As the texts flooded into my phone that it was now 4-1 to Germany, I sat there in the gurdwara and knew this was an altogether different type of English exit from a major tournament.
Traveling back up north I heard it was woeful and embarrassing, with England being outplayed, outclassed and out-thought. So it came as a bit of a surprise when I settled down in the middle of the night to see the ITV highlights, and we didn't look that bad when we had the ball. It seemed we were caught out due to woeful and embarrassing defending more than anything. Putting this down to biased editing, I went on with my life.
So, with a confused brain, I decided it best that all my England points of view should conform to the national consensus - moronic arguments about pay packages (which I'll come to later) and a team that all seems to like drinking it's own Kool Aid (aka believe themselves to be better than they actually are). Until I watched the full ninety minutes yesterday.

People really have no idea what they're banging on about, do they? Just because the papers all adhere to the newest English Football Doomsday protocol (we've had so many), doesn't mean people should dismiss how the match actually panned out.
What We All Know.
That the way England defended was beyond any explanation outside of the England set-up. There's no point listening to us all gabbing about how reckless and indisciplined it was (both being very English traits anyway). We all saw John Terry go up for the free kick at 2-1 down, and then play 'tricky winger' for the throw-in at 3-1 - no defender would do this. But a baby-haired tosser with a Leader Complex would, being a twat that has been overrated from Jump Street (I've said this for ages by the way, but nobody listened, tut).
But what we should be asking is who trained the team to defend like it did, and what explanations have they got for us. And if we're going there, I'd like to know the honest thoughts of the players and manager on the whole campaign - not just one game.
What We All Should Know.
The 2-2 disallowed goal was a major 'game changer'. There, I said it, and I enjoyed it too.

Yes, we may have gone on to lose 6-2, but that's not the point. The point is that at this stage we may have scraped a win on penalties, Rooney could have scored the goal of the tournament, Capello could have slapped Joachim, and we would not have had Germany just sit back for the whole second half. Basically, anything could have happened.
A mate of mine who's against technology in football insists it takes the purity out of the game, detracts from the drama, undermines the ref's authority and can't be in place at all levels of the sport.
To him, and anyone who says the same, I just want to say:
1) That if a sport is relying on refereeing mistakes to add drama and purity to it, then there's something seriously wrong with that sport. Football has so much drama anyway, it doesn't need to stake fairness to add more.
2) So what if technology can't be in place at all levels of the game? Just because the Langold Boys team doesn't get the same treatment as countries at the 2010 World Cup, it doesn't mean nations should be unfairly kicked out of a tournament that only rolls around every four years.
3) Technology isn't the be all and end all, you dicks, it's an AID for the ref. He chooses to use it or not, in order to correct any human errors. Simple.
4) I don't know the exact reasoning why FIFA don't want to use technology in football, but to not use it is the equivalent of you being told by your Geography teacher that you can't use the internet to research your GCSE project on silt.
Other than that, I just want to address my confusion at the start - about us being outclassed. I opt to think that we were out-thought, as Germany played tidy and precise football - but in the large part it was ineffectual. They let us keep the ball for long periods, probably because they knew we'd lose it from a hopeful sixty yard pass from the back. Honigstein says it best:
"The German's were better on the ball, had a better game plan and they had individuals who surprised themselves by reaching new heights."
England lacked courage in their football, had a minimal number of decisive attacks, and simply weren't good enough. This is true. But to say the Germans outclassed England totally by running rings round us, is simply uneducated.
Outclassed is Italy in the 1970 World Cup Final. Look it up you Premier League-supporting muppets.
It is the score-line and the team's defending that is humiliating. Not the ambition of the England team, that's just under the tag of 'not good enough'. For me, Algeria was a far worse performance as we really lacked any attacking threat, invention or general football demeanour in that one (yes, I know Hansen said the Germany game was four levels below the Algeria one, but he's still Scottish). Hey, we may as well go on and lose 4-1 if we're 2-1 down and chasing it, that's what I was taught in P.E. anyway.
Quickly - England Fans.
Please stopping being stupid. That's all I ask of you. I've lost count the amount of times I've heard fans recite word for word what the papers are saying - grow your own opinions in that thing above your eyes.
Listening to 5Live and Talksport I heard the phrase 'technical ability' (and England's lack of it) more than fifty times in fifteen minutes. Do these people even know what this phrase means? To me, it just seems a buzz word for idiocy, and highlights the fact that you really have nothing new to say.
Also, if you made a mistake then own up to it. There's so many people I personally know who agreed with Phil Thompson that Rooney was "streets ahead" of Messi. But now, they've changed their mind, but not in admitting that they were wrong, but because Rooney didn't turn up this summer. This kind of thinking is exactly why fans are the worst people to listen to when it comes to our national side - they just personify the island mentality we have of a 'divine right' to be better than everyone else at football.
We are not. And as for moaning about the wages of these players and how that makes them rubbish...who the f**k do you think funds the Premier League circus you mong? It's an entertainment industry that we all pay into, so don't moan about the wages - stop paying and get off the ride. Now.
Quote Of The Week.
When throwing a hissy fit on BBC radio about the behaviour of the England players, this fan attempted to back Fabio - only to make me realise this is why fans know Sweet FA really.
"We could have had Mickey Mouse in charge of the England team, and we still wouldn't have done better."
A Word On Capello.
We need to break this English trend of expecting, failing and repeating again, and for that reason I think we should keep Don Fabio in charge. That, and the fact that if Redknapp takes charge of England then I truly will stop watching football.
In this country, the Premier League is a foreign league. Nobody outside of it can relate to it, but really want to be in it. It's a bit like London. With the silly amount of foreign influence in the league, why then do you want an Englishmen to be in charge of the players who ply their trade here? Plus, the seal has been broken since Sven, so we're way past this argument now.
If a lot of our English players played abroad, and the England team had a uniform style and formation that they could adapt to (a la Brazil or Argentina) then yes, get an Englishmen in charge. But I'd rather have miscommunication from my manager if he can then bring something new to the set up. Yes, I know, Don Fabio is yet to do this - but he does need time, and at his age the question is if he's really up for it. I don't think anybody has a good replacement in mind, and remember - this is not simply a case of bad team management, so let's not repeat our mistakes.
And if that's not convincing you, well read this then. Ha!
Alright Then Billy Big Bollocks, What Do You Suggest?
First, let's just admit that the national side is not a major priority in this country, and the club game is. Done? Good, now we can move on.
The Premier League is our greatest strength, as well as our greatest weakness. A player like Connor Wickham is being praised to the high heavens within the sport, but have we noticed? Well, he's not playing in the Premier League, so of course not.
Look, Trevor Brooking believes that the current England Under 17's side is the best passing group we've ever had, and I for one take his word on it (he's not one for hyperbole). But do we have a bridge from where these young players can break into the top flight football here? Not so much, so who do we call?
The F Bloody A.
I have to agree with Crissy Waddle on how the FA approach the national side, and our stance with adopting foreign systems. Taking into account this brilliant article showing just how hard it is to change anything in English football, we still have to look to the future.

No matter how long it takes us to adapt and change for the good of our national game, we can't keep trudging out these old promises of 'inquiries into the English game', 'not enough coaches' and 'root and branch reviews' - these arguments are simply echoes from a post-Graham Taylor era. Yet, at the moment, we're doing it again. So sad.
If we should look at anyone for tips, it should be the Germans. From the year 2000, they knew their national game needed to change if it was to compete. After looking at French academies, they decided to take a massive step and get the DFB to work with the Bundesliga for the benefit of the national side (making sure every time had an academy and such like).
So, instead of the Premier League taking over the England team, why not work with the FA? Learn from this failed experiment by giving our youth policies a common goal, by building Burton to create an influx of English coaches, by aiming to provide our national manager with a massive menu of different players to pick from (so players can fill in, like Khedira for Ballack) and basically by seeing just how this relationship benefitted the Germans.
To come back to the start of this post, this was an altogether different exit for England, because this time even our best excuse and scapegoat can't hide the fact that there is something dangerously wrong within the English game. But it can change, if the right people make the right decisions and earn their pay packets.
I still believe that this New Age of English football that I hang on to, can be born out of this 4-1 result. Maybe, years later we can look back on the 2010 World Cup as a turning point in our footballing history, when we started to wrong all the rights about our national game. Maybe, just maybe.

























