While this weekend’s football extravaganza in the city of Barcelona made for instant gratification, a more intriguing story developed as England’s bid for the 2018 suffered a huge blow.  The strangest thing about it was that it wasn’t delivered by one the nations against which England is competing; it came from the BBC.

The BBC aired a program only days before the decision of who will host the 2018 and 2022 World Cups goes to vote, and on it, alleged that three voters in Thursday’s decision received payments in the past, and that yet another voter was involved in illegal ticket sales for the 2010 World Cup.  A description of the accusations and the accused can be found here.  The two men of interest to England’s bid (as they were seen as likely England voters prior to the program’s airing) are Cameroonian Issa Hayatou and Trinidadian Jack Warner.

Many analysts believe that the BBC effectively tanked the chance for England to host the highly desired competition by ostracizing men who were likely to go with England in the voting round.

But punishing England for the BBC’s action seems both strange and normal to me.  And it’s not as if the program is an official inquest.  These men aren’t losing their jobs or facing prison time (yet).  And most importantly, Panorama, the program where the claims are made, was not produced by the England 2018 bid.  In this sense I feel the presumed non-votes from the accused men are strange.

But it also seems natural (but not logical) to be upset at the England bid when the British Broadcasting Company runs one’s name through the mud, especially if you are a power in the football world.  After all, the BBC probably stands to gain more from a World Cup in England than elsewhere, and so in this sense refusing to vote England is a “punishment” for them.

In the immediate scheme of things, England will probably lose the vote.  Russia have been touted as favorites now that no one believes that England team can pull a rabbit out of a hat, especially when England’s little brother just cut a hole in the bottom of the hat, so to speak.

But now Jack Warner has come out and explicitly supported the USA bid for 2022, but not going so far for England.  Instead, he implicitly did so by singing the praises of the FA, yet it still looks to be lost for England.

My question is whether or not this is fair.  The bidding process is a disaster, apparently hostage to the egos of men who aren’t objectively looking at the bids, but instead treating the whole process like a huge football wheel and deal.

And the question of the free press in football, especially with regards to how FIFA runs the World Cup is another issue to which people ought to pay attention.  As I have discussed in the past, there was an uproar in South Africa when FIFA wanted to effectively ban reporters who would write stories that cast FIFA in a negative light.  And, as Soccernet puts it, “Russia now looks the most favoured outcome for 2018, and it is heavily speculated that one of its attractions to FIFA is a lack of a free press which may seek to expose the machinations of the governing body.”

Shouldn’t FIFA be more concerned with its own process and the potentially illegal actions of its members?  Of course it isn’t.  FIFA laughably markets the World Cup as a celebration of different cultures through football.  It just seems the free press isn’t a trait FIFA cares to celebrate.

The winners of the last two World Cups, Germany will begin their defence of the trophy on home soil against Canada next June. The draw (Group A alongside Canada, Nigeria & France) will buoy the hosts as they have absolutely destroyed both Canada and Nigeria in recent friendly matches. Showing exactly why they are the two-time holders, Germany crushed Nigeria 8-0 just 5 days prior to the draw and they managed an equally-impressive 5-0 win over Canada – who had finished fourth in the 2003 World Cup.

2009’s beaten (by Germany, of course) European Championship finalists, England will also be pleased with their draw. Placed in Group B along with Japan, New Zealand and Mexico, things could have been far worse for the lone British representatives. As well as Germany, they have avoided two-time champions, USA and a couple of tricky sides in Group D, which features former champions Norway and the ever-improving Brazilians. That is not to say Group B will be easy for England, however, as Mexico have already proven their strength by beating USA in qualifying.

As mentioned, Group B will provide some of the best entertainment. Norway traditionally do well in World Cups, having won the competition in 1995, finishing second in the first ever World Cup in 1991 and finished fourth in the 1999 and 2007 finals. Despite that impressive World Cup calibre, Brazil will probably still be favourites when the two nations clash next June. They looked extremely impressive in the 2007 finals, finishing runners up to Germany, and are currently ranked 3^rd in the world – behind USA and Germany, whilst Norway currently sit 7^th. Australia are even lower in the rankings – in 12^th – but they are well capable of providing anyone with a tough match. They battled to a respectable 2-1 loss to Germany last month, and managed an impressive 3-1 win over Mexico 3 days earlier. Spare a thought for Equatorial Guinea though. The central Africans are competing in their first ever World Cup and sit all the way down in 62^nd in the world rankings. Group B is not an ideal draw for them, to say the least.

The U.S. won’t necessarily be especially pleased with their draw. Their recent form hasn’t always been totally impressive, and Korea DPR and Sweden will present considerable challenges. Amazingly, USA have been placed in the same group as Korea DPR in each of the last three World Cups, and Sweden have often faced both sides too. This familiarity will only add to the tension, but ultimately, the U.S. are still perfectly capable of topping the group if they can hit the ground running. Colombia are the fourth team in Group C, and will be able to play in the knowledge that there is very little expectation on their shoulders.

The Draw in Full:

Group A – Germany, Canada, Nigeria, France

Group B – Japan, New Zealand, Mexico, England

Group C – United States, Korea DPR, Colombia, Sweden

Group D – Brazil, Australia, Norway, Equatorial Guinea

Amid the sort-of joy and sort-of pain that comes with the wins and losses of international friendlies (barring of course, the big rivalries that were played out on Wednesday — Argentina/Brazil, Spain/Portugal, England/France, etc.), FIFA managed to slip in an innocuous report on their website, complete with a link to a 23-page PDF evaluating the candidates for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup.

And, shockingly early as it seems, “on 2 December 2010, the FIFA Executive Committee will announce its verdict and award the hosting rights to the two best candidates.”

Personally I’m still in a state of semi-exhaustion from the recent World Cup and the seemingly immediate uptake of the club season with all the drama of a suddenly competitive Premier League (do we have Manchester City’s money to thank?), a Real Madrid team that looks set to challenge Barcelona after two years of impossibly meek performances from Los Blancos, and the slide of Inter that coincided with the arrival of Rafa Benitez.  And now all of a sudden FIFA will make or break the hearts of hundreds of millions on Dec. 2.

So what does the longish report tell us?  What is buried in those 23-pages?

As it turns out, a whole lot of OK news for pretty much everybody.

The big question pertains to England and the reality TV worthy spat between the FA and the Russian Football union that resulted in some jingoistic nation bashing and not a whole lot else.  FIFA remained silent on the well publicized issue in this report, which isn’t terribly surprising given the ultra technical nature of the thing.  As an example from FIFA about Russia’s transportation issues:

“The country’s vastness and its remoteness from other countries, coupled with the fact that the high-speed railway network is limited and would only link six candidate Host Cities by 2018, would put pressure on the air traffic infrastructure, potentially causing transfer challenges in view of the lack of alternative means of long-distance transport. The current air traffic situation is to be improved throughmajor upgrades and capacity increases to the majority of the airports.”

If you braved that FIFA-always-attempting-to-be-neutral paragraph and are hoping for England for 2018, then you’re probably happy.  In short, the paragraph stated that transportation is an important feature of the World Cup and Russia’s infrastructure is currently inadequate.

But every nation was given a finger wag by FIFA.  It’s just hard to tell precisely which finger wag is a big deal.  For instance, FIFA raised concerns over legal issues regarding the United States’ bid, citing a lack of government guarantees.  This would seem to be a major issue, although FIFA noted that the USA has hosted a great deal of international events and the government has always complied in the past.

Similarly, the Iberian bid was questioned for not having a clear enough security plan, although again FIFA conceded that they would likely have solved such details in time to host the tournament.

In fact, the biggest criticisms that cannot be foreseeable altered to satisfaction in the next 8 or 12 years pertains to location and bid type.  For Spain/Portugal and Holland/Belgium, FIFA expressly notes that double bids are more challenging due to the “administrative, logistical and financial challenges” of two nations.

The other serious problem for FIFA seems  to be money.  In Australia, Korea and Japan, FIFA has noted that due to the time differences, “the income from Asia/Oceania would need to be increased substantially to offset the likelihood of loss of revenue in Europe.”

A last concern was the devastating heat of Qatar during June and July, which was essentially cited as a health risk to most people at the tournament, although such sentiment was phrased in far more polite language.

I would assume these three concerns would be FIFA’s greatest since they cannot be easily altered the way hotels, and even stadia and transport infrastructure can be, but FIFA’s history of making political decisions ahead of football ones suggest these obstacles aren’t insurmountable.

In conclusion, I sense England has come out of this evaluation slightly ahead of their rivals for 2018.  The criticisms against the bid seemed less severe than against the others, although again, in FIFA’s arid and conscientious tone, it is difficult to tell.

As for 2022, I feel the USA is an attractive option because of the very high potential for revenue (the highest ticketing revenue of all the bids) and its history in hosting.  Qatar has novelty but lacks the draw of all the other host countries in my lifetime.

With a UEFA winner guaranteed from 2018, the bids from Spain/Portugal and Holland/Belgium for 2022 have been rendered void due to consecutive hosting rules from FIFA.  With the remaining options, I feel that the winner will either be USA or Qatar (advantage US), based on the simple assumption that revenue loss will deter FIFA from the Asia/Oceania time zone.

Note 20/11/10: This article has been edited in light of an error regarding FIFA policy.

1. Croatia – Malta

Croatia beat Malta, no surprises there.  The only reason I start with this match is its status as a qualifier.  And to talk about Niko Kranjcar.  Harry Redknapp is unappreciative of the obviously gifted Croatian and the rumors are flying that he’s looking to leave.  I’d urge Mr. Redknapp to reconsider, especially after this performance.

While a brace against Malta is no brace against Spain, Kranjcar is the sort of player that Spurs should learn to manage in order to become more competitive.  He’s got the goods to play for a top team, and a sale to an EPL club would hurt their ambition.  With Lennon still not delivering, and over reliance  on Gareth Bale and Rafael van der Vaart becoming problematic in the face of injuries, why not give Kranjcar a spot as a right sided attacking midfielder?

Next was Argentina against Brazil in Qatar…

2. Argentina – Brazil

Although Argentina won, I have more to say about Brazil, but first – Mr. Messi.  The real positive for Argentina is that Messi can have a so-so night and still decide to run half the length of the pitch before nutmegging his marker with a low shot that beats the keeper.  Sure it was only one goal and the defense didn’t seem to be moving at 100% pace, but a friendly of this nature is never a friendly.  Second, praise for Javier Pastore, who scored a hat trick this weekend but only partially showed why a big club will almost certainly splash out big money for him this summer.  If he gels with the Argentina front three Los Albiceleste will be a horrifying opponent for everyone.

That being said, Brazil to me looked better on the pitch.  If this were a league fixture I’d say a point a piece would be fair, but since only reputations (in a friendly) were at stake, I doubt many of the players, especially the veterans, will be beating themselves up too much about the loss.

A positive they can take from this is that Ronaldinho is not finished for them.  He was perhaps too much of a fantasia (an attempted back heel goal might have been buried by a swivel and hard shot) but it was his first performance for Brazil since Dunga had decided on the players he would take to the World Cup.

Lastly, Chelsea should take heart from Ramires’ wonderful performances at the center of the pitch.  He was a great marker but also wasn’t a bad when Brazil needed men forward.  If Carlo Ancelotti was watching, he might be considering how to tinker with the Chelsea lineup to get such efforts out of the Brazilian.

3. England – France

England lose and France win; an ancient rivalry marks another event; what else can we take from this?  It certainly seems that Laurent Blanc has go his players singing the national anthem; Fabio Capello doesn’t seem nearly as interested in making his England players display the same patriotic feelings.

As for football matters, the French deserved their victory.  They created more clear chances and looked the senior team, although they, like the Three Lions, had a fresher look about them than the teams of South Africa 2010.  While France’s new faces might be more a matter of long term plan than England’s (which may have been more injury related), the integration has been done more smoothly.

With players who have amassed plenty of club caps but fewer international caps (Adil Rami, Mathieu Valbuena), Les Blues played a more balanced game.  There were no Kieran Gibbs on the pitch for France, a player thrown into England with fewer than 35 Arsenal caps in all competitions, including those tough Carling Cup fixtures!  Instead, the youngsters for France (M’Vila and Sakho) has almost 50 caps in less than a season and a half for Rennes and over 100 for PSG, respectively. Both are considered integral parts of the set up; Gibbs is a fringe presence at Arsenal, especially this season.

Extras:

The Iberian Derby was a total rout.  Sergio Ramos apparently forgot what his teammate Ronaldo can do.  Mourinho seems to have held Ramos in check to great effect for Real Madrid.  Sure, he doesn’t bomb forward to terrorize the opponents as he used to, but Madrid is no longer left exposed to counter attacks.  Perhaps Spain should take a lesson.  Manchester United will be pleased to see Nani’s boast about being a top player wasn’t all talk, either.  As for Spain, the whole world knows how they play.  They seem unwilling to change the (very effective) philosophy.  Top teams with top coaches can exploit this.

Times have gotten so bad for England and the Football Association that they’ve launched a new England home jersey that features, for the first time, sponsorship on the front of the shirt.

The Football Association is in such deep financial trouble that they had to resort to not one, but three different sponsors to buy space on the front of the jersey. A spokesman close to the deal said that the sponsors represent the dawn of a new age in English football.

Thanks to Griff for the news tip.

England’s short stay in South Africa came to an embarrassing end yesterday afternoon. They did not have to endure the heartache of an exit via penalties, but they did get their inevitable controversial moment to hide behind, a moment that will no doubt be used to try and deflect the fact that England have been ten levels below substandard since topping their qualifying group back in October. Whether Lampard’s goal was given or not is irrelevant, England were completely out-thought, out-played and simply out-classed by a young inexperienced German side.

“That goal” has reignited the clamour for the use of technology. Video replays are needed in Football to clear up marginal – matter of fact decisions – such as did the ball cross the line, however only two people out of the millions watching failed to see the ball bounce behind the line in Bloemfontein. If the technology was in place yesterday no referee with more than half a functioning eye would’ve needed to refer to the video referee. It is one of the most horrendous errors I have seen made and hope that Jorge Larrionda and his stooges are sent home just as swiftly as the England squad have been.

The Mexicans also fell victim to comedy officiating in Johannesburg, Carlos Tevez was so far offside for the Argentines first goal he was in a different time zone. If that was level to the linesman I’d love to see him put up a shelf. Extra salt was poured in the wounds when the goal was replayed on the big screen. All in all it was a day for the officials to forget, which they seem to be able to do with relative ease – apparently there are plus sides for not having a soul.

There were also reports of a fault with the fourth official’s board during the England Germany encounter, on 71 minutes with England needing three goals Emile Heskeys’ number was inadvertently flashed up forcing a bemused Jermaine Defoe off the field. That just capped another forgettable display in England’s wretched history of forgettable displays.

The Three Lions are landing back on their home turf today and before they even deplane, the English media will be on them like hounds. Their defeated faces will be splashed across the tabloids with horribly corny puns similar to the one shown in Nike’s ‘Write the Future Ad’.

And the whole country is going to be grilling Capello, the players, FIFA, the location, and even the way the EPL is run. Right now, as I type this, England’s (least) favourite Italian is being questioned with more intensity than the Spanish Inquisition.  No surprise. England is going to look for a single scapegoat to bear their string of poor performances and German slaughter. We saw hints of this when Capello swiftly shut down John Terry’s all-team meeting and the English media immediately pounced on Terry in attempts of making him a backup scapegoat—just in case the English lost.

England, I ask you, why can there only be one reason why you failed to revive 1966? Because, really, aren’t a combination of all of the above named factors a reason why you lost?

Capello’s not perfect, that’s a fact. But no one is. Not even Maradona. Sure, he spent too much time trying to find the right starting XI, made some tactical errors, refused to pull out underperforming superstars like Rooney and barely acknowledged the team’s request for Joe Cole to play. But that’s his style. Capello does things his way and while critics may say that he should’ve adopted the less-harsh English method, it probably would have lead to a quicker downfall and probably not a qualifier.

The players are always the hardest and the easiest to blame. The so-called Golden Generation of footballers were supposed to pave the way to a victory that only dreams could concoct. But everybody underperformed. Nobody seemed to have the heart to play. Nobody seemed to want it after Robert Green’s howler. The whole team scored a total of 3 goals. Lampard had arguably the best game of any of the players, but even then, his semi-lackluster performance didn’t debut until the threat of elimination was made very real. Speaking of…

USA fans will forever lament the two discounted goals, but they won’t moan about it nearly as much as England will Lampard’s. The call to FIFA for the inclusion of instant replay and better refereeing will be louder from the British Isles than anywhere else. (Except maybe a jilted Mexico). And with FIFA staying mum on their ref’s performances, it’s not going to make matters any better. To be fair, this is probably England’s best argument for their loss, as an equaliser would have drastically altered the momentum of the second half and prevented such a blitzkrieg.

The environment is always one of the first to be blamed for poor performances: altitude change, a wintertime World Cup, poor pitch conditions, vuvuzelas, etc. I’m surprised the team hasn’t lashed out at the Jabulani ball yet…oh, wait.

The most outrageous argument that has come up thus far has been against the number of foreign players that are allowed to play in the EPL. English players are apparently not getting enough playing time and feel suffocated by the number of foreigners in the clubs. Okay.

When it comes down to it, England have only themselves to blame. Maybe Capello’s no WAGs rule had something to do with it…

The group stages have concluded and now we can all look forward to good old fashioned knockout Football. What this World Cup has provided us so far has been, well, a bit baffling really, it has provided little in the way of genuine thrills and excitement but a huge amount of intrigue. It has been engrossing and most importantly it has provided some genuine surprises.

Group A was the setting for the demise of the French, no heart, no passion, no cohesion, spats, rows and fallouts equalled one point for Les Bleus and a shameful early flight home. Henry should’vedone the world a favour and kept his hand by his side. Uruguay and Mexico qualified from the group with relative ease, both sides have shown through some assured displays that they are more than capable of having a successful run in this World Cup. It was such a disappointment not to see the South Africans get through, maybe naivety, nerves and a little bit of expectation got the better of them, particularly against the Uruguayans, yet their performances either side of that game were impressive and it was a shame not to see the host nation progress. The South African squad, unlike the French, can hold their heads high.

Argentina somewhat strolled through Group B, winning all three games, as impressive as that looks on paper there do appear to be a few cracks in the Argentinean side, particularly at the back. As yet you couldn’t really put them down as nailed on finalists. South Korea qualified as runners up, they are a well organised outfit and create plenty of openings going forward, they make for a tricky opposition. Elsewhere in Group B Greece were Greece and Nigeria were bitterly disappointing, their campaign will only be remembered for Yakubu’s astonishing miss against the Koreans.

The USA claimed top spot in Group C with virtually the last kick of the group, securing a berth in arguably the easier side of the draw. It was no less than the Americans deserved, particularly after clawing their way back from two nil down in their previous match to claim a vital point. England finished runners up, after being vilified for their part in two drab draws they secured qualification with a One nil victory over Slovenia, England may live to regret not converting more of their chances, they now face a tricky route through the knockouts. Far from being spectacular Algeria and Slovenia ensured that qualification for the US and England was not as comfortable as many imagined it would be.

The ever efficient Germans got their World Cup off to a flying start, breezing past an awful Australian side in a four nil rout. That German efficiency went missing in game two when they fell to a one nil defeat at the hands of Serbia. Group D   like most groups was wide open going into the final round of matches. A one goal victory against the Ghanaians clinched top spot for Joachim Low’s men. Ghana finished second, salvaging some pride for what has been a poor World Cup for the African nations. To be fair there wasn’t much between the three sides that finished below the Germans, the Australians were vastly improved after their first display and the Serbs looked well organised and difficult to beat. It was Ghana’s win in their first game which proved how crucial it is to get points on the board as early as possible.

The Dutch waltzed to 9 points in Group E without even having to get out of second gear. Japan finished a thoroughly deserving second. Denmark and Cameroon were quite frankly awful in what was possibly the dullest group of the tournament. The Indomitable Lions, for me, have been the let down of 2010 so far.

Group F was home to the shock of the Tournament, Italy not only failed to qualify but finished bottom of their group. On the back of two lacklustre draws no one expected the Italians to fall short again in their last match. You have to credit the Slovakians for playing with such belief, it has to be the game of the tournament so far, and in contrast to the French, despite their shocking start the Italians fought all the way in their final game and very nearly pulled off a great escape in the dying seconds. Special mention must go to New Zealand, to finish undefeated in a group containing the Azzurri, Paraguay and Slovakia is some achievement for the All Whites and it is a shame three sides could not progress from Group F because no one would begrudge them 90 more minutes of World Cup Football.

Brazil finished top of the pile in Group G with Portugal qualifying as runners up. The Ivory Coast were another African disappointment and the North Koreans went from terrific to terrible in three games. Brazil look strong, their two defensive midfielders play a priceless role and have so far been fantastic, if their more creative colleagues hit form then the boys from Brazil will be the team to beat.

In the final group Chile continued to wave the South American flag proudly. They played with the freedom and expression expected from Group favourites Spain. The Spanish did not buck the trend of struggling European sides, leaving qualification to the last game after a less than convincing start, but they did manage to turn things around and claim top spot. Switzerland were their normal no nonsense selves, set up not to lose and not to be pleasing on the eye. I would like to say the Hondurans did more than just make up the numbers, sadly I can’t.

As the World Cup heads into stage two a lot of teams will try to forget their struggles in the group stages. This is the business end of the tournament and it’s game one as far as they are concerned, if you slip up now you don’t get another chance to set things right. There is still no real favourite, results wise it has been one of the most unpredictable World Cups so far, one thing we know is that every side is beatable. The form book was thrown out of the window during the group stages, and there’s no indication that will change in the knockouts.

If you live in South Florida, there’s only one place to be this weekend to watch your World Cup games and that’s Wowies Sports Grill in Boca Raton, Florida. EPL Talk is hosting all of its official World Cup Viewing Parties at Wowies, a modern sports bar featuring 31 big screen TVs, three full-liquor bars, excellent food and the lovely Wowies Girls. And this weekend is going to be absolutely huge in terms of everything we have planned for you.

Some of the features include a chance for you to win an England home jersey autographed by John Terry, three chances to win a FLO TV Personal Television (valued at $199), several chances to win World Cup mural posters and the 2010 FIFA World Cup video game.

Plus, on top of all that, we’ll have professional soccer players from Miami FC making an appearance during the USA game Saturday to meet the soccer fans in South Florida.

Here’s the schedule for this weekend’s games including what prizes you can win:

• URUGUAY v SOUTH KOREA (Saturday, 9.30am) - Win the 2010 FIFA World Cup video game for the X360 or PS3 (courtesy of EA Sports). The videogame is in stores now and it enables you to take your favorite nation to World Cup glory. It is available on Wii, PS3, x360 and PSP.
• USA v GHANA (Saturday, 2pm) - Win a FLO TV Personal Television (valued at $199, courtesy of FLO TV) or a USA mural poster (courtesy of ESPN). PLUS, professional soccer players from Miami FC will be making an appearance during the game to sign autographs, meet with soccer fans and have your picture taken with them.
• ENGLAND v GERMANY (Sunday, 9.30am) - Win an England World Cup home jersey autographed by John Terry (courtesy of Umbro), or an England mural poster (courtesy of ESPN), or a Germany mural poster (courtesy of ESPN), or a FLO TV Personal Television (valued at $199, courtesy of FLO TV).
• ARGENTINA v MEXICO (Sunday, 2pm) - Win a FLO TV Personal Television (valued at $199, courtesy of FLO TV) or a Mexico mural poster (courtesy of ESPN)

Before each game, we’ll hand out free raffle tickets. And then, at the end of the game, we’ll call the winning raffle ticket numbers.

Happy hour is every day at Wowies from 12-7pm. Plus, they offer a special lunch-menu for $7.95. On top of all of that, you can get a free Red Stripe or Sierra Nevada beer (courtesy of World Cup Buzz and Wowies) by printing the flyer from our sister site World Cup Buzz and giving it to your waitress or bartender during World Cup games.

This is the perfect weekend to get out of the house and go watch World Cup games with passionate soccer fans. Nothing beats being with a big crowd of fans cheering for their team and the uncontrolled passion when your country scores a goal.

And Wowies opens at 9:30am for all of the World Cup games between now and the World Cup Final on July 11.

In addition to that, I’ll be at all of the games this weekend and I’ll be interviewing many soccer fans to get your thoughts about the game. The best clips will be published on World Cup Buzz and other sites in the EPL Talk Network.

I hope to see you there. But if you don’t live in the area, no worries. We’ll be live streaming from many of the games this weekend so you can see where the diehard soccer fans in South Florida are going to watch their World Cup games.

Wowies is located at 7036 W. Palmetto Park Road, Boca Raton, FL 33433. More information about Wowies (including directions) can be found at http://www.worldcupbuzz.com/wowies

In the lead up to the make or break tie for England against Slovenia, the general consensus shared was that England’s World Cup campaign/dream was on the verge of collapse if not already over. A series of unfortunate events had seen England only acquire two points from their opening two group games and confidence in Fabio Capello and the players ability to qualify from their group quickly diminishing.

Today’s result against Slovenia may have aided England’s progression into the knockout phase of the World Cup, but has done little to quell troubles in their setup that cannot be erased with a simple 1-0 win. Still the questions stand about unity in the England camp and whether this is yet another overhyped and overrated World Cup campaign that will end in tatters.

The reasons for their decline have been obvious to see.

Capello pre-World Cup errors

Lauded throughout the qualifying campaign as the administrator of a no-nonsense attitude in the England squad, Fabio Capello was in turn built up as a faultless character that could do no wrong. His ability to mould England into a cohesive unit that brushed aside former foes Croatia in qualifying gave him godlike status in the eyes of England fans and thus began the increased enthusiasm with regards to the possibility of England winning the World Cup.

Although in the final month building up to the tournament, a succession of bad lapses in judgment on Capello’s part saw his once supreme persona appear mere human. During his 30 man squad selection, last minute calls to Owen Hargreaves, Paul Scholes and Jamie Carragher to inquire about their interest in going to the World Cup showed indecisive aspects of his demeanor. While the concept of the Capello index was just baffling in general.

These misjudgments have shown Capello to be imperfect and have altered his perception amongst the England fans and possibly the his players.

English mentality

Every four years since 1966, English mentality from not only the players and staff, but also the fans and media has been a key reason for the downfall of their very own team. Post any major tournament that England flop at, the nation goes through a lag phase in optimism for the prospect of their national team. This lag phase continuously ceases roughly six months before the start of an approaching tournament off the back of a successful qualifying campaign. This cycle has repeated yet again and pre-World Cup hype surrounding the England team has brought stress amongst the players to an unbearable level as they strive to provide for their nation.

A post match interview with Capello by a UK terrestrial TV station showing the game typified the delusion shared amongst the English public as to how the game against Slovenia actually unfolded. For the pundit to address Capello with the statement stroke question “Is this more like the England we know?” just proves that the media are either trying to promote a positive attitude amongst the public, unable to properly analyze that England were hanging onto a 1-0 result or are as previously stated delusional to the stage of being unable to see any fault.

After having the very question directed at him already answered, Capello could only be expected to be drawn into agreeing with the interviewer and added his own touch to the farcical analysis by proclaiming his side played with “freedom”. In this case one could only hope that Capello was cunning enough to take the bait and continue the delusion and not be actually serious in what he is saying.

Trying not to be harsh in any way on English mentality, just purely realistic, this World Cup has showed that England are not persistently arrogant about their chances at major tournaments. A more accurate evaluation would be that they are plainly delusional and have a false sense of teams actual ability built up in their own mind through the media.

This may seem like a very harsh critique of England and probably a more suitable to be published if they were knocked out of the World Cup. On the other hand, this is a simple realistic outlook at the current rut England have themselves in. Every four years they exit the World Cup lamenting numerous different reasons. In most cases it is the inability of their players to keep sufficient nerves during a penalty shootout. Yet again England are dreaming, and closely following behind are the tatters of those dreams.