the final is here, almost

and everyone, except the Germans of course, wants Spain to win. Europe is unified in its desire to see 'anyone but Germany'. Spain have been great. Not only have they demonstrated the attacking panache you would always expect from them, but they have proved solid defensively. Reducing Russia and Italy to a handful of shots on goal. solid in all areas, and with a keeper of Billy the Fish like agility, Spain are the clear favourites.

But never count out Germany. That old chesnut. Its true. Germany have been uncharacteristically inconsistent in these championships-after a convincing win against Poland, they lost to Croatia and struggled passed Austria, before impressing against Portugal, and yet while they seemed woeful against the Turks, they are surely due to another impressive game in the final. So everything is normal. Either team coud win it.

And now on to Turkey, who completely won me over the other night. I was quite moved by the end, which is weird. I was thinking about how shit the Turks are spoken about by many Germans, always going on about the "Turkish problem", and how the endeavour and enterprise they demonstrated, reflected their people in such a good, and largely accurate, light. They did themselves proud. I for one have been won over to Turkish football- in a way I wasn't by Greece's football 4 years earlier, when that nation played the triumphing underdog.

And then to Russia, who while being a pretty useful team, were not as good as everyone thought. In the opinion of football overdose their spectacular win over Holland can be put down not only to an excellent collective performance, especially going forward, but also to the briefing and insight of Gus Hiddink- who surely knew the dutch players and tactics inside and out. This is not to detract from Russia though-they are at least as good as England. The sooner the English climb down off that silly looking patriotic hobby horse, and realise they are not that good just because they play in the filthy rich premiership, the better.

Finally, I enjoyed the 5 live commentary the other day, when it accompanied the pictures. When that power cut kicked in. Can't we have them do the telly commentary all the time? they were soooooo much better.

In preparation for the European Cup final clash

between Man U and Chelsea the Russian government have re-opened the archipelagos. With 50,000 rowdy fans expected to descend upon the Russian capital special security measures have been taken. It is thought that the re-opening of the remote Siberian prison outposts, which do not have Sky TV, or indeed duvets, will be a sufficient deterrent for potential hooligans to stay on the straight and narrow and not fcuk da p'lice. Anyone seen taunting the Russian anti-terrorism enforcement who will be patrolling (most of whom are more familiar with militant checynans than Terry Christian sounding football supporters), pissing in public, or chanting in an unruly manner, will be sent directly to the tundra, and made to mine salt, with just the sexual attention of 'Igor' for entertainment on the long, long, winter nights. After being given a good kick-in.

"We just want them to come and enjoy the game, the vodka, and the women." said a spokesman for Russian tourism. "Minni Driver's character in Goldeneye was not a caricature!" Insulting Russian women everywhere.


Meanwhile Edwin Van De Saar has been commenting on the literal meaning of English words. "When I first that we were to 'clash' with Chelsea I was puzzled." Said the polylinguist. "For me 'clash' is the sound that saucepans make when they are struck together. That this word should have such diverse usage and connotations is indeed an example of the endless curiosity and beauty of the English language."

Also revealed today was the level of debt enjoyed by Chelsea is over 500 million pounds, the majority of which is in the form of a private, interestless debt, to club chairman Roman Abramovic. Nice. This allows Chelsea to operate at a loss. What was not revealed was that Abramovic and his minions could, technically, use this debt 'owed' to them, to secure more debt themselves. And then use this debt to secure more debt, which in turn could be used to secure more debt, and so forth, all underwritten against his vast personal wealth. Amazing. The scale of his empire, and how it could be used, is devastating. I'd love to see Roman Abramovic take the chair on Martin Lewis' money saving show It Pays To Watch. "yes roman, you have millions in the bank, but do you use a cash back credit card? how much do you pay on energy bills? have you thought of swapping energy provider?" To which Roman could reply "when I pay my energy bills I make myself profit!" Dazzling, baffling, and corrupt, all in one go.

would you trust this man?

Would you sleep with this man? He looks like he might need to revert to rape. Meet Aresenal's latest big shareholder.

After one nation socialism was rolled back in the USSR a generation of KGB affiliated robber barons helped privatise the bits of the Russian economy that were still delivering. Thus denying vast swathes of the Russian populace of taxation revenue, and making the Forbes list practically overnight. While we in the west would commonly refer to this as being a gangster, a more popular euphemism as far as Russia is concerned, especially because of the huge potential for business with western banks, is progressive. Just ask Condoleeza Rice.

Since harbouring lofty political ambitions is a rather risky aspiraton in Russia these days (it always has been, actually) the best bet for multi-billionaires is to get the hell out of Russia and find somewhere safe to hide their embezzeled millions. If football had been then as it is now Al Capone could have ended his days with the terraces of say, Loftus Lane, singing his name, rather than watching re-runs of Ice Station Zebra in Alacatraz. How different would the world have been then? We would never have had Brian De Palma's Untouchables. Sean Connery might never have won an oscar. Kevin Costner might never have made the big time.

Welcome to the premiership Mr Usmanov.

When England are playing well:

EN-GER-LAND
when England are disappointing: en-guh-land.

For my part I only ever support England once Wales have been knocked out of the major tournaments i.e.always by the start of the the tournament proper. This means I miss out on the plunging all consuming lows that reach most international supporters. The closest I have ever come to it was when Wales were knocked out by Russia in the play-offs a couple of years back. Knocked out by Russia. There could be a mini-trend developing here.

Of course I support England and Wales jointly in the cricket as they have the same team, and only ever support Wales in the rugby. This is because English rugby players strike me as insufferable gits, and the Welsh are mostly all good comprehensive school lads, like myself.

What does all this prove? Other than that I am a bit of bi-partisan cunt. That nationality is a movable feast of course, like political or sexual persuasion. Oddly enough nationality is more flexible than team loyalty. While no-one really minds if I'm supporting England or Wales, or perversely both, or even if I become Uruguayan. But if I were to switch alliegances from Everton to say, Man U, that would mark me out as some kind of weird traitor.

Amazingly these kind of things do happen. I once met a lifelong Millwall fan who swapped sides. To Chelsea. "Millwall" he said, "were too boring." And that they were "painful to watch". Everyone he made the mistake of telling about this were aghast. General concensus was that if someone stuck his head on a pole in tower bridge it would be no bad thing (he was not just a footballing turncoat but also worked in IT). Knowing Millwall fans maybe someone already has.