By the next world cup, Terry should still be in excellent form (29-year-old central defenders are often at their peak), whereas at 30 Gerrard will be very old for a marauding midfielder. Choosing Gerrard now invites the same type of problem Erickson had this time round with Beckham.

I’ll second that, and what’s more, Wayne Rooney is a little thug. Previous red cards for shoving opposing players in the face after the whistle, etc. Sportswriters indulgently refer to his “mercurial temperament” but he should really be stripped of the national colours for dishonoring Queen and country. Except you’d get laughed at in England for such high-minded pretension.

That said, look at the rest of this tournament: pocked and marred by turf-diving nancies and aggro assholes from every nation, fans everywhere disgusted by the cynical dishonest way the game is played now. If there was one nation poised better than any other to play good clean football it was Britain – Rooney is only the third Englishman sent off in a WC game, because there is a strong tradition of English fair play, etc.

England could have fielded an honourable side, and though they might not have lifted the trophy, they would have won the admiration of the world, for playing the game idealistically in a debased and cynical age. Instead they fielded a thorough blackguard, called upon him to be the English messiah, no less, and got an entirely predictable result.

A team full of David Beckhams, now, that would be a team to watch. They might not win every match but they would surely restore the “beautiful game.”

(I’m for eliminating penalty kicks entirely, myself. But I love marathon sporting events, and hate the arbitrariness of penalties.)

All the Beckham criticism rubs me the wrong way; he’s a bit lazy and invisible much of the time but I’ve never seen a footballer who can place the ball as precisely as he can, and his corners and free kicks must horrify his opponents. He’s one of those players who can carry a game on his shoulders with only a moment’s involvement.

The greatest living Englishman isn’t Andrew Sullivan? Huh?

I didn’t mean to suggest that having a world class scorer guarantees a trip to the semis – only that lacking one makes it very difficult to advance that far.

I did mention both Ronaldos in my list – including Cristiano from Portugal. Pauleta, Figo and C. Ronaldo all appear to me to be more dangerous scoring threats than anyone England had out there yesterday. I’m sure with Owen and a 100% Rooney, England would have a much more potent attack. But I think Portugal has had the stronger side overall in this particular tournament.

Ray is right. Lennon always made England more threatening. Beckham is a one-trick pony.

All that said, my main beef with England was why they didn’t dominate midfield, with Gerrard, Lampard, Cole and the (excellent) Hargreaves.

“Bowie” is a stage name, which David Jones adopted to avoid confusion with the Monkees singer.

The overall quality of the team guaranteed competitive games and promising possessions. But in soc-foot-cer-ball you need to have some players who can put the ball in the net. And in the World Cup you need world class scorers to beat world class defenders.

With no Owen and a hobbled Rooney, England had no world class finishers on its squad: no Klose, no Ronaldo, no Henry, no Ronaldinho, no the other Ronaldo, no Raul, no Shevchenko, no Robben.

Compare France. France played a fine all-around game against Brazil, but in the end it was Zidane to Henry that made the difference.