Is asking for common sense from FIFA too much?

The Sunday Times undercover report about vote selling ahead of the 2018 and 2022 World Cup decision (which I can't link you to due to their ridiculous pay wall, so here's the BBC report) has, according to one FIFA source "significantly harmed" England's bid for the 2018 World Cup.

Firstly, it would be foolish to claim there aren't significant problems with the British press, especially in relation to footballs ever increasing celebrity culture. But, despite this, England is by far and away the best choice for hosting the 2018 World Cup. FIFA need to get over themselves and recognise this.

England could quite easily host the tournament tomorrow. The stadiums, the fans and the transport links are, more or less, already there. During their visit earlier in the year, FIFA only raised concerns over accommodation. Eight years to build a few new hotels and improve transport links is well within England's ability, especially as accommodation and transport in the capital will be improved as part of the 2012 Olympics.

In addition, England has taken great strides in recent years to get rid of the problems that troubled the game for so long. Cases of hooliganism, racism and other fan troubles have dropped drastically due to measures taken by the FA to get the game back to how it should be. This years World Cup in South Africa perfectly illustrates how the reputation of the English supporters has changed from drunken, violent yobs to well behaved, pleasant tourists (who are, admittedly, still drunk).

Compare that to Spain (bidding to co-host with Portugal), current European and World Champions and one of England's rivals for the 2018 World Cup. Spain, like England, has the infrastructure in place to host a World Cup tomorrow. However, there is still a massive problem there with racism. How will the African nations in particular cope with barrages of monkey chants being hurled their way, as players such as Samuel Eto'o and Thierry Henry endured during their career there? Do we want a World Cup where such repulsive, base levels of decency are encountered in the stands?

And then there is Russia, the other major rival to England's bid. Russia, unlike Spain and England, would be unlikely to be able to host a tournament of the World Cup's scale tomorrow. It would require the eight years in which to get ready and, like Spain, still has troubles with its fans.

Make no mistake, I'm not claiming that English football is entirely free of its demons. Far from it. To do so would be naive. What I am saying is that England, while not perfect, has recognised the flaws with its game and striven to make amends.

Can the same be said of Spain and Russia?

Attack on the Togo team bus raises the question: Is Africa ready to host something as massive as the World Cup?

The horrific attack on the Togo national football team and their subsequent withdrawal from the African Cup of Nations has thrown the competition into chaos. It also raises serious questions over Africa's capability to host a tournament as massive as the World Cup. Is Africa ready to host the World Cup when their continent can even host its own competition without team buses being shot at?

The massive influx of teams, their entourage and their fans will prove a logistical nightmare for South African security. While this attack in Angola should serve as a wake up to security forces and lead to improved security, can they ensure peoples safety throughout the competition?

South Africa is one of, if not the, most dangerous places on the planet. With rape, murder, car jackings and assault prevalent, is the most developed country in Africa worthy of hosting something as massive the World Cup? It's not helped by the fact that corruption is also prevalent in South Africa (and Africa in general), so why did FIFA decide that South Africa was fit to host the World Cup? Some sense of fairness that each continent should host it, I suppose?

The fact that FIFA have given the 2014 World Cup to Brazil, another country with massive crime and corruption rates, just compounds the matter. Who's getting it next? China?

It should be said that Brazil have at least hosted the competition before and shown they can do it, as well as being 5 times winners. South Africa have no such claim and were even banned from the World Cup until 1994 because of apartheid. Maybe FIFA see it as some way of recognising South Africa's overcoming of apartheid, but giving them the World Cup when they still have so many problems is not the right way to do it.

Get your vuvuzelas out! My predictions for the World Cup.

So the draw for the greatest sporting event has been made and England have been handed a fantastic chance to go far in this competition. Without further ado, my predictions (and explanations) for the 2010 World Cup!

Group A
1. France - 7pts
2. Uruguay - 4pts
3. Mexico - 3pts
4. South Africa - 1pts

Unfortunately for the hosts they're going to make history as the first host side to go out at the group stage. They've got some good players, but are going to be completely outclassed by the three other teams in their group. That being said, I think they'll start well and get a 1-1 draw against Mexico.
France are utterly mediocre compared to what they used to be. Their saving grace here is that they'll get through on sheer talent alone. Like Argentina they're let down managerially. The experienced players are over the hill and the players in their prime aren't experienced enough at this level.
Uruguay are better than Mexico in my opinion. Mexico are very toothless going forward with their main centre forward, Cuauhtémoc Blanco, 37 by the time summer rolls round. Uruguay on the other hand have Diego Forlan, one of the best strikers in Europe at the moment, leading their front line.

Group B
1. Argentina - 9pts
2. Nigeria - 4pts
3. S. Korea - 4pts
4. Greece - 0pts

That's right, Argentina to win all their group games. Yes they cocked up their qualifying campaign rather well and yes they're managed by someone so incomptent it makes Raymond Domenech look like Alex Feruson. But this is a team with Lionel Messi, Javier Mascherano, Carlos Tevez and Walter Samuel available to them, they should breeze through this group. That being said, like England they have real problems between the sticks. They have a good up and coming goalie with Oscar Ustari but he's only played for them once, while Leo Franco and Roberto Abbondanzierri, their two most experienced goalies, have both been ignored by Maradonna.
The rest of this group is a bunch of mediocre national squads. Korea won't match the achievements of 2002, nor Greece 2004. Nigeria are the only other team in this group with the depth and quality to make a go of it.

Group C
1. England - 7pts
2. USA - 6pts
3. Slovenia - 2pts
4. Algeria - 1pts

England couldn't really have asked for a better group. The USA and Slovenia are beatable without being push overs, so we shouldn't get too complacent. Algeria are a team there for the taking as far as I'm concerned. Whoever we have in goal shouldn't be too heavily tested against any of these sides, although I expect Slovenia to surprise us with a draw. Dunno why, I just do.
The USA should do well in this group. They're a good team with some good players and are difficult to break down. Clint Dempsey and Tim Howard are known quantities to us here in England and are both cracking players. Players such as Landon Donovan also provide a real threat on goal as well.

Group D
1. Germany - 7pts
2. Ghana - 5pts
3. Serbia - 2pts
4. Australia - 1pts

Germany to win the group with their typical efficiency. With players like Ballack, Podolski, Schweinsteiger, Gomes and Klose they'll inevitably do well and will overpower the rest of their group. Only sticking point for them will be Ghana. I can see that game getting mired in the middle of the park as both sides strong midfields slug it out.
Talking of Ghana, they'll do well in this group. With Michael Essien, Sulley Muntari and Stephen Appiah in midfield they'll be able to choke other teams while also getting the ball to their forward quickly and accurately.
Serbia are a good side and are unfortunate to land this group. In another group they'd have stood a solid chance of getting through. A good side with some good players, let down by no definite article. Their main striker in Nikola Zigic who can barely get a game for Valencia.
Australia aren't the team of four years ago. No depth, no quality, will get a get a point out of sheer determination and stubbornness.

Group E
1. Holland - 7pts
2. Cameroon - 5pts
3. Denmark - 2pts
4. Japan - 1pts

Ah Holland, you little tease. You promise so much and deliver so little. Attractive, flowing football is all well and good, but not when you haven't the grit to knuckle down when needed. I can see a good game between them and Cameroon (2-2). Eto'o will have a field day against their back line, but the rest of the squad will let him down. The Dutch really do have a problem defence. Not one player in their backline is world class and with Van der Sar now retired from the international stage they don't have him to fall back on.
Denmark and Japan are much like Korea and Greece, quite mediocre. Not their fault of course, but they'll have a poor tournament.

Group F
1. Italy - 9pts
2. Paraguay - 4pts
3. Slovakia - 4pts
4. New Zealand - 0pts

The World Champions will qualify with ease from this group. They'll be slow to start and may have to grind out a result against Paraguay, but a demolition of New Zealand will set them well on their way.
Paraguay and Slovakia will be seperated solely on goal difference. It really comes down to who can give New Zealand the biggest hiding really.
As for the Kiwi's, what the record for the most goals conceded in the group stage?

Group G
1. Brazil - 9pts
2. Ivory Coast - 6pts
3. Portugal - 3pts
4. North Korea - 0pts

Group of Death, how nice of you to join us! This group contains two of the teams England desperately wanted to avoid in Portugal and the Ivory Coast, while Brazil will always be a monumental threat, especially when going forward.
I reckon the Brazilians can win all these matches, I really do. They've had a transformation under Dunga, similar to the one England's had under Fabio Capello. Gone is the celebrity culture of Brazil-that-was and in is the no-nonsense, well balanced game which is utterly devastating. Whereas pre-Dunga they were like Real Madrid, a bunch of stars playing football, now they're Barcelona, footballers first who just happen to be stars as well.
I've gone for the Ivory Coast to take the other qualification spot. They've a fantastic spine to the team, while Didier Drogba is in the form of his life. Yes the Portugese have Ronaldo, who is without doubt an amazing player. However, that's about it. No-one in that Portugal side leaps out at me bar him. If he has a bad tournament, Portugal have a bad tournament. The two are mutually inclusive.
Poor North Korea though. Their glorious leader Kim-Jong Il has said that North Korean matches in South Africa will only be aired if they win. Looks like North Koreans won't be seeing much of South Africa, then...

Group H
1. Spain - 9pts
2. Chile - 4pts
3. Switzerland - 4pts
4. Honduras - 0pts

Spain to dominate this group easily. Chile will put up a fight, but that's about it. Spain have far too much attacking talent to not swat any of these teams out of the way.
Chile and Switzerland seem quite evenly matched for me. No real match winners, nothing to really shout about. This game will be rather boring.
Honduras will get a thorough dicking by everyone. Like New Zealand, I've no idea how they even qualified.

Now that's the group stages done and dusted, onto the meat and potatoes of the competition: the knockout stages.

Second Round:
France 2 - 1 Nigeria
England 2 - 1 Ghana
Germany 1 - 0 USA (AET)
Argentina 1 - 1 Uruguay (Argentina win on penalties)
Holland 2 - 0 Paraguay
Brazil 3 - 0 Chile
Italy 2 - 1 Cameroon (AET)
Spain 2 - 1 Ivory Coast

Quick Summary:
France, England, Holland, Brazil and Spain all overcome their opponents due to their depth and quality. Germany to have a tough time against the Americans due to their tight-knit nature and organisation. Argentina and Uruguay will be a tough one for both sides, but Argentina's depth of star players will see them through a shootout. Italy to win due to superior fitness levels deep into extra time.

Quarter Finals:
Holland 1 - 1 Brazil (Brazil win on penalties)
England 1 - 0 France
Argentina 0 - 2 Germany
Italy 1 - 2 Spain

Quick Summary:
Holland and Brazil will go right to the wire. Heroics by Julio Cesar keep Brazil in the competition.
England score early and grind out a win against a lacklustre French side. Lack of decent service to Henry/Benzema/Anelka to be their undoing.
Argentina's luck runs out against a highly organised German side. This game should be won from the touchline, with Maradonna running round like a headless chicken and Joachim Low keeping cool and exploiting the lack of Argentinian leadership.
Italy and Spain to be the most entertaining match of the tournment so far. Immovable object versus unstoppable force time. Italy to score from a set-piece, but Spain just edge it due to relentless pressure.

Semi Finals:
England 0 - 2 Brazil
Germany 0 - 1 Spain

Quick Summary:
England's intrepid run comes to a brutal end. Defensive fumbles aplenty is the dish of the day. I can see the pace of Brazil causing havoc for what is quite a slow defence (with the exception of Ashley Cole).
Germany efficiency outdone by Spanish elegance.

Third Place Play-Off:
Germany 1 - 1 England (England win on penalties)

Quick Summary:
Well it has to happen some time...

Final:
Brazil 2 - 1 Spain

Quick Summary:
Brazil's improved defensive qualities see them lifting the trophy for the sixth time. Power and pace combined will shatter a tired Spanish squad.

Top Goalscorer:
Luis Fabiano

Now these could all be totally wrong, and most likely will be, but it'd be a good tournament if it played out like this. Brazil vs Spain is probably the best final I can think of if I'm to be honest.

How to solve play off drama in one simple step.

Get rid of them!

Honestly, why is this so hard to understand? Play offs are fundamentally unfair. Teams should be rewarded by playing consistently through a campaign. If they finish one spot behind the current automatic qualifiers/promoters then they should qualify or get promoted just as equally, not forced to play another round of games designed only to line the pockets of FIFA/UEFA/FA beaurocrats!

This case is perfectly highlighted by the Ireland vs France game last night. Ireland deserve to be in South Africa this summer, France do not. Ireland managed to go through the entire first qualification phase undefeated, despite being in a tougher group than the French. However, France will be in the World Cup. In what way, shape or form is this fair?

To compound matters, the way the French beat the Irish was through an act of blatant, if uncharacteristic, cheating by Thierry Henry. I'm not saying that the match should be replayed, that'd be ludicrous and open up a whole new can of worms. However, in order to prevent such monumental cock ups something has to be done.

Video technology has to be introduced, even if it's just in a limited capacity. It works in every other sport that it's been tried in, so why not football? People argue that it'd break up the flow of play but that's nonsense. In cases such as the one last night, how much longer would it have taken to check the videos than it did to stop players protesting?

This doesn't go for just play-offs either. It should be implemented across the board for higher level games. With football being the multi-billion pound industry that it is, shouldn't fairness be a critical issue?