England v Germany: on first thoughts

For my father, who preferred rugby to football, leaving me, at the age of eight, to decide whether to support West Germany or England during Italia '90.

Much has been said by the English media about the disappointing displays of England throughout the World Cup. But the biggest con is the English media for constantly elevating England's chances and then kicking them all the way back down to earth when they fail to meet the high expectations set for them.

The general consensus among the English media - both newspapers and TV - is that despite Lampard's disallowed goal Germany played far superior football and would have won anyway. Confidence in such an assertion by so many people seems a bit chips and fishy to me. At two goals apiece it is impossible to say what the final result would be.

If England were to again win the World Cup, many English people would almost certainly buy one or more newspapers the following day to keep as a memento. But the English football press would have less to write about than if England lost as usual - where did it go wrong? Should Capello stay? Who will play in Euro 2012? Who will play at the World Cup in 2014? How can England change to win in future? The list goes on and on like a Duracell Bunny at Fusion Festival.

The media write at great length about the mistakes Capello and the England players made, yet throughout qualification and in the run up to the World Cup the press were shoving piles of nutritious praise on England and Capello. I still read much of it with great interest but that is because I am half-German and so can distance myself from the pathetic nature of it all.

Nevertheless, some key points:

German goalkeeper Manuel Neuer's assist was the first by a goalkeeper in a world cup since 1966. That means Terry and Upson cocked up that one.

In Raphael Honigstein's excellent book Englischer Fussball - A German's view of our beautiful game, when discussing the British footballing press, he points out that "it is all about movement, a constantly evolving narrative. Newspapers deliberately write off teams, coaches or players so that their eventual rise can be even more dramatic; or suffocate a team under a blanket of superlatives until they can dance on its grave."

The Premier League, being a separate organisation from the English FA, has next to no interest in developing English talent. It wants to continue to stage the best league in the world.

The Olympics, terrorists and Kekswichsen

For the Bad Boys on Tuesdays and the Expats vs. Germans on Wednesdays.

When a sport's greatest obtainable achievement is an olympic gold it should be an olympic event. If there is another tournament or trophy which is considered a better of harder achievement in a certain sport then that sport should not be an olympic event. For example, sports like football and tennis have more revered trophies - the FIFA World Cup, Roland Garros, Wimbledon etc. - whereas the 100m sprint does not. Simple.

All women's world records are void. The terminology should be changed to "women's record". I am for sexual equality but I cannot help but feel that the fastest person in the world holds the world record, and if that happens to be a man then so be it. Only one person can have a world record, never two.

Now what the Flec were Flec (Front for the Liberation of the Enclave of Cabinda) thinking when they shot at the Togan national team's coaches? The world, and especially Africans, love football. Utterly love it to fuck. Footballers should be untouchable like "made" men in the mafia or cops. No one will feel any empathy for them, unlike them lads responsible for 9/11, the 'RA or Hamas.

Keep thinking about Kekswichsen/soggy biscuit, do I. I love both words and the idea of the game. I would never play it myself, unless it was for a large sum of money, but it nevertheless fascinates me. So much so that I once tried to write a screenplay for a short film about three lads that play soggy biscuit to respect the dying wishes of their terminally ill friend. The best comment below gets an exclusive look at said draft. This is good:

Viewing football - it's the game itself which we should truly love

For Brian Clough - "If God had meant the game to be played up there, he would've put goalposts in the air."

To enjoy viewing football you have to remain objective. And being a hardcore fan of one club prevents this.

There are two reasons why football is the greatest sport. First, the shape of the ball. The sphere is the most perfect object in nature and mathematics; a player can make instinctive decisions by predicting its movement. Second, football takes the arms and hands - the most coordinated parts of the body - out of the equation, making it difficult enough to be impressive when played well. There isn't another sport in which the competitors are such well-balanced athletes. Tennis looks good in slow motion, but nobody cares about one man's dedication to something. Snooker is brilliant but - thanks to failed attempts - will never be a team sport.

Do support one club - just don't do it blindly. To enjoy the game for its entertainment value you must do it without favouritism. Admit a team's wrongs, even if it's your own.

However, football is also drama. The stories behind the clubs, managers and players make viewing more exciting. And this is why a certain amount of emotional attachment to one club is good.

Three rules they should bring in:

If the ball appears to have crossed the line, the referee has to ask the fourth official to view the replay. It won't take long; it's an undisputable decision. Fouls aren't, but offsides will be soon (some kind of sensor technology - real quick).
If a player is whistled for offside, he should still be allowed to shoot, as it is his right to do so, if only to let off steam, follow his instincts and entertain the crowd.
If a goalkeeper concedes a penalty, he shouldn't be given a red card, unless he saves the penalty.