The candidates put forward to take on the role are Cole, Gerrard or Lampard. Gerrard exerted his skills of leadership when he captained England to their most dismal world cup exploits since 1994. Cole and Lampard also helped inspire the team to that low in our fortunes. They are all part of the fools gold generation which managed to turn every tournament into a more abject failure than the tournament before. This is a stigma shared by Rio Ferdinand but he refuses to be captain because we didn't want him when he wanted us. He, like the others though, can only play when fit - which is very rare for all of them - and, anyway, he isn't good enough and neither are the others. "Roo" is, apparently the obvious, even the "stand out" candidate for the pres, despite his abject performance in South Africa to add to his association with, and major role in, every England failure since 2004. The only other candidate favoured by the press is good old Scottie Parker. His advantages, like the other favoured ones are, that he is too old (31) and that he is a good cockney boy, one of 'Arry's to boot. Let's usher in the new age for England by keeping the old failures firmly in the picture.

So, what are Joe Hart's credentials? He's 25 - not exactly too young and he's actually got good experience too. He's played for Birmingham at the wrong end of the PL and City at the top end, and at both clubs he's shown an ability to organise his defence, shout information and instructions to them and to lead by example (ie by playing well). He's been to a world cup and he's played in the champions league. It seems he can't be captain because he's a 'keeper - but that hasn't stopped Italy in 1982 and Spain in 2010 lifting the world cup while captained by the 'keeper. And for me it would put Joe Hart very firmly in the same tradition as that other City legend to captain England - the great Frank Swift, who died today fifty four years ago. Always loved, never forgotten, Frank.