New season, same old problem?

WELL the first week of the new Premier League season certainly reminded us just how great it is, right? Goals galore, great comebacks, excitement and Manchester United losing. What more could we have wished for?

But for me the bigger issue was the dreadful offside decisions that cost both Southampton and Reading the chance of a point at Manchester City and Chelsea respectively.

There is no doubt that had it been a player from the away side, the newly promoted away side I might add, as far offside as both Carlos Tevez and Fernando Torres were when they scored, the goals would not have been given. But the big clubs always seem to get these decisions, especially at home.

FIFA have been calling for the use of goal-line technology to sort out incidents that occur very rarely, but if we are going to use technology for anything - and overall I am against it - then at least lets use it for decisions that happen all the time. Like offsides for example.

The pace of the game these days means it is very difficult for the assistant referees, or linesmen in old money, to keep up with play. That does not excuse the lino in the Chelsea match, however, as it did not need a video replay to tell us that Torres was miles offside when he put Chelsea ahead against Reading.

Decisions like that, even at this early stage of the season, could prove crucial for a club like Reading, where every point is so important. They had played well at Chelsea on Wednesday evening and looked set to earn at least a point with the score at 2-2 going into the last ten minutes. But all their hard work was undone by a dreadful mistake by the assistant, and this should not be allowed to continue.

Southampton suffered a similar fate at City last Sunday. The goal from Tevez may have come early in the match, and at one point the Saints managed to turn it around to lead 2-1, but it makes it no less important. To be fair to the assistant, on this occasion the call was much tighter and at first look it was touch-and-go, but replays showed Tevez was clearly offside and once again a big club had been given the benefit of a tight call.

So perhaps herein lies the real problem. Perhaps the referees and their assistants can tell what is offside and what is not without the need for video replays. Perhaps they just have an agenda in favour of the big clubs?

I am not suggesting for one minute that the officials are 'bent' in any way, just that perhaps they are 'influenced' by the stature of the club and pressure from the fans. I have heard many former referees speak of the pressure they felt at places like Old Trafford, and of course who would want to endure the wrath of Fergie?

But I don't just blame the officials. The Premier League will do nothing about the injustices bestowed on Southampton and Reading this week. Nothing. The assistants involved will be running the line at a Premier League game this weekend. They will not be suspended. Had these decisions gone against City or Chelsea, or, heaven forbid, United, they would have been relegated to League Two, or worse, without a seconds thought. One rule for one.

So what is the answer? Well personally I would like to see the officials come out in the media and explain these decisions after the match. Let them watch replays of the incidents and explain their thinking. Was their positioning wrong? Did they just did not see it? Whatever the reasons they should have to face the consequences. A fine, a ban, extra tuition. A written apology to the club involved at the very least. But they are unaccountable.

Perhaps the officials themselves would welcome the use of video replays to help them. If so, perhaps we should try it. The money in the game is so great these days that they cannot afford to keep getting it wrong.

If Reading are relegated by one point this season, a point they should have got at Chelsea, then the consequences for them will be huge. The lino will no doubt be sunning himself somewhere next summer without a care in the World while Reading will be suffering the consequences of his mistake. Where is the justice in that?

So a potentially great start to the new season has been slightly tarnished for me. As a fan of a club in the 'Big Four,' I fully expect to see my club benefit from decisions like these throughout the season. But that does not make it okay. I would rather see my team lose fairly than win unfairly. Unless it's against United at Old Trafford or Spurs at White Hart Lane, of course. Then I just want to see us to win.

Sky are to blame for much of what is wrong with the game these days, but they could just offer the solution to one of its biggest problems. Their million different camera angles and the speed at which they can produce replays could mean these offside decisions are called right everytime. And we would all welcome that, wouldn't we?

No van Persie, no chance?

SO Arsenal are held to a goalless draw in their Premier League opener against Sunderland on Saturday and it's all down to the sale of Robin van Persie. Yes of course it is. I mean the club never drew a home game while the Dutchman was playing did they?

The late chance missed by new signing Oliver Giroud would surely have been buried by van Persie, they said. Yes, I mean he never missed any chances did he? When he was fit of course.

Yes it was a disappointing way to kick off the new season, but I prefer to look at the positives. Santi Cazorla, for example, made a very encouraging debut. In fact I would so as far as to say he looks the natural replacement for Cesc Fabregas.

Lukas Podolski and Giroud may have failed to shine but both are clearly quality players and will score goals once they have settled in. Plus, of course, the possible arrivals of Nuri Sahin and Yann M'Vila mean we have plenty of reasons to be optimistic.

Furthermore the other challengers have not exactly set the world alight either. Manchester City struggled to overcome an average Southampton side, Chelsea appeared to run out of steam after a good start at Wigan, while United lost, and looked very poor, at Everton.

So it is hardly a time for doom and gloom. I can see great potential in this side. The squad appears to have more balance now and a midfield of Arteta, Cazorla and Wilshere fills me with excitement. Meanwhile, with Steve Bould working his magic on the defensive side of the game, I can see a lot more clean sheets this season.

But where will the goals come from, I hear you ask? Well, Podolski, Giroud, Gervinho, Theo Walcott and Cazorla all have double figures in them so I feel the goals will be more evenly spread this season. The Golden Boot may not be finding its way back to The Emirates come May but a real trophy might well be.

The seven year itch may be about to be scratched. I have not felt this optimistic about the clubs chances of success since the days of Thierry Henry and Dennis Bergkamp. The other challengers do not scare me and, as long as we can stay in contention through the early weeks, I can see us getting stronger and stronger as the season progresses.

But the whole balance of the team does seem more suited to the Champions League. Chelsea proved last season that you do not have to be the best team to win it, just play to your strengths and have a bit of luck along the way. We can do that.

Failing that, of course, is the FA Cup. By January I believe this team will be flying and no one will fancy getting drawn against us. No one. Three major trophies to go for and we have a great chance in all of them.

Nah, who am I kidding? We have just lost the greatest striker in the World to one of our biggest rivals. And that is following on from the loss of Fabregas and Samir Nasri last year. The club is in decline, a selling club, and Saturday's 0-0 draw with a dire Sunderland side is the reality of where we are at.

The critics cannot all be wrong, can they? Wenger has clearly lost the plot and without van Persie we are doomed to another season of failure. Aren't we??

Super Saturday proves The Olympics has been a resounding success

CAN THERE ever have been a better night for British sport than the one we witnessed in The Olympic Stadium on Saturday?

3 gold medals in less time than it took the Team GB football side to crash out on penalties to South Korea in Cardiff. Amazing.

The first gold, won by Jessica Ennis in the Heptathlon just after 9pm, was the most predictable. Her performances in the earlier six events meant it was a foregone conclusion she would get the result she needed in the 800 metres.

Ennis did not need to win the race. In fact she only had to finish at least 13 seconds behind her nearest rival. She could have walked around the track and still come away with the gold. But that is not in her nature. Despite slipping down to third coming into the home straight, she pushed herself again to clinch the gold in style.

Meanwhile, the final of the Long Jump was taking place simultaneously, and we had a chance of two medals. Greg Rutherford led early on and, inspired by Ennis winning the 800 metres moments earlier, landed a jump of 8.31m in the fourth round to increase his advantage.

By now the Men’s 10,000 metres final had started, with Mo Farrah one of the favourites to take the gold. As the athletes ran past on the track behind them, Rutherford’s nearest rivals failed to match his distance and we had a second gold medal, just twenty minutes after the first.

The 10,000 metres was now becoming a very tactical race, with the Kenyans determined to make it as difficult for Farrah as possible. But the Brit went in front at the start of the final lap and pulled away from his rivals on the home straight to make a hat-trick of gold medals just before 9.50pm.

Coming on top of a great day elsewhere, where Team GB had picked up a gold in rowing and two in cycling, it was a great way to round off a remarkable day for British sport.

You almost had to feel sorry for the finalists in the Women’s 100 metres, which started just after Farrah had crossed the line. Usually this is one of blue-riband events but this time it felt very much like an anti-climax. The night had been all about the Brits.

The euphoria continued on Sunday, as Ben Ainsley won a 4^th Olympic gold in the Sailing Finn before Andy Murray demolished Roger Federer in the Tennis final at Wimbledon to land a gold of his own. He later picked up a silver with Laura Robson in the Mixed Doubles to make it another great day for Team GB.

It seems hard to believe now that the award of the Games in 2005 was greeted with so much scepticism. There is no doubt it has been a massive success, however, more so than Lord Coe could ever have imagined.

Yes, the cost of hosting such a major event has been mentioned many times, especially in these times of austerity, but there can be little doubt now it has been money well spent.

The whole thing has been superbly organised, the atmosphere inside the well designed venues has been terrific and the Team GB athletes, in so many different events, have proved to be the best we have ever had.

With blanket coverage on the BBC, it has also given us the chance to watch some sports we would not otherwise have had the opportunity to see. Handball, in particular, has proved very popular and it would be no surprise to see it really take off after The Games are over.

And of course the good news is we still have another week to go…

Hopes high for Daggers ahead of the new season

AFTER the struggles of last season, where they propped up the nPower League Two table for long periods, the Daggers will be confident of a more successful campaign this time.

Having released experienced players in the form of captain Mark Arber, Jon Nurse, Peter Gain and Damien McCrory - all of whom played a big part in the clubs play-off triumph at Wembley in 2010 - manager John Still is looking to rebuild his squad.

Although having one of smallest budgets in the league, Still has secured the signing of former Arsenal defender Gavin Hoyte on a 2 year deal. The 22 year old right back, who has enjoyed loan spells with AFC Wimbledon, Lincoln City, Watford and Brighton and Hove Albion, is the brother of Middlesbrough full back Justin Hoyte - who also began is career at Arsenal - and looks to be great addition to the squad.

Meanwhile, several of the younger members of the squad have been offered extended contracts. Promising midfielder Billy Bingham has signed a new 3 year deal and Still has great faith in the 21 year old, who made 30 appearances last season, scoring twice.

"Although he has been here a while he has suffered with injuries, but has returned to pre-season looking fit and sharp, so we are hoping he can really push on," Still said.

Another youngster tied in to a long-term deal is striker Dwight Gayle. Signed last summer, Gayle was sent straight out on loan to Bishops Stortford, where he scored 42 goals in all competitions for the Blue Square North side.

"He got a good year's experience at Bishops Stortford," said Still. "I am hoping he can follow in the footsteps of the likes of Paul Benson, Tresor Kandol, Ben Strevens and be a fantastic forward for us. He has all the attributes."

Abu Ogogo is another to be offered a new contract while also being named as club captain, while striker Brian Woodall, who had a great season, has been rewarded with a new 3 year deal.

Another striker, Sam Williams, who missed most of last season with a knee injury, will be expected to play a major role this time, and his partnership with Josh Scott up front will be vital to the success of the team.

Scott himself has suffered terrible injury problems over the last couple of years - missing virtually the whole of the 2010-11 season - but he is back now and ready for the challenges ahead.

In midfield Matt Saunders, who was signed on a free transfer in February, has also had his fair share of injuries, but everyone at the club has high hopes for him after impressing in the few appearances he was able to make last season.

Expectations for the Essex club are usually low, but I think they could cause a surprise or two this season. If the young players - like Woodall and left back Femi Ilesanmi - continue to develop as they have been, and the team recaptures the form it showed at the end of the last campaign, I can see them challenging for a place in the play-offs.

Still came in for some unnecessary stick from the fans last season but he proved once again to be the right man for the job. Let's hope the club can be rewarded for the loyalty they showed him with another trip to Wembley in May.

Racism in football? Fact or fiction??

DID YOU watch 'Is Football Racist?' the other night? What did you make of it? Do you think we still have racial problems in the game, or is it just another case of mountains out of molehills?

Personally I think the racial issues in football are nowhere near as bad as Clark Carlisle was making out. As he said himself, he has never been subjected to any racism, despite being in the game for 17 years, and most of the players he spoke to had hardly encountered any either.

Northampton striker Ade Akinfenwa told of a team-mate who once called an opossing player a 'black c**t' during a game, but apologised for it straight after the match. Hardly a major issue then. Things are sometimes said in the heat of the moment. Of course that does not make it right, but it is easy for something to slip out in these high-pressure situations. I doubt the player in question is actually a racist, and Akinfenwa certainly did not appear to have a problem with him. He accepted the apology and moved on.

Then we had Stan Collymore. It appears the worst he has suffered has been a few remarks on Twitter. Hardly surprising when you see some of the rubbish he comes out with, both on social media and the radio. While I am not condoning bringing race into it, we should remember this is a man with a very questionable past, so for him to get on his high-horse about a few comments on Twitter really does lack a lot of creditability.

Funnily enough the most harrowing story in the programme was that of Carlisle's father. He spoke of the racial abuse he suffered as a young man, both on the pitch as a semi-professional player and on the terraces as a fan. He said that was one of the reasons he never took his son to matches. Very sad. But this was back in the 1970's. Things were very different then.

He lost a lot of sympathy from me, however, when he looked to blame his failure on making it as a professional on his colour. Really?? I don't recall it standing in the way of Viv Anderson or Cyril Regis, for example, or later John Barnes. My guess is Mr. Carlisle was just not quite good enough.

In fact it was Barnes who was up next. I remember watching him play for Watford back in the early 1980's and thinking what a fabulous player he was. I was on the North Bank when he tore Arsenal apart in 1982 and I left that game thinking I just seen the greatest player ever. He was the new Pele.

But Barnes was one of the first black players I can remember getting racially abused at football. We all recall the banana throwing incidents at Liverpool, but I also remember an England match where he was abused by his own fans. Monkey chants every time he got the ball and some refusing to celebrate the goals he had scored. Unbelievable. Maybe Collymore should remember that before he starts playing the victim...

I guess it is unsurprising that Barnes now appears to have a chip on his shoulder. I always saw him as a trail-blazer for black players in this country but he ruined it all by trying to blame his colour on his lack of managerial opportunities. I recall him doing a terrible job at both Celtic and Tranmere Rovers so that is more likely to be the reason he has not been flooded with offers since. The same goes for Paul Ince.

So I don't buy into the argument that club chairmen are racist. Every chairman wants the best man for the job regardless of their colour. Yes, there has been a lack of black managers and coaches in the game but I think that is more to do with culture. Most black players seem to go into the media when they finish playing. Mark Bright, Ian Wright, Leroy Rosenior, Garth Crooks, Collymore etc. Perhaps coaching does not appeal to them in the same way it does to white players?

So, in conclusion, much progress has been made over the last 30 years or so and black players are no longer disadvantaged in the game. There are more black players now than ever before so it is inevitable the number of black coaches will eventually increase as they come to the end of their playing careers. But I still do not think we will see a massive change. If you look at some of the black players currently reaching the end of their careers, how many appear to be management material? Ashley Cole? Rio Ferdinand? I don't think so. That is not racism, it is simply that they are not cut out for a career in management.

Yet they expect to be considered for these jobs simply because of their colour. Positive discrimination I believe it is called. Or just discrimination as I call it. The best man for the job should get it, be they black, white or green. And most black managers have just not been good enough. In fact, with very few exceptions, you could argue that most white managers are not good enough either. I mean most of them get sacked, don't they? Is that racism too?

Carlisle is an intelligent guy. He is very good role model for all young lads looking to make a career in football. He has been given an important role within the game and is proof that colour will not hold you back if you do not allow it to.

So instead of the likes of Ince and Barnes blaming 'inverted racisim' on their woes, perhaps they should take a look at themselves. Go away and improve your management skills. Do not expect to be given a job simply because of your colour.

Instead of Collymore complaining about a few Tweets, he should understand it is him people do not like, not his colour. The more you look to blame your colour on your failings, the more you create racist feelings.

Of course racism exists in society. I think it always will. And it is not just blacks who are victims of it either, let's not forget that. But if the programme proved anything at all it is that racism is not a major problem in football in 2012. Suarez and Terry incidents apart ,we really have very little to be ashamed of.

So is football racist? I would say not, but what do you think??

The King is dead, long live the King

SO VAN Persie is not going to sign a new contract. Are you surprised? I know I'm not. He is 28 years old and been at Arsenal for 8 seasons. In that time he has won just one major trophy - the FA Cup in 2005. Surely a player of his ability deserves to have won more?

With big names like Cesc Fabregas and Samir Nasri long gone, the club has remained as far away as ever from the big prizes in recent years. Van Persie has decided he has seen enough. He wants to finish his career with a flourish and he feels he will not be able to do that at Arsenal.

But lets not kid ourselves. No player is bigger than the club. Others, far better than the Dutchman, have left before and the club has survived. Moreover, van Persie has spent more than half his 8 years at the club on the treatment table anyway.

It has only been in the last 18 months that he has finally remained injury-free, a spell that has seen him reach new levels of genius. 48 Premier League goals in 56 matches since January 2011 tells its own story. But if he does leave now I, for one, will not shed a tear.

As soon as a player no longer wants to play for you, you have to get rid of him. We will get good money for him too, although we are unlikely to re-invest that in the team. We never do. But at least we will be able to post a healthy profit again next year.

Before the Euros I thought the future success of the club rested with van Persie staying, but I think I may have got it wrong. I believe we will now move forward even stronger. Being known as 'RvP and the other 10' was not good for the club as a whole and others will now have to step up and take responsibility.

The arrival of Lukas Podolski and Oliver Giroud means we now have two very good forward players, while maybe this could be a good time to finally play Theo Walcott in a more central position. A front two of Giroud and Walcott, with Podolski just behind, could actually make us an even more potent attacking force.

I would therefore like to see any money from the RvP sale used on the defensive area of the team. A central defender and a holding midfielder - Matt Hummels and Yann M'Vila for example - are the sort of players we need to challenge for the title this season.

So the King may be about to leave, but long live the King. We should not forget the magical moments van Persie gave us, especially in the last season and a half, but we need to look to the future now. And what a glorious future it could be.

We still have a very good squad of players - with the bonus of a fit-again Jack Wilshere to come back in as well - so I am convinced we will be celebrating a Premier League or Champions League triumph next May. And how will Robin feel then??

Wimbledon. Can the second week live up to the drama of the first?

WHAT AN incredible first week of Wimbledon that was. From Rafa Nadal's surprise early exit to late-night matches under the roof on Centre Court, it has certainly been a week that will live long in the memory.

Nadal was beaten in five amazing sets by little known Czech Lukas Rosol on Thursday evening, before six-time Champion Roger Federer was taken all the way by Frenchman Julien Benneteau the following night - finally coming through 6-1 in the fifth.

Meanwhile, Andy Murray made it a third night of late drama when he finally over-came Cypriot Marcos Baghdadis at 23.02 on Saturday night, the latest ever finish at the All-England Club.

On top of the drama on court there was the return of the old debate over equal prize money for men and women off it. Frenchman Gilles Simon claimed, after his second round exit to Xavier Mallise, that women do not deserve equal money as their matches only last half as long as the men. He also claimed the men's game is more exciting.

Maria Sharopova, favourite to lift the women's title, countered by claiming her matches attract more attention than his, but her argument was rather let down by the clash between current Champion Petra Kvitova and Varvara Lepchenko the following day, which lasted barely 53 minutes.

Nadal was not the only former Champion to suffer an early exit, however, as Venus Williams crashed out in straight sets to Russian Elena Vesnina in the first round. Sister Serena, meanwhile, ensured a Williams did make it through to the second week after squeezing past Zheng Jie, 9-7 in the final set.

Defending men's Champion Novak Djorkovic has eased through the first week and is now favourite to retain his title, although in this Jubilee year can Murray finally end the 76 year wait for a British Men's Champion?

His biggest hurdle in reaching the final, apart from his suspect temperament, are Jo-Wilfred Tsonga and David Ferrer, who beat him in the French Open last month. But history may be on his side as the last British Champion, Virginia Wade, also lifted the title in a Jubilee year - 1977.

So we have much to look forward to as the second week kicks off this afternoon, weather permitting of course.

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.