Lies, damn lies and possession statistics

POSSESSION STATISTICS. Apparently they are the new way of deciding who is the better team. Not goals scored, no. Possession stats.

Five-hundred square passes have now become more important than 2-3 forward passes that actually lead to a goal-scoring opportunity.

Sepp Blatter wants to find a new way of deciding drawn matches; well maybe he should consider possession stats? The result would be the same. Spain would still win.

England was considered to be not good enough at the Euros because their possession stats were so poor. Despite this, however, no one managed to beat them. No one. Not even finalists Italy.

They may have had only 38% of the ball and had the least shots on target of all the quarter-finalists, yet they scored as many goals as the others. Surely this proves how effective they were with the ball when they had it?

It has been said that 4-4-2 is out-dated and that the 4-3-3 - or 4-5-1 as it is generally played - is the way forward. Really? If you have the right players, 4-4-2 can still be very effective.

You may not be in possession of the ball as much - and you will have to work harder - but if you are fit, keep your shape, close down the space and make good use of your set-pieces, you can beat anyone. It worked well enough for England in the opening matches until they appeared to run out of steam later in the tournament.

Personally I would have used Andy Carroll up front with Wayne Rooney, and played two wingers in Stewart Downing and Theo Walcott. The one thing 4-3-3 - or 4-5-1 - lacks is width and that can be so effective, particularly on the counter attack.

For all their possession, Spain have only scored 3 more goals than England in the tournament - and 4 of them came against the Irish, the worst side in the competition - despite having, on average, 30% more possession per game.

Okay, so a long ball, or a well worked set-piece may not be as pleasing on the eye but it is ultimately what the game is all about. Scoring goals.

Yet the people who rave about Spain for their possession, criticise Arsenal for 'over-playing'. They should shoot more, they say, be more direct. Yet Arsenal usually dominates possession, only to fall to a sucker-punch - more-often-than-not caused by a long ball or a set-piece.

For all their possession in the Euros, Spain has been boring to watch. They have passed and passed but gone nowhere. Playing without a striker has meant they have had no outlet and just gone around in circles.

Yes, it has got them to the final but is it really the blueprint for good football? Greece were criticised for the way they played in winning the Euros in 2004 but at least they got the ball forward quickly.

I think we need to strike a balance. Yes, you need the ball but you also need to do something with it. An end product. Possession only gets you so far.

The good old 'long ball game' has been widely criticised but it was certainly effective. As the great Brain Clough once said 'It only takes a second to score a goal, young man.' He had clearly never seen Spain.

I want to see good, fast attacking play. Direct players who want to make things happen. Several side-ways or backwards passes may be good for the possession stats but they are not good for the paying spectator.

So let’s stop pretending possession is King. It isn't. Goals are. And until they change the rules of the game, the team who score the most goals will always win, whether they have 10% of the possession or 75. Playing two good forward passes will always be more effective than 20 square ones and, ultimately, more exciting to watch.

Possession statistics? You know what you can do with them...

Another tournament failure but perhaps the future will be a little brighter?

SO ENGLAND are not good enough. Well there's a surprise. Despite winning what appeared to be, on paper at least, a tough group, we should have known that when it came down to it, when it really mattered, we would come up short. Again.

But the truth is we probably got about as far as we could reasonably have hoped to with the squad we had. The only criticism you could aim at Roy Hodgson was that he was far too negative. Not losing appeared to be more important than winning, and it was that negativity that ultimately cost us the chance of reaching the last four.

Let's be honest, Italy were beatable. They arrived at the tournament on the back of a poor run of form, and it was only a nervy win over the Irish, the weakest side in the competition, that sent them into the quarter finals at the expense of Croatia.

Yet despite all this we went into the match with the same phlegmatic approach we had in our previous games. In fact the only time we have shown any real ambition under Hodgson was after going behind against Sweden.

Of course those tactics had worked well enough in the other matches but this was not the group stage. It was winner-takes-all, and over the 120 minutes we were clearly second best.

Despite this, however, I was confident we would win the shoot-out. All our previous exits on penalties had come after really good performances. The two semi finals defeats at the hands of the Germans - in 1990 and 1996 - were probably the best two displays I have ever seen from an England side.

We deserved to beat Argentina in 1998, while the two quarter final defeats to Portugal in 2004 and 2006 were both very unfortunate. Ironically our only shoot-out success had come after a drab 0-0 with Spain at Euro 96 so I felt perhaps history was on our side. But it was not to be.

Unlike previous exits, however, I was not upset or angry this time. No. Just disappointed. Disappointed we did not go for it a bit more.

You could tell by Hodgson's team selection, the same side that had laboured to victory over Ukraine, that he was content to sit back, trying to nick a goal on the break. But the longer the match went on the more we seemed to be simply holding on for penalties. Strange for a country with such poor a record in shoot-outs.

I don't buy into the fact that we defended particularly well either. Italy were afforded several good chances over the 120 minutes and with better finishing they would have won comfortably.

I also do not feel Hogdson utilised his squad particularly well. He simply stuck with the same players in every match, as though he did not trust the others. His insistence in perservering with James Milner and Ashley Young, despite neither having a good tournament, was baffling, especially as we had more dynamic alternatives on the bench. And Rooney? Well perhaps we would have been better keeping him at home...

But in all fairness to Hodgson, he only came into the job three weeks before the tournament started and did not have enough time to adequately prepare. He did the right thing by building from the back, making us organised and difficult to beat, so I have no doubt we will improve over the next couple of years.

Therefore I am not going be too critical. The team did as well as could be expected - even if the performances were not great - and there are several positives we can take from the whole experience.

Andy Carroll, Danny Welbeck, Theo Walcott and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain all did their long-term prospects no harm what-so-ever, while Steven Gerrard proved himself to be a very good captain. Meanwhile, in Joe Hart we have a goalkeeper as good as any in the World.

We also have a some good players ready to burst onto the international scene. Jack Wilshere will surely be a main-stay in midfield for years to come, while others like Daniel Sturridge, Jack Rodwell and Connor Wickham offer hope for the future.

So while we looked as far away as ever from competing with the very best in Ukraine, there is at least a chink of light. Plus, in Hodgson, I believe we have the right man to take us forward. But I guess only time will tell.

Do not allow goal-line controversy to over-shadow England's success

SO England not only qualified from a group many felt we would struggle to get out of, we actually finished three points clear of France at the top.

But the euphoria of England's success has been overshadowed somewhat by the latest goal-line controversy. Having been the victims of a poor decision against Germany at the last World Cup in South Africa, England benefited from one against Ukraine this time.

Of course it is easy for Sepp Blatter to say the need for goal-line technology is now a 'necessity,' but with a fifth official standing on the goal-line, shouldn't they be spotting these things anyway? Plus, of course, he is conveniently over-looking the offside decision that was not given in the build up to the 'goal' in the first place. So perhaps Blatter would be better advised to improve the standard of his officials before he looks elsewhere?

I do not, however, agree that he is only calling for technology now it has benefited England. It has been unfortunate that two big decisions in the last two tournaments have involved our nation, but UEFA have been talking about goal-line technology for years. The more high-profile mistakes, the more likely they are to want to do something about it, whoever is on the right or wrong end of them. So lets forget any conspiracy theories.

But is technology the answer anyway? Personally I am opposed to it. Football has always been about human error, be it by players, managers, or officials. Take that away and you lose something important from the game.

The fact mistakes are made adds to the drama and makes the sport what it is. If every decision was correct then what would managers have to blame poor results on? Their own short-comings, or those of their players? Heaven forbid.

Of course it is easy to over-react when your team has suffered, but it is rarely a poor decision by the officials that proves decisive in the end. It is usually good play or a defensive mistake. Plus these things usually even themselves out eventually, as we have seen for ourselves.

The fact remains that most of these decisions are called right anyway. The first Italian goal against Ireland on Monday night, for example, was correctly given, and for every bad call there are 4 or 5 good ones.

But we should not let the controversy of John Terry's goal-line acrobatics overshadow what has been a great tournament for England thus far. A group that looked tricky on paper has been negotiated with the minimum of fuss.

We have looked solid, shown resilience and produced enough quality in the final third to suggest we could go all the way.

Winning the group has of course given us the extra bonus of avoiding World and European Champions Spain. Italy, however, will provide difficult quarter final opposition. They have a history of rising to the occasion in the big tournaments and have been solid and well organised throughout the group stage.

Without wanting to dampen your enthusiasm, it is likely to be a dour game. Both sides will sit back, looking to play on the counter attack, and Italy are past masters at that. The first goal will therefore hold the key, but I am confident it will be us going through, even it takes extra time and penalties. Yes, the Italians are even worse from 12 yards than us.

Should we get past The Azzurri we will then face the winners of the Germany Vs. Greece tie in the last four. Of course you would image that will the Germans, the only side with a 100% record in the group stage, but Greece showed they are no mugs with victory to knock out a very good Russian side last weekend.

All that, however, is for the future. So far we have achieved the minimum requirement for England at a major Championship, we have got through the group stage - only the second time we have managed it at the Euros - so we now need to show exactly what we are capable of.

But if we are to go all the way, we are going to have to make sure the ball hits the back of the net, as the next goal-line controversy will not go our way. Not if Blatter and his cronies have anything to do with it anyway.

Fixture excitement rather misplaced?

So, the fixtures for the new season have been released to a Sky Sports/tabloid press fanfare but excuse me if I cannot get too excited.

Yes, it is nice to know when you are playing who and where, but other than that what is there to get excited about? They are just fixtures, the same ones we have every season. Each team will play the others home and away and at the end of all someone will win the league, some will be promoted, while others will be relegated.

Okay, if your club have been promoted I sort of get it. Looking at the new fixtures will then have a hint of excitement about it. But does the order of those matches really matter? Of course as the season progresses it can do.

It would be an advantage, for example, to play Manchester United away the week they have several players out through injury, or suspension. But that is not known yet so how can you feel excited or disappointed? You will have to play them at some stage.

I have seen many comments on social network sites over the last 24 hours saying how excited people are to be playing Spurs away on Boxing Day or Derby County at home on February 15th. Would you not be as excited about playing those teams anyway?? And if not what difference does the date make?

The only dates that really matter are the first game and the last. The rest are simply a way of planning where you are likely to be over the nine months from August to May. A diary. Unless you happen to support a Premier League side of course, in which case most of your fixtures will be changed to a Sunday lunchtime or Monday night by Sky anyway.

That is why I find Sky's excitement a little strange. If they love the released fixtures so much why do they insist on changing them? And not for the benefit of the fans either.

Then they talk of Southampton facing a tough start to the season. Yes Sky, they will have to face some Premier League teams so of course it will be tough. They were, after all, in League One two years ago.

Having said that the promoted sides do usually start well. They have momentum and are not under as much pressure in August as they are in March when they could be fighting relegation.

So perhaps, just perhaps, playing Champions Manchester City away on the opening weekend may just prove to be a blessing in disguise. My guess is, however, that they will lose that particular fixture no matter when it is played.

And that is the point. The dates of the fixtures do not matter, it is the players who are playing in them that do. So I don't care who my team are playing on Boxing Day, or New Years Day, or October 17th. I just hope they win them all.

The season is over 38 or 46 matches, depending on which division you are in, and surely the only thing that matters is your team winning enough of them to finish as high in the table as they can?

The lost art of enjoying an England match

There have not been many occasions over the last 32 years of watching England in tournament football where I have been able to enjoy a good performance and a good result. All too often our best displays have ended in defeat - semi finals against Germany in 1990 and 1996 and quarter finals against Portugal in 2004 an 2006 for example - so last night's 3-2 victory over Sweden was particularly sweet.

Okay so it hasn't won us anything, or even got us out of the group stage, but it made a pleasant change to be able to enjoy an England match in a major tournament. In fact the last time I can recall feeling so excited watching my country was when we beat Holland 4-1 in Euro 96.

Last night's match felt very similar, in many ways, to our World Cup quarter final win over Cameroon in 1990. On that occasion we also led 1-0, went 2-1 behind in the second half before scoring twice to go through, although we needed extra time and two Gary Lineker penalties to win that night.

Of course the biggest irony of the win last night was that in the build up to the game everyone was saying how vulnerable the Swedes were to crosses into the box - the very reason Andy Carroll was selected to start in the first place - yet it was us who conceded twice from set pieces, an area where we have traditionally been so strong.

But Roy Hodgson then produced something successive England managers have failed to do - a plan B. He immediately brought on Theo Walcott for the once-again disappointing James Milner and the Arsenal winger made an immediate impression.

He appeared a little shocked that his effort from 25 yards flew straight into the net to bring us level just four minutes after his arrival - unsurprising perhaps given that he had not scored for his country in nearly four years - while it was his powerful run and cross from the right that enabled Danny Welbeck to plunder the winner twelve minutes from time.

And what an important winner it could prove to be. A draw would have meant only victory over Ukraine on Tuesday night would have been good enough to send us through to the last eight, while now we just need a point.

But qualification alone may not be enough. With Spain favourites to top Group C, the runners-up in our section will face the holders in the quarter final. For all the excitement of last night's success we do not appear good enough to beat them at the moment so it is in our best interests to try and win the group.

France currently lead by one goal - the one goal we should have scored last night with efforts from John Terry and Steven Gerrard superbly kept out by the Swedish goalkeeper- and you would expect them to beat Sweden. Therefore we would not only need to beat Ukraine but do so by at least one more goal than the French - a tough ask.

However, we should not get ahead of ourselves just yet. We still need a result against the hosts, who know only victory will be good enough for them, so we just need to concentrate on doing that and worrying about any possible quarter final opponents on Wednesday.

So as much as I enjoyed last night's success I am under no illusions. Sweden are an average, ageing side and we made hard work of beating them, hardly the form of potential European Champions. However, we showed a resilience sadly lacking from England sides in the past and we were able to find a way to win, something Manchester United have made a habit of in recent years.

Okay so we may not be able to go all the way and actually lift the trophy on July 1st, but if we can recapture a little of what we showed in the final twenty minutes last night perhaps I won't have to wait another 16 years to enjoy an England victory.

Early signings look promising, but van Persie holds the key

The signings of Lukas Podolski and Oliver Giroud, plus the possible arrival of Yann M'Vila, are encouraging signs, but are they really the type of players Arsenal need to challenge for the title next season?

Lukas Podolski, Arsenal's first summer signing.

Podolski appears to be a direct replacement for Andrey Arshavin, while Giroud, at 6ft 3in, is the obvious choice to replace Nicklas Bendtner and/or Mauranne Chamakh as back-up for Robin van Persie. However, with just 6 caps to his name, the 25 year old French striker represents something of a gamble, although his scoring record suggests he could be another shrewd investment by Arsene Wenger.

But M'Vila could prove to be the best signing of all, a defensive midfielder capable of protecting the defence. His presence would also allow Alex Song more freedom to get forward, which he loves to do, and with the likes of Mikel Arteta, Tomas Rosicky, Aaron Ramsey and Jack Wilshere set to return from injury, Arsenal could have a very strong midfield indeed.

The return of Jack Wilshere could prove crucial.

Behind them, however, there still appears to be problems. It has been this area of the team which has cost them in recent years, conceding at least 10 goals a season more than their title rivals, and they still do not appear to have enough strength in depth. The first choice back four of Bacary Sagna, Laurent Koscielny, Thomas Vermaelen and either Kieran Gibbs or Andre Santos, look decent enough but the back-up still appears weak. Carl Jenkinson has potential at right back but you are not going to win major honours with him playing regularly, while Francis Coquelin seems more suited to midfield role.

In the centre of defence Per Mertesaker recovered from a slow start to finally look like the international centre half he is before injury ended his season in February, but the jury is still out on Johan Djourou and Sebastian Squiallaci. Therefore the signing of another centre half this summer looks essential, someone like German Matt Hummels for example, who appears to be a perfect fit for Arsenal.

Matt Hummels, a perfect fit for Arsenal?

There is also concern over the goalkeeping situation. Wojciech Szczesny had a decent season and is going to be a very good goalkeeper, but he showed his inexperience for Poland in the opening match of Euro 12 and his replacement, Lukas Fabianski, is never going to good enough. Perhaps third choice Vito Mannone will come good after going out on loan last season, but the club need a more experienced goalkeeper to give them some solid cover.

But of course the biggest signing of all would be to tie van Persie in to a long term deal. It does not appear to be simply a matter of money for the skipper, but ambition of the club. The signings made so far are a positive step but will they be enough to convince the Dutchman he can fulfil his own ambitions in North London?

Robin van Persie, the signing of the summer?

He has clearly looked like a player with a lot on his mind in the Euros, but Holland's potential early exit would at least give the club more time to sort out his future.

While they do not have to sell as he still has a year left on his contract, Arsenal are unlikely to risk losing him on a free next summer. However, if a trophy arrives at The Emirates next season there is a very real possibility van Persie would be happy to commit his long term future then.

Having sold Cesc Fabregas and Samir Nasri last summer, the last thing they need is to lose another of their star players, so it may be worth the gamble of keeping the Dutchman for another year. They have recouped enough in sales over the last few years, and made a healthy profit once again, so it could be a risk worth taking if it means the club are celebrating a Premier League or Champions League success next May.

Optimistic? Perhaps, but with another 2-3 good signings in defensive areas it could be possible. Just remember where you read it first...

A good start but the shackles need to come off

England's 1-1 draw with France last night left me with mixed feelings. On the one hand it was a decent performance and a good start to the tournament, but on the other it felt like a missed opportunity.

Having worked so hard to get ourselves in front, we switched off and allowed them back into the game. Yes, they had a good spell of pressure just before the break, but I cannot help feeling they were there for the taking in the second half. However, we seemed more content not to lose rather than go and actually win it.

Forget their 22 match unbeaten run, France are not a great side. Yes, they have some good players like Samir Nasri, Karim Benzema and Yohan Cabaye, but I doubt they will get further than the quarter finals. In fact I would not be surprised if they did not even get out of the group.

But perhaps Roy Hodgson has spent too long as the underdog as he now appears to have an inferiority complex. It was as though he did not think we could beat them. We were content to sit back in the second half when a little more ambition could have given us 3 very important points.

Of course it is only the first game, and having watched Ukraine come from behind to beat Sweden last night we have nothing to fear from either of them, but we have got to start believing in ourselves a little more. In spells we played some good football and we created some good chances, especially in the first half, but the longer the match went on the less likely we looked to win it. In fact we looked like a side playing with the handbrake on, afraid to step up a gear.

The substitutions were also left far too late. Why not bring Theo Walcott on to run at their tiring defence in the final twenty minutes? Why not bring Jermain Defoe on earlier? Why bring Jordan Henderson on at all??

I am not, however, going to be too critical of Hodgson or the team. We have got off to a decent start so hopefully we can now settle down, grow into the tournament and improve. Of course we will need to be more positive against Sweden on Friday, especially if France have beaten Ukraine earlier in the day, but we have the players to do that. We just need to believe a bit more.

On the plus side was the performance of Arsenal youngster Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, in only his 3rd international appearance. The boy looks like a potential star and could emerge as the new Gazza, circa 1990, in term of ability and influence on the team. Of course it is hoped he will not follow a similar path off the pitch, but having heard his post-match interviews he certainly seems to have his feet firmly on the ground.

Others to perform well included the much-maligned Glen Johnson at right back, Scott Parker and Steven Gerrard in the centre of midfield, while Danny Welbeck put in a great shift up front. The shape of the team looked good, we didn't panic and everyone worked hard for each other.

So, a satisfactory if unspectacular start but the signs are positive and I think we will not only qualify for the knock-out stages but win the group. And then who knows?

Goals, red cards, penalty saves and controversy. Welcome to Euro 2012

After a rather low-key build up to Euro 2012, the tournament got of to an explosive start in Warsaw last night. Hosts Poland kicked off proceedings in Group A with the opening goal against 2004 winners Greece inside eight minutes - a diving header from Robert Lewandowski - before the match, and the tournament, was engulfed by refereeing controversy.

Poland's Lewandowski heads the opening goal of the tournament

Spanish official Carlos Carballo angered the Greeks by producing a second, soft yellow card for Sokratis Papastathopoulus just before the break, but there was even more drama to follow in the second half.

The ten-men of Greece grabbed an equaliser six minutes after the restart when the hosts' Arsenal goalkeeper Wojciech Szczesny mis-judged a cross and substitute Demitris Salpingidis stabbed home from close range.

Papastathopuolus is shown red

Worse was to follow for Szczesny when he was shown a straight red card for a reckless challenge on Salpingidis inside the penalty area soon after, but substitute goalkeeper Przemyslaw Tyton saved Giorgas Karagounis' spot kick with his first touch after coming on, and it finished 1-1.

Despite all the excitement it is difficult to see either side progressing far in the tournament. Poland appear to lack any real quality, Lewandowski apart, while the Greeks are hard working and efficient but are a pale shadow of the side which lifted the trophy in Portugal 8 years ago.

The second game saw dark horses Russia take on Cech Republic in Wroclaw, also in Group A. After the thrills of the first game it certainly had a lot to live up to but did not disappoint. Russia, under the leadership of Dick Advocaat, produced some exhilarating, attacking football to seal an impressive 4-1 victory.

Dzagoev gives Russia the lead

Teenager Alan Dzagoev scored twice while Roman Shirakov and substitute Roman Pavlyuchenko were also on target. The Cech's briefly rallied as Viclav Pilar made it 2-1 early in the second period, but Russia were far too strong in the end and they will now be favourites to win the group.

Pavlyuchenko scores a marvellous Russian 4th

Andrey Arshavin looked a completely different player to the one who left Arsenal in January as he was behind everything good the Russians produced. Playing in a free-role just behind the front two, Arshavin could become one the stars of the tournament.

Despite this heavy defeat you have to fancy the Cech's to go through as well - showing more than enough here to suggest they can beat both Poland and Greece.

Tonight is the turn of Group B, where Holland kick off their campaign against Denmark in Kharkiv, while the  much-fancied Germans meet Portugal in Lviv. This certainly looks like being one of the most keenly-contested groups which will see one of the favourites eliminated.

Ronaldo, hoping to lead Portugal to succes in Group B

Portugal, with the likes of Cristiano Ronaldo and Nani, will entertain but can they overcome the might of the Germans and the Dutch? The Danes, meanwhile, will be looking to reproduce the sort of form that saw them win the trophy in 1992.

We will, of course, know more after tonight's round of matches but you would be foolish to back against the Germans, while I fancy it will be the Dutch, with Robin van Persie and Klaas-Jan Huntelaar leading the line, who follow them into the last eight.

Ferdinand over-looked again, but let's concentrate on the ones that have been selected

So, the big news from the England camp this week, as we build towards of the start of the tournament, has been Rio Ferdinand's second snub by manager Roy Hodgson. Having been originally left out of both the 23 man squad and the stand-by list, he was overlooked again this week when Gary Cahill was forced to withdraw through injury.

The decision should not have come as a major shock, however, as Liverpool youngster Martin Kelly was on that stand-by list, but questions remain over why Hodgson did not select 81-cap Ferdinand in the first place.


Rio Ferdinand, yesterdays man?

Despite reports to the contrary, I do not believe it has anything to do with the upcoming court case involving John Terry, who is accused of racially abusing Ferdinand's brother Anton. No, I believe it is simply that Hogdson thinks Rio's time is up.

Okay, so he had a decent finish to the season, taking Manchester United to within seconds of the Premier League title, but having selected Terry, Hodgson probably felt he needed some younger blood in the defensive areas. With us likely to face sides like Germany, Holland or Spain should we progress in the tournament, a central defensive partnership or Terry and Ferdinand would leave us vulnerable to swift counter-attacks. Joleon Lescott and Phil Jagielka both offer pace in that crucial area of the team and, as such, were the more sensible options.

A bigger surprise for me was the omission of Micah Richards. The Manchester City man can play at right back or centre half and that versatility would have made him an extremely useful member of the squad. In fact many would argue he would have been a better choice at right back than Glen Johnson, who is likely to start the tournament in that position despite a relatively poor season at Liverpool.

Micah Richards, unlucky not to be selected.

However, the evidence of Hodgson's reign so far suggests it is not defensively where England may struggle in Poland and Ukraine. No, a lack of creativity in midfield and up front appears to be the bigger issue, especially should we reach the latter stages of the tournament.

Wayne Rooney's suspension for the opening two group games is not the ideal start, leaving our hopes of progression from the group resting on the goal prowess of Andy Carroll, Danny Welbeck and Jermain Defoe. Hodgson has always preferred a 4-4-2 formation and with that in mind I would be tempted to start Welbeck with Defoe up front for the opening match against France on Monday evening.

Jermain Defoe, ready for a starting place?

United's Welbeck deserves his place after a good performance and well taken goal against Belgium last weekend, while Defoe did his chances no harm with a fine cameo from the bench. He has pace, is a willing runner of the channels and is a very good finisher.

I would move Ashley Young to the left, keep James Milner on the right and leave the midfield partnership of Steven Gerrard and Scott Parker intact. With Lescott replacing the unfortunate Cahill at the back, I believe this is a team capable of getting a positive result against the French, which would set us up nicely for the rest of the tournament.

We have a squad of players who look as though they want to play for the manager. Moreover, they appear happy, relaxed and ready for the battles that lie ahead. So let's forget about Ferdinand - a distraction we can do without - and get behind the players that have been selected. You never know we may just be rewarded come July 1st.

Can England actually win Euro 2012??

With the start of the European Championships under a week away you may be forgiven for wondering where the usual over-the-top hype has gone?

Even in this Jubilee Year there has been a distinct lack of flags flying from car windows and chest-beating from the tabloid press. In fact I cannot recall such a low-key build up to a major tournament but I, for one, am actually quite excited about it.

Perhaps it is this lack of expectation. Come on admit it, who seriously expects us to go much beyond the group stage? Well read on and you may change your mind...

I am actually feeling surprisingly upbeat about our chances. This is unusual for me as I am normally the most pessimistic of England fans. Even when we are 3-0 up I still expect us to lose, but it is different this time. Yes, Roy Hodgson has been thrown in at the deep end with very little time to prepare his squad, and the players at his disposal do not exactly fill you with confidence, but I really believe we could cause a surprise or two.

Roy Hodgson. Will he still be smiling on July 1st?

Too much has been made of the his squad choice, but the fact is he has selected the best of a very average bunch. With the exception of Wayne Rooney, who is suspended for the opening two matches anyway, we have a distinct lack any World class players. Yes, Joe Hart is a decent enough goalkeeper, Ashley Cole is still a quality left back and Steven Gerrard is a driving force in midfield, but other than that what have we got?

You can argue all day that Michael Carrick should have been picked ahead of Gareth Barry, or Adam Johnson should have got the nod over Jordan Henderson, but it would simply have been one average player replacing another.

No, the key to our hope of success lies with Hodgson. He may not have been first choice among the fans or the media, but he has always been tactically switched on, his sides are well organised, hard-working and tough to beat. The very definition of tournament success, in fact.

His Fulham side, which reached the final of the Europa League in 2010, showed that good organisation and hard work can overcome the more technically gifted sides, and he does seem able to get the best from average players. Surely an essential quality as manager of this England squad?

Yes, we have a difficult group, with France, Sweden and co-hosts Ukraine, but if we can reach the knock-out stage I believe we will come into our own. We may lack the flair of sides like Spain, Germany and France but the Euros has often given us a surprise winner. Denmark in 1992 for example, or Greece in 2004, both of whom were capable of grinding out 1-0 results. But do I really believe we are capable of repeating such success? Well yes actually, I do.

No one will relish facing us in the knock-out stages and we are more than capable of nicking a goal. Three of our first choice back four play together at Chelsea so will already have a natural understanding, while we have pace in the form of Theo Walcott and Ashley Young, something that is vital for international success. Plus of course, we have Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain as a secret weapon. But more importantly than that, we have a coach who understands the complexities of international football.

The Ox. About to announce himself on the World stage?

I also feel the injuries which have caused Barry and Frank Lampard to withdraw from the squad, have actually helped us. The long running question over whether Lampard and Gerrard can play together will be made redundant, while the one-paced Barry, who was favourite to step in, would have only held us back. Maybe the stage is now set for Oxlade-Chamberlain or Scott Parker to really take the tournament by storm?

The lack of expectation will also help. Previous tournaments have seen the players weighed down by the hopes of the Nation but this time that will not be the case. It also helps that we face France first. How? Well they have a history of starting slowly in tournaments so it could be the best time to play them. Also, should we lose, it will lower expectations even further so we can relax, grow into the tournament and then welcome Rooney back into the side. After that? Well who knows??

Wayne Rooney, ready to be unleashed in the knock-out stage

Come on admit it, you think it's possible now too don't you??