Wally with a Brolly

As a Fulham fan, I often get the same reaction when I mention that fact to someone: 'Fulham? Nice team! They're my second favourite team after [insert douch-ish or obscure team].'

Beautiful, aren't they?

Don't expect Walcott to play well again for at least another 6 months

Torres endured another in a long succession of painful evenings in front of the cameras

Germany's Mesut Ozil teasing Portugal's resident winker

The man Spain really need...

Euros are always a good footballing proposition due to the geographical proximity of the teams involved. This always means that we are guaranteed a few rivalries or grudge matches during any European tournament, and this version hasn't disappointed.

France-England has always been a competitive rivalry based on a love/hate relationship between the two countries. The English always secretly admire the French for their culture and food. The French secretly admire the English because they created football and stood up to the Nazis. Yes, I'm dealing in stereotypes, but we all know this is true.

So when the two teams meet, it obviously always means something more, but in a playful, banter sort of way. The French hate nothing more than losing to the arrogant English whilst the English hate nothing more than losing to the pompous French. We all love each other in the end though.

Russia-Poland has never been a competitive rivalry. It's always been a true grudge match based on the common History between the two countries. Centuries of discord and atrocities between Russia and Poland have meant that there is no love lost between fans of each country. More so than Ukraine and its schizophrenic uncertain identity, Poland has always hated Russia. And Russia has always enjoyed bullying little Poland.

You could tell this rivalry had deeply rooted origins when we witnessed the violence between both sets of fans prior to the game. The football match was secondary. It was Poland vs Russia on a grander scale. In footballing terms this fixture has never had particular relevance and never been a rivalry. It's always been about something more than football.

Germany-Holland is a mixture of both previously-mentioned rivalries.

It is of course competitive, as evidenced by the numerous incidents between the teams over the years.

The 1974 World Cup final was thus meant to be a consecration of Total Football, and Dutch arrogance resembled Hungarian confidence from 1954. In both cases, no-one told the Germans about the pre-approved script, and certainly the 1974 West Germany team deserved more credit, as it possessed two fine players in Beckenbauer and Muller. For this reason both sets of fans still have a feeling of unease over that final: the Germans for never having been considered worthy winners by neutrals, and the Holland for, well, losing the final.

Beckenbauer beating Cruyff: something we tend to forget

The 1988 Euro semi-final was also overshadowed by the actions of Ronald Koeman at the end of the game. Swapping shirts with Germany's Mr Nice Guy Olaf Thon, Koeman pretended to wipe his pale Dutch arse over it. This was unashamed provocation from one of Holland's finest players of the time. What's more, the fact Olaf Thon was the victim made it even worse, as he was the most likeable and classy players Germany had (as evidenced by the fact he agreed to swap his shirt at the end of the game).

Not your best moment Ronald.

That West Germany team was full of absolute douche-bags, and Koeman picked Olaf Thon. We wouldn't have been so aggrieved if he had wiped his arse with Matthaus's shirt, that would have been nice. But not Olaf Thon. It was unashamed bullying from Koeman, and the lack of dignity in victory was shocking.
It also overshadowed a good game of football between two really fine teams once again competing at the highest international level.

Matthaus: we're guessing we'd be laughing if Koeman had wiped his arse on that douche-bag's shirt. A better target than Olaf Thon.

Finally, the World Cup 1990 quarter-final between the two teams was once again full of fire. Both teams were part of the favourites to lift the World Cup, and many knew that the winner of this game would have great chances of going through and winning the whole damn thing.
Once again the Dutch didn't cover themselves in glory, with Frank Rijkaard spitting an outrageous amount of gob into Rudi Voller's hair.
Now don't get me wrong. Voller's hair was so ridiculous it deserved someone or something to wake the German from his hair-related coma and make him take drastic action. I'm just not sure spitting in it twice was the best option.
Once again, the actions of certain players made us forget that these were two great teams fighting for the World Cup.

What's more ridiculous: the obscene amount of spit or both men's hairstyles? We're not sure either.

So we know that this rivalry has always been competitive. It also has always had Historical repercussions based on WWII (what else?). No need to expand here, but the Dutch have been pretty slow in forgiving the Germans. We could tell it still hurt them when they turned up at the 2006 World Cup wearing 'We want our bicycles back!' shirts, a clear reference to the Wehrmacht's decision to confiscate all bikes at one point.

The source of so much tension between Dutch and Germans. We tend to simplify things.

(On a sidenote, the BBC coverage of that rivalry was, for once, spot on. I particularly enjoyed that random German fan's remark of 'We haven't won anything for 16 years and haven't even been to a final for...what...48 months!'.)

So there we were. Germany-Holland. The two beaten finalists of the last two major international tournaments, going face-to-face in a game with particularly distasteful history. It was the first real clash of Euro 2012. And it didn't disappoint.


          HOW THEY LINED UP

GERMANY: Why change a winning team? This was surely what Joachim Low was thinking, as he put out the same team that had beaten Portugal. Germany had perfect balance: a good ball-playing defence, and efficient and creative midfield and a potent strikeforce. This was the simplest decision Low ever had to make, and it came as no surprise that he put his faith in players he knew inside-out. Podolski in particular could be grateful: his performance in the first game hadn't particularly set the world alight, and whilst I was hoping to catch a glimpse of Gotze, Schurrle or Reus, Low's decision was vindicated.


HOLLAND: 'Why change a winning team?' was also probably Van Marwijk's thinking. Except they hadn't won their first game, so it wasn't technically a winning team. The Dutch coach, however, hadn't forgotten that these were the players that had taken Holland to the World Cup Final (to the exception of Willems) and had qualified brilliantly for the Euros.

People had been calling for the introduction of Van der Vaart over Van Bommel in central midfield. VdV's technical and passing brilliance, combined with De Jong's tenacity and fighting spirit (and legs...Van Bommel is slooooow), would be enough to control the midfield. Or so people thought. But Holland had looked vulnerable with both Van Bommel and De Jong against Denmark. Surely Van Marwijk wasn't going to let any gaps for Ozil and co to exploit. And let's just say VdV isn't the best at tracking his man, or simply at tracking back.
Van Marwijk went for the safe option, but let us not forget two things as well:
 
    1. Van Bommel is Van Marwijk's son-in-law. Are you going to create a rift in the family? What if Van Marwijk wants to see his grandchildren in the future? People are so inconsiderate of the potential repercussions on Van Marwijk's family of dropping Van Bommel.

Van Bommel's children: one reason for his continued inclusion in the Dutch team.

    2. Van Bommel is Holland's captain. Only Denmark don't play their team captain. But he's Christian Poulsen. And he's rubbish.

Of course both teams played in a 4-2-3-1. Because is there another formation being used at the moment in big games? I didn't think so either.


          THE GAME ITSELF
Once again, we'll go for observations and conclusions rather than an actual recap of the game.

* This was a game of ego vs team ethic. The Dutch have often been blighted by the egotistical nature of their big players. Think Edgar Davids (arrogant Edgar? Surely not) being sent home at Euro 96 for being a tool. Think of any team having Arjen Robben in its rank. And of course Huntelaar made it clear he was sulking like a big baby. Difficult to have cohesion when you care more about yourself than the team. Germany, on the other hand, is a team patiently built over the last few years, with players knowing exactly their roles and sticking to them. This is what makes them scary good. And this is why Mario Gomez didn't cry like a baby when he got subbed (denying him a hat-trick) whilst Robben threw his shirt (the equivalent of handing in a resignation letter whilst going on an expletive-filled rant directed at your hierarchical superior) and walked off steaming despite producing nothing whatsoever.

* There is no better left-back in the world than Philip Lahm. Only Ashley Cole is his equal. Lahm not only had Robben in his back pocket all game, he was also a willing runner and didn't misplace a single pass all game. A great player.

* Are we genuinely surprised that Holland are that bad? They were clearly split into a defensive unit (the back 7) and an attacking unit (Robben, Sneijder, Van Persie and Afellay). Germany, on the other hand, have midfielders in Khedira and Schweinsteiger who fulfill both defensive and attacking duties brilliantly. Germany are a very fluid team.

* Is that the best back 4 Holland can muster? A decent right-back, two centre backs who don't play for any elite teams in Europe (sorry Everton and Malaga) and an 18-year old left-back who has played the grand total of 45 games for PSV! That will never be enough at international level, even though they did get to the World Cup final. Put that back 4 in the Premier League or SPain and they would be torn apart.

* Speaking of being torn apart, Jetro Willems really showed his age yesterday. How can I tell? Thomas Muller is not a natural winger. He's not the fastest and doesn't have the greatest touch. He does, however, have a footballing brain. This was highlighted by the number of times he got past or in behind Willems yesterday. The young Dutch left-back had a nightmare of a first half. I'm guessing it didn't help that Afellay was utterly disinterested in tracking back and helping him out. Cheers Ibrahim.

Willems struggling to contain Muller: Welcome to international football Jetro!

* Can we stop referring to players based on one game we've seen them play all season? Yes Mario Gomez had a bad game in the Champions' League final. Yes, he had been poor at Euro 2008, which was the last time any BBC commentator watched him play. There is no doubting he is world class though. His two goals were brilliantly taken. Gomez has the Ibrahimovic syndrome in the BBC's commentators' eyes: doesn't play well when we watch him, so must be totally rubbish. Do your homework boys. Both are world-class players infinitely better than any English striker bar Rooney.

* It sounds simple, but people need to stop giving Schweinsteiger so much time or he will destroy you. Need I say more? He had two assists yesterday, never panicked in possession and was the metronome of his team. Spotless performance by one of the best midfielders in the world.

* I know I am going to get slated for this, but Schweinsteiger is the type of player Steven Gerrard could have been. Don't get me wrong, Gerrard was world-class and one of the best number 10s in the world. But when you see Schweini's tactical awareness and desire to never shirk his defensive duties, it makes you wonder whether Gerrard could have been as complete. Schweinsteiger is the complete centre midfielder. Gerrard could have been had he not been asked to play a bit higher up the pitch and if he hadn't picked up bad habits. England could have done with a player of Schweinsteiger's ilk, and Gerrard definitely could have been that player.

* Are people still wondering why Khedira was signed by Real and plays in all the big games? An absolute tour-de-force yesterday by Sami. He was everywhere, defensively and offensively.

* Mats Hummels has flown under the radar but he is a great centre back. Good with the ball at his feet, never panicks. Only made one mistake yesterday in the first half. There won't be many more. Look out for him during the rest of Euro 2012.

* Ozil just finds space. A superb Number 10. No need to add anything really.

* If there is one Dutch player whose desire and enthusiasm you can't doubt, it's Wesley Sneijder. He's the only Dutch player who lived up to his name yesterday, constantly probing the German defence, and showing a bit of fire and the same time. Doesn't deserve to head home so early. An outstanding player.

* How can I tell Van Persie is stressed? He rushes when he plays for the Netherlands, and forgets to bring other players into play. A good goal nonetheless. But he'll be disappointed with his performance.

* Holland only started becoming dangerous once Van Persie played the Number 10 role. RVP is a great striker but he was not playing on the shoulders of the last defenders, and nobody was getting into the box. We've seen the same problem with Spain and France in this tournament.

* This is probably the end of Van Bommel. Can't say we'll miss him.

* On a sidenote, I for once enjoyed Lawrenson's punditry. The reason? He kept things to a minimum, and was at his acerbic best. Jonathan Pearce on the other hand? Talks too much. We get it Jonathan, you love the Dutch fans' singing, everybody has been nice to you in Ukraine, and the cities are surprisingly lovely. Can we get back to the football please?


          PLAYER RATINGS

GERMANY

NEUER: Dealt with everything thrown his way, which wasn't much. Not to blame for Van Persie's goal. 6/10

BOATENG: A bit wasteful with the ball, but held his own in a right-back role he doesn't particularly appreciate. Started to find it tough once Sneijder drifted onto the left. 6/10

HUMMELS: Apart from a lazy mistake at the start when he let a long ball fall into the path of Van Persie, the Dortmund man put up an accomplished performance. Was turned on Van Persie's goal, but he's not the first and only defender who's suffered that ignominy. Was calm when Holland threatened. A confident tackle in the box on Van Persie. A solid performance. 7/10

BADSTUBER: Underrated centre back who put another solid performance. The young man has progressed immensely since being trusted with the centre-back role at both club and international levels. Didn't put a foot wrong. 7/10

LAHM: What can we say about the German captain? Clearly relished the opportunity to face Robben, and was never in any danger against the Dutch winger. Always ideally placed, and offered great support going forward. The usual from Lahm, which says a lot about his abilities. 9/10

Sensational

KHEDIRA: A complete performance. A great understanding with Schweinsteiger as to who drops and who bombs forward. Provided a physical presence and didn't misplace a lot of passes. Very underrated. 8/10

SCHWEINSTEIGER: A maestro performance (Remember Didier Zokora? His middle name is Maestro. Couldn't be further from the truth!). Probably didn't misplace a single pass, didn't shirk his defensive responsibilities, and had two assists. The complete midfielder. 9/10

Schweinsteiger getting the better of Sneijder. A complete performance from the German

MULLER: Tormented young Willems with his clever runs and use of the ball. Does a lot of unrecognised work, such as helping out Boateng defensively. Impressive, especially considering right-wing isn't his preferred position. 7/10
Replaced by Sven Bender. Great name, and mastered the run-down-the-line-to-waste-time move. Did exactly what he was asked to do.

PODOLSKI: Not the best of performances again from Lukas, which should worry Arsenal fans. But his pedigree is enough, even though I wished we could have caught a glimpse of Mario Gotze. A player you can trust to follow instructions though. 5/10

OZIL: A silky touch, and an innate ability to find space. Ozil bamboozled Van Bommel and De Jong with his running between the lines. Lacked a bit of end product but always looked dangerous. Put a shift in for the team. 7/10
Replaced by Kroos, who simply helped shore up the midfield.

GOMEZ: Probably had about 2 touches in the game and scored both. Lethal. Reminds me of Van Nistelrooy. 8/10
Replaced by Klose, who had great energy and pressurised Mathijsen into silly mistakes. Gave Stekelenburg a fright with his endless running. A good cameo. 7/10


HOLLAND

STEKELENBURG: Nearly gifted Klose a ridiculous goal. Maybe dived early on Gomez's second goal. Otherwise didn't actually have much to do. 5/10

VAN DER WIEL: Weak defensively, and didn't bring much going forward. Wasn't helped in any way by Robben, who refused to track back and to pass the ball. 4/10

HEITINGA: There is a reason the big scary Dutchman has never played or been linked with one of the big European clubs. A limited centre-back at this level, he was in trouble all game long. To be fair to him, he wasn't much helped by his team-mates' refusal to help defensively. Kept going to the end though. 4/10

MATHIJSEN: Came back from injury and looked rusty. Obviously better than Vlaar (not difficult) but still looked weak. It doesn't help his stock that an ageing Ooijer was preferred at the World Cup, which shows how little faith the Dutch have in Mathijsen. And this lack of faith was justified. Out of his depth. 4/10

WILLEMS: A boy playing alongside men. Was repeatedly torn apart in the first half, and his positioning was more than suspect. Did OK in the second half, but Germany were coasting by then. Showed his naivety many times in the way he used the ball. 2/10

VAN BOMMEL: Slow both in his tracking and with the ball at his feet. Brst forward in the first half, which surprised everyone watching, including the Germans. Anonymous. 2/10
Replaced by Van der Vaart, who brought a little bit more fluidity to the Dutch midfield. Not great defensively though. 5/10

DE JONG: Played his socks off. Not there to distribute, and it shows, but he kept going and produced an outstanding last-ditch tackle on Ozil in the second half. You can't doubt his commitment to the cause. One of the few Dutch players to deserve better. And it hurts to type that sentence, as it's still De Jong. 6/10

AFELLAY: Completely anonymous. Didn't help out Willems one bit, and I honestly forgot he was on the pitch. Produced nothing, and was rightly subbed at half-time. 2/10
Replaced by Huntelaar, who's just like Gomez: not the best at holding the ball up, but lethal if given the chance. The difference with Gomez is that Huntelaar didn't score and, in that case, his contribution is borderline meaningless. His introduction did help to free Van Persie a little bit, but that's not really what was asked of him. 3/10

ROBBEN: Petulant, inefficient. Was completely dominated by Lahm. An infuriating player. Blessed with superb technical ability, he too often made the wrong decisions. A great player when it works, but it didn't work for him yesterday, and his  individualism then becomes a major hindrance to the team. A shameful exit as well. 3/10
Replaced by Kuyt, who I'm not sure actually touched the ball. A typical 2012 Dirk Kuyt cameo.

Robben: petulant, useless, rubbish, egotistical

SNEIJDER: Deserved better. Was always creative, and took matters in his own hands (or feet) when he realised his team-mates gave up. A sublime shot just past the post. Willing to sacrifice for the team when he drifted wide to let Van Persie play in the hole. His reputation will not diminish after this Euro. 7/10

Sneijder: a superb effort in a losing encounter

VAN PERSIE: An inefficient first half despite good intentions. He never tried to run behind the defenders, which explained their ease in dealing with him, as well as Holland's static attack. The introduction of Huntelaar allowed him to play in the hole, and he came to life a little it. A good goal which helps save his game. Otherwise disappointing. 5/10

Denmark surprised many by beating Holland in the first game of this Euro, probably the biggest 'shock' so far. Yes, I'm putting 'shock' in quotation marks because our surprise was mostly due to our lack of understanding and knowledge about that Danish team.

Whilst it is fair to say that Holland were the clear favourites, Denmark had come top of their group in qualifying, even overtaking a much-fancied Portugal team. Without so much as a defence to rely on (Heintinga and Vlaar, seriously???), Holland were always going to be vulnerable.

Their profligacy in front of goal was what killed Holland, but let us not underestimate a resolute performance by Denmark, led by the immaculate Daniel Agger, surely one of the best Premier League defenders when fit.

I've always liked Denmark, ever since discovering Brian Laudrup in 1996 and for Rangers. This led to an irrational man-crush towards the gorgeous Brian (have you seen that guy's hair? Impressive). This was further accentuated by Denmark's performance at World Cup 98, when they gave Brazil one hell of a fright in one of the most entertaining games of that tournament. The Laudrups and Schmeichel were world class players who seemed to have a good heart.

Brian Laudrup: class, elegance and unbelievable hair

Simonsen, Laudrups, Schmeichel. For such a small country, Denmark had produced winners who combined grace, elegance and efficiency on a football pitch.

Unfortunately, after World Cup 98, Denmark fell into footballing coma, also soon to be known as Torresitis for obvious reasons. Gone were the days of producing talented, exciting footballers.

We were now stuck with such luminaries as Stig Tofting, Thomas Gravesen and Christian Poulsen. The common denominator? An absolute lack of footballing skill combined with a reckless lust for 'tackling'. Again, we need to put 'tackling' in quotation marks, for these three players were the Danish Bartons: a desire to break someone's leg was always there.

Stig Tofting: Crazy

I particularly remember a friendly match between France and Denmark a few years back. At that time Gravesen and Poulsen had a certain pedigree. Gravesen had signed for Real Madrid, and had scared the hell out of everyone whilst being semi-productive. By 'everyone', I include his team-mates. Robinho had never seen anyone like Gravesen at training, and he still shudders at night when thinking of training sessions at Real. Poulsen had gone to Sevilla from Schalke, and had actually proven to be an effective shield protecting the runs of Navas, Alves and the late Puerta.

Gravesen at Real Madrid: Robinho still has nigthmares

Based on that knowledge, I was looking forward to a good competitive game for the French. What I witnessed was the equivalent of a pack of sheep sent to slaughter. Gravesen and Poulsen started the friendly scything everyone in sight, uninterested in playing the beautiful game of football. It was a monstrosity of a game, a friendly only in name. It was simply scary.

My love for the Danes had wilted, even with the introduction of the unparalleled Nicklas Bendtner, their only world-class player (cough, cough. That title belongs to Agger).

So, when I watched Denmark-Holland, I wasn't especially rooting for the Danes. I was just happy to see that Poulsen wasn't starting. The Dutch midfielders' legs were not to be broken, and that was a relief.

However, another Poulsen was playing. Simon Poulsen. And I was instantly captivated. And a new Danish man-crush had started.

As his name was mentioned, I had visions of World Cup 2010, where Poulsen had majestically headed a clearance onto Agger's back for a comical own-goal. No wonder I was happy to see him back in his left-back position at a major international championship.

To score an own goal from there is physically impossible. Enter Simon Poulsen. In memorable action at the 2010 World Cup

Now, let's make things clear: Simon Poulsen is not your average left-back. Tall, gangly, utterly uncomfortable with the ball at his feet, Simon combines a desire to burst forward with a total misunderstanding of what his defensive duties are, or more accurately, should be.

People scoff at Glen Johnson's supposed lack of defensive ability, but Poulsen takes it to a whole new level, often giving his opponent considerable time and space to turn, try a few dribbles and almost inevitably burst past him. I'm unsure as to whether the poor bloke knows the off-side trap.

So when I saw Simon Poulsen facing Arjen Robben, my pulse started racing. I was about to witness a professional footballer being torn apart in front of thousands of footballing fans and viewers. Think Arsenal's 8-2 defeat at Old Trafford this season, but for one man only.

It started ominously for Simon, with the inevitable burst of pace by Robben resulting in Agger and the underrated Kjaer often having to produce outstanding last-ditch tackles. Denmark were riding their luck, and Simon Poulsen was probably the luckiest of them all.

And then, all of a sudden, this all changed. Poulsen 'burst' down the left-wing, 'brushing off' the 'defensive attention' provided by Van der Wiel and Robben, and produced a world-class cross, by his own standards. His pinpoint cross was deflected into Michael Krohn-Dehli's path, and the little winger from Brondby took his chance wonderfully to stun the Dutch.

From there on, Poulsen was unbeatable, but often not on purpose. With Robben panicking and revisiting the Champions' League final every time he touched the ball, Poulsen managed to look like a decent left-back for the rest of the game, albeit with an element of luck.

Poulsen beating Robben: hope for all footballers out there. Notice where he's looking and where the ball is. Emblematic of Simon's skill.

He thus produced a beautifully unnecessary handball in his own box when surrounded by absolutely no Dutch players whatsoever. It was a moment of pure lack of technical ability, with Poulsen clearly misjudging the elementary flight of the ball. Or it was a pure moment of madness, with Poulsen simply taking a chance and pulling it off.

And an irrational man-crush was thus born. As the Danish players celebrated at the end of the game, I stared at the screen, hoping to catch a last glimpse of Simon Poulsen. And when I did, I thought that an 'unorthodox' (read 'rubbish') 'left-back' with no defensive qualities being able to shut down one of the most terrorising wingers in the world should give us all a little bit of hope.

And so my love with Denmark was rekindled, and my faith in football restored. If Simon Poulsen can keep a clean sheet against Robben and co, who's to say Bendtner won't score a hat-trick against Germany, and Dennis Rohmedahl won't earn a move to Barcelona?

So thank you Simon Poulsen for giving hope to every football fan and amateur player out there.

After the destruction of an overrated Czech team in the first game, the suddenly-dark-horses Russians turn their attention to Poland, with the clear intention of spoiling the hosts' party and send them crashing out of their own Euro.

Unable to watch too much Russian football, but also unwilling to do so (Terek Grozny vs Spartak Moscow anyone?), it was a pleasure to see the return of the mercurial Andrei Arshavin against the Czech. The little Russian had disappeared off the radar after his move back home to Zenit, and I was genuinely looking forward to watching him play for his nation.

What I witnessed was a footballing lesson by one of the misunderstood players of the last few years.

Sure, Alan Dzagoev got all the plaudits, and rightly so, for a performance which belied the fact he is still only 21.
I can however safely say that none of this would have happened without Arshavin. Andrei was everywhere that night, and had it not been for Kerzhakov managing to hit that barn door an impressive number of ZERO times in 7 attempts, Russia would have recorded an even greater win.

There was Arshavin threading what has been the ball of the tournament (with Sneijder's outrageous outside-of-the-boot through ball to Huntelaar), splitting the Czech defence and leaving Kerzhakov one-on-one with Cech (in case you're wondering, he missed).

Kerzhakov: without him, Arshavin would be top of the assists chart. Yes, this photo symbolises his performance. No, it is not photoshopped.

There was Arshavin, upping the tempo when its team got too comfortable at 2-1, despite Czech pressure.

There was Arshavin, dictating play and dropping off the two Czech central defenders to come collect the ball and initiate attacks.

It was an absolute lesson in how to play the Number 10 role, and one I'm sure Dzagoev himself has been lucky to learn whilst playing alongside Arshavin for Russia.

A helpless defender trying to stop Arshavin. A common sight in international football

Most importantly, it was proof that Arshavin had been misunderstood all along.

(On a sidenote, Arshavin is not only misunderstood in footballing terms. The man is a genius, full stop. Check out his answers to questions by fans on his website. Our favourite two are:

Q: How do you see yourself in 50 years?
Arshavin: 78-year-old man, with aching legs and a glamorous walking stick

Q: In what order would you place the following animals: a tiger, a cow, a pig, a horse, a sheep?
Arshavin: A pig - it will always get the last place! A tiger, a cow, a horse, a sheep. And I'll repeat that a pig is always the last one, because it is a pig.

Brilliant)

Arshavin: footballing genius, and part-time philosopher with an irrational hatred of pigs

Let's go back in time to Euro 96. The Three Lions were romping to victory over Holland, igniting the closest run to ending God knows how many years of hurt. Gascoigne was actually considered to be a fine professional footballer, even though we all knew he was an unrepenting obese alcoholic, which perhaps made his accomplishments on the pitch even more impressive.

Personally, Euro 96 also remains the moment I discovered Gheorghe Hagi. And he's probably the Euro 96 version of Arshavin.

Gheorge Hagi was also known as 'mercurial'. He was also erratic, prone to laziness and probably even crazy. He played for Barcelona and Real Madrid but never really shone. Put him in a Romanian shirt, and Hagi was a genius.
In that yellow shirt, he was unstoppable. He literally carried Romania in the World Cup 94, and even though the Romanians lost in the first round of Euro 96 (to a group containing France, Spain and a Stoichkov-led Bulgaria goddamit!), he was the best player on the pitch every time. Two years later, he would lead an ageing Romanian team to victory over England in the World Cup.

Gheorghe Hagi: erratic, scum, crazy, a cheat, under-performing player at club level. A genius with Romania. Arshavin's 'ancestor'.

So Hagi was a genius number 10 for his country, an underachieving player for the big clubs he played for. Does this sound familiar?

Now go back to Euro 2008. Russia, for a long time considered to have deserved their place only because England, led by a man who inspired this blog (Thanks Schteve!), had been so abject they had forgotten to actually qualify.

Russia were underrated and romped to the semi-finals of the Euro, led by the brilliance of Arshavin who single-handedly destroyed the much-fancied Holland. Again, an underrated Russian team led by Arshavin, sounds familiar?


"But wasn't he absolutely rubbish when he was at Arsenal?" And here's where and when Arshavin has been most misunderstood.

When he arrived in 2009, Arshavin was the first real established star that Arsene had bought in the last few years. Here was an old player (by Arsenal standards) who had just terrorised teams at Euro 2008, joining Arsenal and settling in.

98 league games and 23 goals (and many more assists) later, and Andrei was unceremoniously dumped back to Zenit St Petersburg.

Whilst his desire was often lacking towards the end, and the difficulties in learning decent English proved too much for him, let us not forget that this man was played out of position for many years and still produced at a good level.

Here was a player used to playing in the hole for club and country. Playing as a number 10, he had not only terrorised teams at Euro 2008, but had also led Zenit to victory in the Europa League in 2008 as well.

But as soon as he arrived at Arsenal he was turned into a Left-Winger, continuing a trend that has seen Arsene waste players such as Hleb, Rosicky and Bentley by playing them out on the wings. OK, that last one was a stretch. It was clear for us to see that Arshavin only wished to play Number 10, without the many defensive duties demanded of a modern winger and which, to his detriment, he continuously disregarded.

Arshavin at Arsenal: my thoughts exactly Andrei

Whilst his attitude in stopping to care once he realised he was never going to get his wish after several years should not be commended, we have to realise that Wenger seemed particularly inflexible, especially when you consider that players in his position have not been as productive yet have been given chances. Walcott, for example, has only attained double figures in the goal in the Prem this season, yet is continually starting.


Whilst it is clear that Andrei didn't show the best of his abilities whilst at Arsenal, he was also let down by his manager and by so-called experts who totally disregarded his stats. Didn't the man score 4 in a single game past Liverpool? Didn't he score 10 goals in his first full season from a position he hated playing in?

Arshavin with Russia: at his eccentric best. Unstoppable.

So don't be surprised if he tears Euro 2012 apart. Arsenal's loss is Russia's gain. And we should be glad that international tournaments give players such as Arshavin a chance to truly shine.

As I rushed to the pub to catch the England-France game, I could easily tell that Euro 2012 had finally officially started. English flags and packed bars with screaming starting even before the game itself was under-way: no doubt England was about to enter the competition.

The mood in the England camp had been decidedly low-key, partly due to the fact the English public finally had no expectations, but also I suspect due to Roy (I refuse to call him Woy) Hodgson's approach which had worked so well at Fulham in the Europa League. People are often surprised by teams that apparently 'sneak in' when nobody expects them to, and these teams often outperform to their wildest expectations. Think Porto and (sigh) Chelsea in the Champions' League. This had also worked at the Euro, where unfortunately everyone woke up to Greece winning the damn thing in 2004, and an under-strength Germany making it all the way to the final in 2008.

France, on the other hand, were for once quietly confident in their ability. An injured M'Vila was a big loss prior to kick-off, and there were concerns about Mexes's fitness (i.e. he's too fat). But Laurent Blanc was able to field a full-strength squad riding on the wave of a 20 game unbeaten run which included impressive victories over Brazil and Germany.

The beers were flowing, and people were getting tense. Minutes before kick-off, and confirmation of the line-ups, and as usual groans and delight within the crowd.


          THE LINE-UPS

ENGLAND: Football fans are, by definition, fickle and lazy. Otherwise, how could they justify hours of sitting on the couch to insult/crown players? And, with the announcement of the line-ups, I was comforted in that view. Groans accompanied the inclusion of Milner, often sen as a willing workhorse with limited skill, especially on the wing. Whilst this view is often backed up by evidence, Roy had picked him for a reason.

Roy knew that, faced with a French 4-3-3, winning the midfield battle would be important. And whilst England started in what seemed like a 4-4-1-1 with Milner and Oxlade-Chamberlain on the wings, this had the potential to morph into a quick counter-attacking or defensive 4-3-3 when needs be, with Young and Chamberlain occupying the wings and Milner helping out Parker and Gerrard in Central Midfield.

It therefore was extremely annoying to hear Alan Shearer, he of Newcastle's relegation and insightful analysis fame, call Hodgson's formation 'rigid'. Roy had come with a plan with the limited means at his disposal, and shouldn't that be what you ask of your manager and your team? Not only that, but Hodgson and England were proven right with the result, and would have been vindicated had Milner not missed that sitter. We're also guessing Downing would have managed to miss that, so the choice of player was the right one.

Finally, a word on Oxlade-Chamberlain. His inclusion was both bold and unsurprising. Having witnessed him in the Champions' League against AC Milan, there was clear evidence that the young Gunner is a willing runner, and would be more willing to listen to his manager's demands in terms of tracking back.

The right choice. If only he could score from 2 yards out

FRANCE: International managers often surprise you, whether in a positive or negative fashion.
Take Roy: The man often criticised for being too conservative included an 18-year-old and a novice 22-year-old striker in the line-up to face France at the first game of the Euros.

Laurent Blanc, on the other hand, was infuriating in his decisions.

Now don't get me wrong: Florent Malouda, on his day, was a great player. Notice anything in that sentence?
1. The use of the past tense: Florent has not shown anything remotely world-class for a good two years.
2. The use of "on his day". Again, it hasn't really been Florent's day too many times this year. You can tell by the fact he started a grant total of ZERO important games for arguably the worst Chelsea team of the last few years (Yes, I know they won the Champions' League. No, they're not the best Chelsea side of the last five years).

So it was puzzling to see an educated manager decide to play an unwanted winger as a central midfielder. This was especially so when combined with his decision to restrict Nasri to the right hand-side of midfield.

As men were quickly going for a last-minute piss (recommended with the amount of booze to be consumed), both teams walked onto the pitch and gave us...well, what exactly did they give us?

"Rubbish, moi?" A has-been winger playing centre midfield. Puzzling.

          THE GAME ITSELF

Everyone in England watched the game, so let's just jump straight to a few conclusions from the game:

* What a first half that was! Pace, tempo, invention from both sides, it was truly a pleasure to watch that game. Whilst the first 15 minutes were a bit tense, the rest of the half was full of vigour and a clear desire from both teams to have the upper hand, albeit in different styles. England were happy to hit France on the break, whilst France were constantly probing and testing England's tactical discipline with their neat passing.

* Steven Gerrard probably played the most disciplined game of his career. Roy evidently asked him to do so, as playing 4 across midfield, even with Milner helping out, left Parker and Gerrard potentially vulnerable to France's 3 men in midfield. And with Parker having Achilles' problems and being slow (no faster than Barry in my book), Gerrard was asked to give a disciplined performance, one he hasn't been asked to produce for Liverpool since 1999, when he was playing in the youth team. It truly was a captain's performance!

* Seriously, is anyone surprised that Parker has been found out at this level? He was out of his depth against Holland in a friendly, and again yesterday was slow and a bit cumbersome. You can't doubt his enthusiasm. I just doubt his quality.

* Malouda should never play for France. The man is just rubbish now, especially in the centre of midfield. Depressing.

* England not only showed courage, but also great discipline. France showed exactly the opposite. Samir Nasri and Franck Ribery are players of undoubtable talent, but it'd be great if they followed instructions. Boys, if you're playing on the wings, it'd be great if you provided any width. Instead they both kept cutting back inside, stepping on Cabaye's and Benzema's toes. Disappointing.

* Can we just agree that Glenn Johnson is and has been England's starting right-back for a reason all these years. The man has never put a foot wrong for England, and the criticism of Johnson stems from his supposed poor performances for his club. I'm pretty sure I've seen Terry having a few bad performances this season, and yet his place in the team is always assured. Double standards.

* Ashley Cole and Joe Hart are England's only true world-class players, and showed it yet again yesterdat. Nothing to add to this statement really. Simplest thing I'll have to write throughout the Euros.

* Lescott is actually really good. You can argue he's the one who actually bossed that England defeat. The continuation of a great season alongside Kompany for Man City.

* Did Debuchy earn himself a transfer to a big club or what? Whilst we at WwaB are not surprised by his performance, Debuchy will have been unknown to many outside France. Tnink Cabaye, but at right-back. And not because they both played for Lille. Debuchy is that good, as evidenced by the few frights he gave to Ashley Cole.

* Evra is past it. Whilst he didn't have too much to do, it has become common to see Evra jog back when caught out of position or supposed to cover. A disturbing trend that will only continue in the future as he becomes more and more of a liability.

* Welbeck led the line well. He was feeding off scraps yet still managed to turn Mexes (of AC Milan) a few times and held the ball up really well. Echoes of Bobby Zamora for Fulham when Roy was manager there, and this turned out to work out well, didn't it?

* France were disappointing in the second half. No desire, no energy, no tempo. We witnessed walking football, and this played right into England's hands, as the English boys must have gotten tired towards the end.

* Roy's substitutions made absolute sense. Whilst I'm no fan of Jordan Henderson, the boy is full of running and energy. Putting him on for a disappointing Parker made absolute sense. Similarly, switching Young back to LM and putting on Defoe gave ENgland a focal point for any counter-attacks, and Rami and Mexes must have been wary of his pace.

* Again, I must emphasise that this probably was the best result England could get considering the players missing and the circumstances of Hodgson's appointment.



         PLAYER RATINGS

ENGLAND

HART: Parried everything thrown at him. An incredible save in the first half, and held on to several good shots from Benzema in the second. A reassuring presence. 9/10

World Class

JOHNSON: Solid and had Ribery in his back-pocket all game long. Even tried to help out by providing width when England had the ball. A complete performance. 8/10

TERRY: Underrated and solid performance. Was happy to have all the French play in front of him though. 6/10

LESCOTT: Covered Cole the few times Debuchy provided width. Authoritative, simple and effective. Grew as the game went on. Cahill who? 8/10

COLE: The man just never puts a foot wrong. Mr Consistency, even if he found Debuchy to be a handful, especially in the first half. 7/10

MILNER: A willing worker, as usual. Provided width and help in midfield, and that's what he was asked to do. Shame that he missed that sitter. An unsung hero. 7/10

GERRARD: A great performance from the captain. Disciplined, kept things simple and helped Parker out. A commanding game, with a great assist to boot. 8/10

PARKER: Found the going tough, maybe hampered by his Achilles problem. Still seems to be too slow, and his touch was often poor. You can't doubt his commitment, but this might not be enough. 5/10

OXLADE-CHAMBERLAIN: Did well considering the fact this was a competitive game at the Euros against France, and the lad is still 18. Worked hard and tried to provide support. 6/10

YOUNG: Enterprising, creative and a great outlet for Hodgson's time. Gave Diarra the runaround a few times. Was particularly impressive in the first half. Shame his decision-making wasn't as good as his dribbling, as he wasted a few good opportunities. 7/10

WELBECK: Had no support and no great service throughout the game. played the big-man-up-front role to perfection, and even gave Mexes and Rami a scare or two. Useful in relieving pressure. 7/10




FRANCE

LLORIS: Had nothing to do apart from pick the ball out of his net. Even then, didn't know what hit him. 5/10

DEBUCHY: A great performance from right-back. Was solid defensively and probably was France's most dangerous player in the first half, causing countless problems to Oxlade-Chamberlain and even Cole. A very good player full of good intentions. 8/10

Debuchy, a real threat

RAMI: Slow and cumbersome, his distribution was quite poor. Didn't have much to do though. But where was he on England's goal? 5/10

MEXES: Slow but managed to deal with Welbeck with authority every time the young Mancunian tried to turn him. grew a bit into the game. Didn't help France up the tempo by spending too much time exchaning passes with Rami. 5/10

EVRA: Only good contribution was being involved in France's goal by squaring it to Ribery. Was totally absent and provided no width in the second half when France needed it. A lazy performance, especially when compared with Debuchy's. 4/10

DIARRA: Found the going tough against Young, especially in the first half. At fault for the goal. Better in the second half as he nipped many England counters in the bud, whether legally or cynically. 5/10

CABAYE: Also found it tough out there. Enjoyed a good tussle with the England midfielders and had a few good shots, but his distribution was poor. Should have been booked. 6/10

MALOUDA: Didn't up the tempo one bit, no creativity. A useless addition to France's midfield, especially considering that meant playing Nasri on the right. Slow. 2/10

NASRI: Found more options when he drifted into the middle, and scored a great goal. Stepped on Benzema's toes by cutting too much inside. Was meant to play wide right for a reason, and didn't follow instructions, playing right into England's hands. A frustrating performance. 6/10

RIBERY: A wasteful performance. Laid on an assist but otherwise was anonymous, apart from trying to get Johnson sent off for an 'elbow'. Cut too much inside and provided no width. Disappointing. 4/10

BENZEMA: Flashes of brilliance, no serice. Should have played on Terry's shoulders a bit more, even though England defended deep. A few good shots. 6/10