jose Mourinho? Dear God, no. I do not want that strutting peacock in charge of my national side. Just because a man can win championships by spending piles of cash does not make him good international material. National managers have a limited pool of talent. You cannot buy in any more. Unless you're Irish and keen on geneaology perhaps. That's why Bobby Robson was such a good manager. He never had the money to spend at Ipswich and so had to know how to get the best out of the squad available to him. Think about it.

Anyone else? Errrm. Not a host of names are there? Hiddink is too old and cynical, Klinsmann is a German and Wenger doesn't even know that the English have football players of their own. A knee-jerk sacking only benefits the appetite of the press for blood. If they wanted him sacked, they should have shouted louder after the 0-0 against Macedonia at home. That was where this campaign went wrong. And if he goes and the 'best man' whoever he is, tells the FA to go forth, what then? Another bloody shambles.

Leave it be. Let him take on the next World Cup campaign and please, please, remember this. England aren't that great. Good on their day but no strength in depth and a confidence that is wafer thin.

It's a little overdue, I know but actually, I'm still coming down from England's fantastic 12-10 win over Australia. Frankly, it's great to beat the Aussies in any sport at any time but here in the Rugby World Cup Quarter Finals, with us as rank outsiders, it was particularly sweet.

Our pack won it, no secret there. But I have to say I don't think I've ever seen a more one-sided forward contest in international rugby. So dominant were we by the end of the first half that, once we'd gone ahead in the second half (a half in which Australia scored no points at all.. and yes I know we scored zero against South Africa in 80 mins but it just shows how we are improving) I could not see the Aussies coming back to win. Our turnover ball was hugely impressive, our driving was solid and most of all, our scrum was awesome and more disciplined than I have seen from England in a long time. As soon as our pack had the ball, I could relax, knowing they would not give it away.

Seeing the looks on the Aussie pack's faces whenever a scrum was called is something I shall remember for a long time. It wasn't fear, exactly, but it was shock, confusion and hopelessness. And our forwards just rolled on over them every single time. Magnificent stuff. Simon Shaw has been given the nod in many quarters as Man of the Match but my pick would be Andrew Sheridan. A massive presence, dropping the right words in the right ears at the right times and masterminding our pack dominance. It might not have been pretty but it was incredibly effective and a show of force that others ought to be wary of.

France are next up and I see that we 'have no fear' of them. But I saw the France v All Blacks match too and any team who can grind down the All Blacks and then outscore them with relative comfort in the second half is a team to be respected mightily. Our biggest foes right now are over-confidence and the blight that is spilling the ball in the loose. Too much of that against France and we will come unstuck. They, like us, have improved beyond recognition since the opening games and they are at home. It promises to be a superb occasion. Get in front of your TVs and prepare to have your nerves shredded most finely.

Today brings the announcement that Pakistan's Inzamam-ul-Haq is to retire from test cricket after the Lahore test match versus South Africa next week. Having already quit the one day game, Inzamam's retirement brings to a close, the career of one of the world's best batsmen of all time.

He has always been an uncomplicated cricketer and in many respects a genuine throw back to what could be termed more relaxed times. Fitness was never at the top of his agenda. He fielded in the slips and was one of the safest pairs of hands you'll ever see. Running in the field was a rare enough sight. And when batting, he was a stranger to the quick single, preferring to deal in boundaries or gentle ones and twos if necessary. Mind you, after 16 years at the very top and scoring bucket loads of runs, why wouldn't he play the way he wants and not bow to modern pressures?

It sounds a bit like I'm having a go at him for being, well, a little large, and I'm not. I will always remember him striding to the wicket and praying that we could remove him early whe neven the best are vulnerable. Too often though, I have sat and watched the bitter-sweet sight of him scoring heavily against England. His grace at the wicket was a joy to watch. He kept it simple, always appeared to have time and his range of shots was unsurpassed. A magnificent batsman. One, unless you are Pakistani, that you are delighted to see the back of. And that is perhaps the biggest compliment you can give him.

He'll be missed on the international stage but one hopes he stays on to coach the new generation. The game can always do with more Inzys.

Brian Barwick is not always known for smart talking but this is just supreme common sense. The FA are going to pilot a scheme at grass roots level in which only the captain of a side can talk to the referee... just like in Rugby Union. Hallelujah. RU has so many intelligent rules that aid discipline and leave players in no doubt as to the correct course of action and the consequences for not taking that course. And communicating with the ref is one of the best.

Witness the Rugby World Cup. As much fire and passion (in most games anyway but that's another story) yet any decision that is questioned is not done so by 15 men clustering round the ref and shouting. It is done by the captain, on his own and is hence sorted out very quickly and respectfully. Only once have I seen another player question a reffing decision. A Georgian prop was about to make a noise but the ref, perhaps half his size, merely put a finger to his lips and shook his head. Problem solved.

I pray this pilot works. One of the central blights of football the world over is the normally unfounded screeching injustice of players when they believe a decision has gone against them. Ally this to the sin bin and wave good-bye to foul-mouthed abuse from Old Trafford to Hackney Marshes. Say hello to better referees too. This has no downside, only goodness.

Tim Henman may well have played his last singles match as a professional. His demolition of his replacement Croation opponent, Roko Karanusic, was a fitting reminder of what the tennis-watching public and the British Davis Cup team will be missing from now on. I shan't bang on about his startling achievements again, you've heard it all before. What I will say is that I'm delighted he wants to stay in the game and help nurture new talent.

A great man, a great British sportsman and a great ambassador for tennis. Knight him immediately.