Her majesty said it a few years back during her speech to open parliament. Well it's back again. Instead of some of the unsavoury characters who populate the royal family, the stars of this annus are the representative teams of England. They couldn't complete the grand slam in rugby against the weakest opposition, they barely qualified for EURO2000, ALTHOUGH YOU WOULD NOT THINK IT BY THE PLAYERS THEY PICKED, and finally we are going to stomp them in cricket this season.( Latest score ENG 7-129).

JUST TO COMMENT ON THE RASH OF LIVERPUDLIANS WHO believe that every English man on "their" team ought to start for England. I am going to lay in wait for the day Cole starts scoring a bagful for them; and to Drinky........five managers picked Cole five times in five years. And you wonder why players don't perform and run their mouths in the press? That's why England can't produce a decent young cricketer; and why Walsh who might have been dropped seven times for the WI has 453 test wickets.

It's about identifying talent and giving them opportunities to succeed. All those managers who failed to give Cole a chance are all gone, just like the manager of Liverpool, oops, England wil be,........

I could be wrong......

I am quite frankly stunned at the selective memory and hypocrisy here. I've had a flip through my archive of football material and magazines here to find a 1997 issue of 'Manchester United' with an article called 'Its great to be a United fan because...'. Want to know what point thirteen was? I quote: '...United and England field almost exactly the same team...'. When there were mediocre players like Butt in the squad, United fans were telling us how great the United side was and how they were the saviours of the England team. Liverpool have four or five players picked, and suddenly its a scouse-biased conspiracy against the rightful kings of the world, Manchester United. Andy Cole is not out of the squad because he isn't good enough, but because he cannot gel with anyone else in the side. He has gone through four different partners before Yorke at Man United - it took him three years to settle properly. England do not have three years of solid training, they have about two weeks at a time. If Cole cannot settle with anyone during that training period, then he surely should be in the squad, let alone the first team. The problem with Cole is not his talent - that has never been questioned - but the fact is that there are four other players who play in Cole's position, all of whom get along well together, which is why they featured in the friendlies before Euro 2000.

I am also glad that you brought up the England Cricket team, because before I joined Soccer Gaming I wrote for GA-Sports' Cricket Gaming site and also have had several cricketing sites. I agree with you about the England cricket team selection. The major problem with it is exactly the same as with the football team (which is why I'm glad you brought it up because it lets me make an excellent point http://www.soccergaming.com/ubb/smile.gif). For years in the early-mid nineties Raymond Illingworth and other chairmen of selectors picked from the 'fashionable' sides such as Yorkshire and Surrey. Meanwhile, Andrew Cad**** was finishing as leading wicket-taker in the County Championship, but because he played for the unfashionable Somerset, he was denied the chance to have a run in the England side. Robert Turner, Giles White, Mark Alleyne... for years they turned in great performances but were snubbed. Meanwhile poorer players from the home counties and the rose counties were playing, and losing, for England.

Change sport to football and the same thing is going on. Ben Thatcher - superb all season, a shoe-in for the England squad... plays for Wimbledon. Phil Neville plays in his position and is the inferior player... plays for Man Utd so in he goes. The same could be said for Gary Neville (Kieron Dyer, anyone?).

The point I'm trying to make is that Manchester United fans gloat when the England squad is choc-full of sub-standard United players/reserves, and throw the toys out of the cot when talented players at other clubs get picked in their places. That is just one of the reasons why I hate the fans of Manchester United more than any others fans (bar Gloucesters, though the chances of finding a Gloucester fan on the net are like trying to find unisex public toilets in Iran). Antithesis managed to encompass all that I hate in Man Utd fans in one post, which is pretty good going. Hats off, guys.

Even the devil can quote scripture. Not that L'pool fans are imps, although, well; nevermind. So you think Man Utd. fans are running their mouths. I would not know, what I do know is that if there is one team in the world which ought have no complaints about team cohesiveness it's a British team. While others have to beg clubs to release their players from a myriad of national leagues, the Brits have their players available on spot and further to that, the "style" of football is so similar at club and national levels that there is a minimum of real "teaching" to be imparted by coaches.
Frankly I think the argument about Cole's attitude, is deceitful and mischevious. It's borne, I speculate, from the mind of one player; Alan Shearer. I think that lad has a chip on his shoulder, he rightfully is upset by the fact that his record does not appraise him the glory it(his record) deserves.

Enough of that. As an islander of a former colony, I have an indigestable, lingering swallow of support for England and their teams. I want them to do well, I want them to succeed, but I also want them to pick the best players. I don't think they do. As for those lads who never are picked because of their playing on small market clubs, maybe they will if they stay there rather than running to the first upscale club that mentions their name as a prospect