Yet another Jimmy Greaves Q&A

Jimmy Greaves, quizzed by Dear Mr Levy.

Well actually, not quite. I was unable to travel into London and speak face to face with the great man this past Thursday. He was in Leicester Square for the Burger King Whopper Legend promotion, so thanks to Jack Clothier for the one-to-one facetime and the unexpected (and much appreciated) video footage.

The Whopper Legend promotion by the way will see the winner watch the WC final with three mates and Jimmy Greaves. So get whopping.

Back to the interview, a couple of answers you might not like, but then it's Greaves and the last thing he's going to do is appease for the sake of it. Don't get too upset. And no, I didn't ask him whether he preferred Aaron or Theo, because everyone knows Theo is shit. And I'll hazard a guess that he isn't a fan of James Corden either. Just a hunch.

I should add, the questions are not exactly ground-breaking, and that's my fault for thinking that because I wasn't actually present to speak to Jimmy that time would be of an essence and the Q's would not actually be asked. Grateful to Jack for the effort and for Jimmy's honesty and charm. For a far more in-depth interview, check this out over at Spurs Odyssey and this interview at Tottenham on my Mind.

Qs:

Spurs or Chelsea?
King or Campbell?
Park Lane or Paxton?
Levy or Sugar?

Video:

Enjoy.

England Knee-jerks, home truths and facepalms

I know it's one game, and we have a habit of being slow starters, but that was not exactly great against the USA. For several worrying reasons. Green, the risk (and failure) of starting Milner and King. Lack of imagination and guile. Far too many average, fragmented performances from our 'big' players.

My pre-World Cup prediction was that England would stumble all the way to the final, so I guess on performance, they're in the right gear to progress. I certainly think we will, considering the lack of quality possessed by Slovenia and Algeria.

Courtesy of the England v USA match thread over at Rumourwhores.com. Feel free to agree/disagree/discuss:

I'm watching another 'alternative' game here - England were 'in control' for max 10 mins on mine, with the US posing far more probs as the half wore on. The clever & direct interplay from Dempsey, Donovan & Altidore looked to be causing us far more probs than our blunt instrument of Heskey failing to free up the Roonster - Chopper

-

England looked confident until that mistake (Green) as well. That one on one from Heskey though, you've got to seriously question his role after that haven't you? It's wonderful grafting for the team and bringing others in to play, but seriously, a one on one with the keeper is a striker's bread and butter. He never even made Howard work. It went straight at him. Dreadful. Shaun Wright-Phillips was completely clueless and Aaron Lennon regressed to his old no end product self. Glen Johnson was superb up that right flank for me though, some superb crosses in to the box, good support of Lennon and played well. USA well organised and both should qualify from here. - Kop

-

Someone please find a retirement home for Jamie Carragher...what a useless old fart he is. Should have put Dawson in. England basically look the same lackluster side they did under Sven. - Spiderman

-

"A fantastic save from Green" err, no it wasn't, again he didn't get his hands fully behind the ball and was lucky it came of the post. A good save would have been to have pushed it out for a corner to cut out the immediate danger. Thought on the whole we were the better team, and 3 points wouldn't have flattered us.

I'd like to see an England a little less prone to taking their foot of the pedal. After one of the better spells, the last 10 minutes seemed to me to be more concerned at not losing than trying to stretch. There had been some decent balls in from Johnson, Gerrard and Lennon - so with Crouch on the pitch I'd have liked to have seen more effort to get it out wide, quickly.

So I guess James will be in goal for Algeria - assuming his knee improves. Beginning to wonder whether there was any point to Hart going as - despite obviously having had the best season of the three - his lack of Internationals is just going to be held against him. - Skitters

-

Right, that was a bit disappointing wasn't it? I'll start with the positives, I actually think we looked good for stretches of the game, perhaps not as much in control as ITV were making out as the US certainly threatened but we opened them up numerous times.

Gerrard took the captains role on well, he had a good game and looked menacing throughout. Johnson also played well, looking more of a threat than either winger and there was really no problems at the back until Carragher came on and got roasted a few times.

On the other side apart from Green f**king up (which is not in the least bit surprising, we've all seen him do it before) and Hart not being picked when he's been the best English keeper this year the most disappointing thing was how quickly we resorted to hoofing the ball. Everything good we did was along the floor, even Heskey main contribution was a clever round the corner pass and yet the closer it got to the end of the game the quicker we abandoned that and started smashing the ball up the field aimlessly, losing possession and looking more and more desperate.

The bit when we held onto the ball for like 30 seconds at the back and then just hoofed it up the pitch in the last minute was cringeworthy.

Get King back in a few days, put Hart and Joe Cole (for SWP or Milner) in the team and I'm still hopeful. - Zero

-

I thought England were fair sh*t last night until the last 10-15 mins when it looked like they thought about the passing a bit more instead of rushing everything and struggling to put a couple of passes together. Still dont like the look of our defence down the middle either. With the players we have there a simple ball over the top and the two CB are in trouble .

How come Milner got taken off so soon? Yes i know he got booked, was he still ill or something. Overall the result wasn't that big a surprise to me we normally start off shit in the opening games and either scrape the win or draw. - Stacki

-

Said at the time that King's inclusion was f**king insane and it's certainly looking that way now. Thought that Gerrard was very good, as was Johnson, and Heskey probably England's best player for me, which says a lot as I don't rate the guy at all and never have. Green's mistake was a total disgrace - under zero pressure, no-one even closing down, and he still manages to f**k it up. England will still qualify - I fancy them to tank one of Algeria or Slovenia - but it puts them under unnecessary pressure as they had more than enough out there to see of the USA handily. They need to play now with real intent though as if they are gunshy in any way they will come unstuck. I think Capello is too canny a manager to let that happen though.

I rate Capello as probably the most accomplished manager England have had since Robson in 1990. And remember everyone was calling for Robson's balls in 88 when England got dicked in every game. At the end of the day Capello's first job was to get England to the World Cup and he did that with absolute ease. We're at the business end of things now and ultimately he will be judged on how England fare in this tournament. I'm a hell of a lot more comfortable with him in charge than the likes of McClaren or Eriksson as I don't think he'll shy away from making tough decisions or shaking things up.

As for Joe Cole, I think he should defo feature in the next game. Milner looked like he was trying to force things and was wisely subbed so there's a spot for him on the left, where he's excelled for England before. - Chronic

-

-

Call me knee jerk but is he (re: Fabio a canny manager)? People have been blowing smoke up Capello's arse largely because of that thrashing away to a depleted Croatia side, dismissing the ordinary performances and predictable defeats against any half decent team. It all echoes a bit of Eriksson's reign to me. Take last nights performance, it was exactly the same as we have always played - sh*te in possession, fast to adopt the long ball when things aint going our way, a lack of cohesion and a staggering lack of quality from players who have had the season of their lives for their clubs in Rooney, Lennon and Lampard. We played ok in little spells but that is simply not good enough on this stage.

Green has had his worst season for us but there is no way that stat is correct. It was an utterly embarrassing mistake which you will be hard pushed to find at the next 2 or 3 international tournaments. I totally agree with you about the 'wonder save' as well - he got lucky. I don't give a sh*t if he's dropped and it wrecks his confidence and his career. This is about England winning the World Cup (yeah, I know, don't laugh), not Rob Green's mental state. It's ok anyway, he prepares for making a mistake before a game.

Anybody else think we were crying out for Joey Cole last night? Oh, and Carragher. Somebody put this **** down. He was never that f**king good in the first place. - Chazza

For more discussion and verbals, check out Rumourwhores.com here. Fans of all clubs welcome. Back to England...

Do we drop Green for James or perhaps Hart? What's the answer to the CB conundrum with King out (how long for - depends on what report you believe)? Heskey does a job for England but if fails to impress does that have a detrimental effect on the performance of Rooney? And If Heskey is there to aid Ron and bring other players into the game when holding up the ball, does it really out-weigh the ability to hold his nerves (rather than the ball) and take a chance in front of goal when presented with one? Lennon was well marked and rarely had the ball played into space in front of him (it's International football, so it's not going to be easy) so if he's doubled-up on, surely there's more space down the middle to exploit? Was SWP the answer on the opposite side? Not on yesterdays performance. Gerrard and Lampard work? Seemed too. Gerrard played with heart, with Lampard doing well to fulfil his Barryesque duties. But was that enough? No deflected shots or runs from Frank, so was his role too contained?

It's tricky not to over-analyse, because that's what we do thanks to the traditional expecation that England will turn up and turn on. The reality is, we never do but that doesn't mean we should be dismissing our chances just yet. And considering this is the World Cup, we could have had a bit more assured swagger and intent. I'm happy to get this type of result/performance out of the way first game, and get it right in the next one. As long as we get it right, of course.

Roll on the next 90 minutes of torture.

The Tournament pt 2 - The Favourites

It’s no big news that Spain and Brazil are clear favourites for the World Cup. I would even go so far as to say that no other team has a chance of winning the title, with the possible exception of Italy, but even then it’s only out of respect for them as the current Champions. So many things are pointing in the favour of Spain and Brazil, so the real question is which team will have the edge.

Brazil’s fast paced, attacking style will mean they will no doubt rack up the scores against the average teams, but the challenge to Brazil always comes against the more defensive minded of the European Heavyweights. They faded limply against France four years ago. However this is a team that Dunga has built for these type of tactical, attritional battles. People have bemoaned the lack of flair, and it’s true that this Brazil team may not be scoring 3 or 4 goals on a regular basis. But this team will still win those games. Where they hold the advantage will be later on in the tournament. The team does still have its fair quota of attacking brilliance, but they play in a much more European style. Less Samba.

The defence for Brazil is looking pretty strong this time. Juan has been quietly excellent for Roma for about 2 years now. Has such great defensive ability that he sometimes made Mexes look good. Lucio is another superb defender, and a great ball player too. The same could be said of Maicon, a more physically imposing and defensively instinctive full back than we are used to seeing. Gilberto will also basically play as a stationary wall about 5 feet in front of the defence.

Melo is a very un-Brazilian player, again very defensive and not much of a ball player. Is trying to model his game on Emerson, and not really succeeding…yet. That’s a hell of a lot of good defensive players already. This team is built primarily to not concede goals. They are also blessed with 2 great keepers. In the recent past, Brazil teams have been built from the top down i.e Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Ronaldinho and then whoever else. Even the inclusion of Elano as a playmaker/point guard is a nod to caution and pragmatism.

The biggest statement is the omission of Ronaldinho. He’s had a decent season, and you know he would produce a few magic moments if he was picked, but it’s a clear message from Dunga. These clear statements of Dunga are part of why he may not be the right man for the Brazil job. He has made the team all about his philosophy and his personality rather than that of Brazil. The Brazilian coach should be a background character. The team will pick itself, play itself, and win itself. Dunga will argue that they won that way in ’94, but then they had Romario and Bebeto. Now they have Luis Fabiano, Grafite, Nilmar and Baptista.

In ’94 Brazil, after failing miserably with their Samba style for 20-odd years, went for a different strategy. They played with midfield cloggers like Mauro Silva and Mazinho. But they won that WC because of the brilliance of Romario, and the ultimate 2^nd Striker Bebeto. They certainly won’t be able rely on the brilliance of their strikers this time, because Pato and Neymar have been left behind, and all they have up front are Luis Fabiano, Grafite, Nilmar and Baptista. None of those players are ones I see setting this tournament on fire. Fabiano is a good player, always has been, but his best years are behind him and he is not genuinely world class. So the burden will fall onto Kaka and primarily (for goals) onto Robinho.

Strikers scoring won’t be a problem for Spain. In David Villa they have a player who is making scoring over a goal every 2 games at the highest level very easy. As far as I can tell, he appears to have completely mastered the art of goalscoring. With the service he will be getting from all areas of the midfield, he won’t fail to score at least 4 goals. This fact alone will probably get Spain to the final. The only slight weakness in the Spain line up is left back, and also that Puyol will get found out a couple of times. But they will ride that out pretty easily.

Fabregas will probably play ahead of Torres, but either way it gives Spain flexibility to switch from 4-4-2 to 4-5-1 with devastating effect. They have great players in all levels of the midfield too. They managed to win the Euros without ever having to get out of 3^rd gear. They have a fairly easy group. The one thing against them is history. Spain have never won the WC, and there is the eternal taboo – no European team has ever won it outside Europe. Spain are probably better placed to break this curse than any European team previously. Despite history being against them, I make them favourites ahead of Brazil. Del Bosque is the perfect coach for this team, willing to play the background and let the players take centre stage.

The only other team that stand a chance of winning is Italy. The team is very nondescript, but, as it was 4 years ago, it’s not about the team. It’s about Lippi. In the last WC, you saw with Italy and England the 2 polar opposites of how to mould a team. England was based around the cult of the superstar player, Italy around the cult of the manager. It’s arguably been taken a step further this time with the omission of Totti.

I’m fairly certain Lippi will believe that the squad he is taking this time is actually stronger than 4 years ago. There are a lot of unrecognisable names. But the team is built around collective strength. 4 years ago they were characterized by the likes of Perotta and Iaquinta – hard working, skilful, yet totally unglamorous players. They will play by the same theory this time. They will follow Lippi’s instructions, work hard for each other, and might once again surprise a few people. The fact they are totally unheralded will play right into Lippi’s hands. This team is the footballing equivalent of a ninja assassin – silent, faceless, but brutally efficient.

Would be nice if Capello can achieve the same effect for England.

by guest-blogger Chrisman

In-ger-lund !

Bookmark this.

If you want more of this:

In-ger-lund Facebook group here.

And if you haven't you really should...teh trunk you-tube page.

No Theo? That's fab

You must know deep down something is wrong somewhere when the media lead with the story (genuine shock it would seem) that Theo Walcott has not been included in Fabio's 23.  Surprise omission they called it. We then had to endure various ex-players tell us how for example Theo deserved to go to SA (Really? Based on what? That hat-trick 2 years ago?) and other gems like Kenny Samson explaining he was pleased for the young lad Warnock. That's 28 years young Stephen - three years older than the unlucky (and better) Baines. And Heskey has been included because he's a battering ram. And we all know that if want to win the WC you need a battering ram upfront as a Plan B, to you know, work your way through the best defences in world football when Plan A comes unstuck. Although I won't joke too much here because we lack world class players in forward positions. Rooney being the only one. Would be a bit scary if he got injured in the first group game.

But hey, it's all about opinions. And the persistence on Walcott and the apparent shock must be all part of the pantomime, because anyone following football would point out what is already quite obvious to all. He's not been that good for a while.

I know I'm in broken record mode with this, and I'm not screaming 'I told you so' standing on a soap box pumping my chest out, because everybody knew this already. Well, apart from Walcott himself who is apparently very disappointed. And the people who seem to take to all this shock horror he's not going to SA BS. I'd say he would have been as lucky as he was 4 years ago to have made it in this time round. At least the BBC (news at ten) had a more realistic report on all this citing his inconsistent form. I guess all this hype was created the day David Dein had words with Sven. They created a monster, which has since nested under the bed.

So minutes silence then for the broken hearted and the delusional.

Moving on. Congrats to JD, Crouchie, The King and Azza.

Elsewhere, no room for Tommy or Daws. Experience being the reason at a guess, as Dawson has been superb this season and is arguably a better player on current form than Upson - but Upson has been there before (England setup and selection) and as discussed earlier in the week, some risks - it would seem - are far too big to take. Same with Hudd. Although has Carrick performed better than him this season? Oh yeah right, soz, that's not relevant, it's all about experience. If you want to validate it all, I guess you could say you wouldn't want a newbie ballsing it up and as our mentality (the English) is one that perhaps lacks the natural confidence and bravado to select a 'youngster' and throw them in at the deep end, maybe we should trust Fabio with his final selection. We took a 17 year old to the WC four years ago and never used him. This time round, no wildcards.

So, Heskey WC final brace anyone?

The Tournament pt 1 - Dark Horses

The World Cup soon cometh. And in the downtime between Spurs’ latest epic, era-changing victories, it’s a nice distraction. There will be a fair few players on show that we have an interest in, but more importantly it’s simply the greatest celebration of football ever created. I know it’s the fashionable thing to say that the Champion’s League and club football has surpassed the World Cup and the international game.

To that theory I say this – bollocks. International football is still the ultimate proving ground for the best players in the world. We’ve see countless ‘top top’ players succeed on a domestic and European level, only to be totally shown up by some minor former Soviet republic in a World Cup Qualifier.

This World Cup has all the ingredients of a straight-up banger. Wild fans, all the best teams, evenly matched groups, an element of danger and games at a reasonable hour. I will be surprised if it’s not seen as the best one so far. So who will succeed? Who will fail? And what the hell is going to happen? In a series of frankly scintillating previews, I will tell you. First of all, I would like to deal with that group of teams that everyone is always ranting on about – The Dark Horses.

The first World Cup I ever watched in detail was Italia ’90. And the ‘Dark Horse’ for that tournament was Yugoslavia. In reality, they were not a dark horse – they were a strong contender. But not much has changed. The lazy answer to the dark horse question seems to be, for this WC, Serbia. But trust me, Serbia will not make it out of the group stage, despite the fact that their main rival has just lost their best player. They (still) haven’t got a centre-forward to match their decent midfield and excellent defence. Zigic doesn’t count; he’s just a shit Peter Crouch.

Also, discount Cameroon and Nigeria – they had good teams 20-odd years ago, but have since suffered from the disease of ‘thinking you’re too good to listen to any form of coaching’. Ivory Coast are probably better placed to succeed, but suffer from the similarly specific African disease of ‘good team, shit keeper’. However similar the outfield skills of teams are, expect Chris Ronaldo and co to completely sodomize Boubacar Barry. Of the African teams, I would have tipped Ghana to have the most success, coming through their group and losing in a great game to England in round 2. But that was before Essien was injured. But who knows, maybe the stage is set for the Ghetto Kid to make himself a hero…

The group that I think could provide the most unexpected surprises is Group A. Mexico showed flashes of what they are capable of against England, and in the past 2 WC’s they have practically eliminated themselves due to pure psychological incontinence. If they can overcome these demons, I could see them beating Uruguay, Argentina, and maybe even Germany. They have a better team now than in the past 2 tournaments, but the mental weaknesses still remain.

Uruguay may well be a better bet. Despite the bizarre decision not to take the brilliant Christian Rodriguez, they could still be a force. Whoever qualifies 2^nd in that group will have to play Argentina – a team blatantly there for the taking. Then after that it’s Germany, who technically should be underdogs for a lot of games these days. Unfortunately no one seems to have told them. If either Uruguay or Mexico can raise themselves out of their collective psychological pits of despair, expect significant things to happen.

One thing is for sure, and that’s whoever meets Argentina in round 2 will give them a hell of a game. The Mexico-Argentina game in ’06 was a wonderful game of football, and one that Mexico really should have won. If they can carry that experience through, and really believe in themselves, they will expose Diego Maradona’s side. Then on to Germany…

While on the subject of Germany, let’s mention another Dark Horse. Germany. Whilst there is no way my logical football brain can entertain the prospect of them winning it, I’ve seen enough in the last few years to tell me that they will do better than they should. They are a very pedestrian team. They lack anything but the most basic kind of firepower up front. Their CBs are cumbersome.

But they have that mentality of superiority. It has carried them to WC and EC finals in this decade that they had no right to be in. And it will probably propel them to at least another semi. Ballack’s absence is irrelevant. You could put a team of German pub players in the WC and they would probably beat the majority of African, Eastern European and South American teams. They are the Martin O’Neill of international football – built for tournament play, essentially inferior, but don’t know when they are beaten (a potent mix).

Now onto 2 teams which are the antithesis of the German side – South Korea and Japan. South Korea remains the last true enigma of World Football. People will always tell you that their achievements in 2002 were due to dodgy refereeing, but that is mostly elitist football propaganda. They rode their luck against Spain, but beat both Spain and Italy fair and square, and were the better team in both games. They have those performances in them. They are quick, strong, and technically good. But they have the crumble factor.

As do Japan. In the last WC, Japan comprehensively outplayed both Australia and Croatia, but failed to win either match. They are a brilliant passing team, and they actually have pace and great organisation too. Sooner or later they will learn to shoot and then we’re all in trouble. Along with Russia and England, they are the great inadequates of world football. All the talent and tangible resources you could want, but lacking any form of winner’s mentality.

If you really pressed me, I would tip both Greece and Denmark to come through and the 2^nd place teams in their respective groups. The experienced European bully-boys boring everyone on their way to routine 2^nd round elimination. But if either of Japan or Korea brings their game-faces, then we could be pleasantly surprised. Korea should beat Nigerian and Greece comfortably, but something tells me Greece will old-man their way through. Not a dark horse so much as a shit horse.

Dark horses are notoriously tricky to predict. The problem lies in the fact that whenever a team is tipped as a dark horse, they suddenly are put in the pressure situation, and the freedom that they would have experienced is taken away. This usually leads to a total breakdown, the most famous example being Colombia in ’94.

The teams that make a good fist of being dark horses are usually the teams that no one in their right mind gave a chance to – Cameroon in ’90, Bulgaria in ‘94 and Senegal in ’02. This is where, paradoxically, the Asian teams could have the advantage. No one, quite rightly, is tipping them to do anything, so the pressure is off and anything they do achieve will be a bonus.

by guest-blogger Chrisman

Still to come – The Favourites, The Fakers and the The Players.

Never pass to Walcott

Cracking ad this. Especially the Rooney bit. And yeah, it's a slow news day.

Don't take Defoe to the World Cup Fabio...he's evil

We win. Away. Score three goals, and keep a clean sheet. We do it with a mix of the ugly and the sublime, in the mud, up North. And back down South, one of London's freebie newspapers decides to run the headline that has Jermaine Defoe pencilled in as some type of Dark Sith, waving his light-sabers around with no remorse and unnerving petulance. The Facere is strong with this one. Much like the farce is strong with the Evening Standard and their blatant side-step to say something positive about Spurs. You'll be equally shocked to hear the report of the game has nothing to do with Matthew Norman, unless he's ghost writing for Tom Collomosse.

So, basically our win has had the shine taken off it because Defoe did a norty tackle. Yes, yes, because losing your rag is something that is simply forbidden if you're not Wayne Rooney. Tom poses the question 'How would he react to a sly dig in the ribs or a kick on the ankle' during a World Cup quarter final? Don't fret Tom, Wayne will give him some hints and tips on how to control his temperament, because we all know JD is an animal on the pitch, isn't he just. Week in week out, all the goals he's scored count for nothing because they're blanked out by his suspect attitude in games.

Dry them Tom.

Dashing towards the ball is also apparently more condemning evidence that our top scorer is a liability.

Edgy.
Irritable.

That's our JD according to the ES.

So one bad stupid tackle, and it's deserving of 80% of a match report? Really? Is he like this every week? Does he get sent off regularly due to violent conduct or stupid reactions? Of course he bloody well doesn't.

Absolute bollocks journalism by an absolute melter trying his best to avoid discussing a decent win away when a few thought we'd perhaps stumble and lose more ground.

Tomorrow the Evening Standard is set to publish a piece about how Modric is over-rated because anyone with a mullet in this day and age can not possibly be good at football.

Don't mess with the Maradona

Off-topic.

Love him or hate him, you never get a boring moment when Diego Maradona flexes his ego. Whether its belly-flopping in the rain in celebration or telling a journalist to keep on sucking, it's been an emotional qualification campaign for the best footballer of all time who was also a pretty decent drugs fiend too. His latest vocal outburst concerns his nations footballing journalists not-so-cute criticism of his tactics, selection and general performance as the Argentine boss.

He's not very good at coaching. Ok, so his record doesn't look too shabby on paper - Played 13 Won 9 Lost 4 - but considering the wealth of talent at his disposal, Argentina have looked disjointed and clumsy. And I can hardly ever say I agree with some of his ethics on and off the pitch, but I found his assault on the question-asking-reporter quite delightful. Diego is a massive melting pot.  I hope we get Argentina in the World Cup.

FIFA are investigating this and he faces a 5-match ban apparently. He wouldn't change a thing. All black and white to Diego.

Club or country? Spurs or England?

Do you care much about the English national team? I'm sure most of you do, but in comparison to supporting Spurs week in week out, do you get as emotionally involved? What's more important? Club or country?

Yeah, I know. You've never heard that question asked before have you? In fact, it's probably best to ignore the question because most would side with their club, because it's the bread and butter of the game.

Club football is massive, but the pressures and expectations of major tournaments still has me nervous, gutted and joyful - pretty much like watching Tottenham.

Obviously, every Spurs game matters far more than the odd qualifying match or friendly. But when we're involved in a World Cup, it's unquestionably important and equally devastating when we are traditionally knocked out by the Q-F's. It just is. Much like any Spurs game just is.

It's a bit like the cricket. Biting nails during The Ashes, not that fussed with the one-day internationals. England games deep into a championship get the hairs on the back of my neck all stand-upish but otherwise, I don't care too much as long as the team play well.

Some might argue this is just a jingoistic reaction on my part, getting carried away with the over-hype of the press and Union Jack flag waving that sweeps across the nation when England Expects. Making England a part-time bonus to club football rather than the be all and end all of supporting. Although I can clearly remember how sick I've felt when the dream is ended in the latter stages of any give World Cup. You can't fake that type of depression.

I won't ask that clichéd question (oh) about whether you would choose to see Spurs win the title or England win the World Cup. Or whether you just watch England and hope the Spurs representatives do well. Or perhaps hope they sit firmly on the bench and don't get to play, avoiding the potential for injury.

I guess, for me, club football is more important because its your identity as a supporter. England, (even if it can be a circus some of the time, not too dis-similar to Spurs I guess) is just as important from an emotional viewpoint. But only at certain moments. Mainly because its more condensed and all hopes fall upon a summer month every other year.

If you check out the link included in this blog post above, you'll find that most of the Spurs fans in the message board thread are not actually choosing between club and country. They don't appear to care that much, if at all, about the national side. It's more a case of, Spurs matters, England doesn't. No so much club or country, but just club.

/discuss