Somehow, there is always a stigma attached to English defeats against New Zealand. England's farcical Ashes campaign in 1990-91, for instance, became even more embarrassing when they failed to overcome the Kiwis in both the Benson & Hedges World Series, and the subsequent three-match one-day tour.

And if that's the case, then today, the team took a significant stride towards completing their most ignominious tour of all time. But England better get used to the feeling. On March 16, in less than two months' time, their World Cup campaign gets underway against the same opponents in St Lucia, and on this evidence, they'll be lucky to put even Kenya, the former semi-finalists, and the John-Davison-powered Canada in their place.

In the meantime, the CB Series is providing quite enough spleen-venting among the press corps. One-day cricket brings everyone all out in a rash of adjectives. A quick scour of the wires reveals that, on other pages, England's latest performance has been described as "woeful", "desperate", "shambolic", "pathetic" and "flaky", as they were "hammered", "blitzed", "trounced" and "destroyed" by the "rampant", "buoyant" and "determined" Kiwis.

And to that, England might be expected to respond: "Bovvered?" Their attitude to one-day cricket is as fickle as the entourage of WAGs and infants that has been trailing around in the team's wake all winter, although - tellingly - there has been no-one in the set-up willing to have a good old-fashioned tantrum. A combination of Duncan Fletcher's impassivity and Andrew Flintoff's banality has seen to that. "The lads are trying their damnedest to win games," was Freddie's latest variation on the same soundbite, another infuriatingly deadpan response to a flatlining tour.

And when the cameras panned in on the dressing-room, Fletcher's hangdoggy-in-the-window expression was, to the average long-suffering England fan, every bit as slappable as Ricky Ponting had found it to be at Trent Bridge in 2005. Quite how the shunned Chris Read, sitting in fulminating silence beside him, resisted the temptation, no-one will ever know.

Last year, Fletcher infamously claimed that he knew "ten of the eleven players" whom he would like to have playing at St Lucia on March 16 for the opening match of the World Cup. For all we know, he still moans "Jonesy" and "Tresco" in his sleep to this day. But it's time to wake up and smell the coffee, Duncan. Those boys are gone, and they ain't coming back.

It's quite an irony, given the disparaging comments that Fletcher has long been making about county cricket, that three of the key figures as England claw their way to the start of another World Cup campaign, are Jon Lewis, Paul Nixon and Mal Loye - thirtysomethings one and all, and men who owe their very livelihoods to that maligned county treadmill. It's certainly not how England would have planned their winter. But seeing as they didn't actually bother to plan it in the first place, it seems about fair.

But enough pontificating about the same old spiel. It really is too depressing. Perhaps, in the spirit of this bloated, corporatised era of the game, it's time to automate our reports on these abominable contests. In fact, why wait for the technology to catch up? There is already in existence a handy 'bullshit generator' that, with a couple of quick tweaks, could easily churn out 700 words for next Friday's 252-run defeat against the Aussies.

I've been playing with it for the last five minutes and the machine has already identified three of Team England's key requirements, which is three more than any of Flintoff and Fletcher's press conferences have so far managed. Three quick clicks reveal that they need to "engineer robust partnerships", "target seamless channels" and "unleash next-generation models". Over to you Mr Ken Schofield and the ECB Review Committee. Let's see if you can better that bull, on and off the pitch.

I wonder at what point Flintoff will realise he is fast becoming damaged goods, not so much by dint of his performances, but by the pathetic efforts of his team mates. Nice guy that he is, he can't communicate the frustration he must be feeling.

And yet another World Cup humiliation comes thundering over the horizon. Yet this has been Oh so predictable since, believe it or not, 2001. After the world cup debacle under Stewart, we put together a squad that trounced Zim. Then we broke it up and tried something else. That didn't work, so back to the drawing board. And on it went.

England's selectors have destroyed our ODI team by failing to have any vision, any clue, of where the team is going. Let's try Jon Lewis. Or maybe Kabir Ali? Why not give Ryan Sidebottom a try? Chris Silverwood? Sure, throw him in. Mahmood? Maybe. Don't forget Harmison, Kirtley, Plunkett, Tremlett, Anderson, SiJo, Broad, Bresnan, Chapple, Wharf, Johnson and Tudor.

So, as other sides are packed with players with 100+ and 200+ ODIs, we probably have the biggest pool of international 'talent' in the world. And not a bloody clue what to do with them all.

Forget this world cup, it's gone. Pick 15-20 players for the next one, and get them 50 ODIs each between now and then.

But this won't happen. We'll stick with pick n' mix selections, and in 4 years time we'll be in exactly the same situation as we are now.

"The lads are trying their damnedest..."
i can think of atleast one sponsor who might sign them up next year for modelling contracts: Pfizer
any others you think?

it seems the English do not have any interst in playing the game and i mean both the forms (on current evidence).. remember the Ashes...do u still remember it?...oh how can one forgot tht shameful display (were they playing grade cricket?)..even Bangladesh would have done better (hopefully)...and you know what after all the hype and all the excitement of previous Ashes settling down and the 5-0 drubbing from the masters (of the cricketing world)......i think now we are now able to see how the English mind works...looks like the fairy tale has come to an end..back to reality for the POMS..kinda sad end though, but wat the hell..

Whilst the bowling display was pleasing the batting is woeful.
The England Bastsmen are incompetant in this form of the game. Firstly, apart from Loye's 36 off 36 against Oz on debut; no one at the top of innings tries to go over the top. Hence our scored after 15 overs are always way behind the run rate and we are playing catch up.
The batting seems devoid of any plan/ideas. It is just "Go out and bat". It is embrassing watching Bell, Strauss and Collingwood just nibble the ball around for 1's. It isn't a test match boys. For me Strauss must depart the top order when Vaughan is fit and Bell should be dropped.
Like the test matches there is a lack of intent in the batting (Except Loye, Fred and KP) instead of the Aussie "I'm coming at you".
Plus, why do we have Dalrymple at 8? Plus, what does Chris Read have to do, surely he is a better option than a 36 year old?

I think it's about time we start looking at the positive to come out of this tour for England....at least they are consistent.

The leadership and management on this tour is totally discredited, Fletcher must go, Flintoff is not captaincy material either in judgement or leadership. It is a shame that Fletchers term of office has been so tarnished by this tour after all the good he has done previously but he has been in post too long and his judgement has failed him. The selectors must also take a lot of blame,surely when selecting a squad they have a strategy in mind agreed with coach and captain. Why was this jettisoned by coach and captain as soon as they landed in Oz, Fletcher even felt he had to justify himself by committing the cardinal sin of slagging off a player in public, Read who may or may not have been able to stand the pressure, now we will never know although why everybody ignored Rod Marshes opinion, a man not known for suffering fools and who did as much as anybody to improve the standard of English cricket. Panesar also damned with faint praise and then replaced.Tresco who obviously wasn't up to it.If the coach is going to ignore that strategy then he should have picked the team.
The enquiry will be a whitewash, somebody, probably Fletcher will have all the blame (not everything is his fault) and the rest will carry on as before, why is Boycott not on the team, probably because the ECB are frightened of him and his incisive grasp of the game, he is a far better commentator than he was batsman and is as knowledgible as anyone available.
I look forward to further humiliation and a rearranging of the deck chairs while the band plays on.

I think that all Contracts for England players be scrapped and that they be paid on results. This might make them concentrate their minds on the job at hand.

It is indeed a conundrum, Andrew. Two questions:

WHY don't England care about one-day cricket? How can such an unprofessional attitude have developed and entrenched itself?

The counties play as much one-day cricket as any domestic teams anywhere in the world. How can the international side be so clueless?

I can understand dispirited and demorlaised displays in the wake of the Ashes, but their capitulation from a good position against New Zealand just looked disinterested, as if they don't care. If they are not even motivated enough to try and avoid humiliation, the next month could do more damage to England's one-day game than they can ever hope to fix just by bringing back Pietersen!

And the way England are going at the moment, they'd struggle even with Andrew's bullsh*t generator - they might find it hard to understand "24/7" in terms of unstinting effort, rather than an actual scoreboard target for the top- and middle-order!

Um, it's the batting duncan, the batting. Why haven't the england management clocked on to something that's so glaringly obvious to the rest of us? during the test matches we collapsed in at least one innings of every match - the key reason we lost the ashes so comprehensively. we obviously should have played six batsmen in most tests. worse though, this was all entirely predictable because we're no good at one-day cricket - a game designed for batsmen. We've been kidding ourselves for too long that the skills required for the one-day game are completely different from those needed for tests (try telling australia that). collingwood's 200 (which warne described presciently as 'a*se') is looking ever more a disaster, because it appears to be keeping the most limited batsman to play for england in the last 20 years in the team, and at no. 4 no less! and while bell at least has a modicum of talent, for now he's a test and 1-day no. 6 at best.
a few years ago, when we didn't have the bowlers, we used to put out a batting line up that permed six from atherton, stewart, hick, thorpe, hussein, ramprakash, smith, crawley. We crucified them at the time, but what we'd give for that kind of quality now.
in their absence let's at least get a line-up that contains proper batsmen down to no.7 (flintoff), one that looks tougher than a roasted marshmallow to the opposition. How about Loye, Key, Vaughan, Strauss, Shah, Joyce as a top 6 for now and, in an ideal world, Trescothick, Loye, Vaughan, Strauss, Pietersen, Shah ...?

It's an unedifying spectacle to have a journalist commentator have a trantrum in public. I wonder, but hope not, that South African pundits are following suit, about their team's first innings total of 125 against Pakistan. Why don't they just get rid of their batting line-up to follow some of the logic here? Batting collapses are part of cricket. It's the nature of the game and the bowlers have something to do with it, the nature of the pitch, the psychology of the fight. That is what makes cricket exciting. For goodness sake stop wingeing like schoolboys in the playground. What team can possibly succeed under this kind of misanthropic mardy shambolic scrutiny? I would give Andrew 0 out of 10 for analysis. How would he like being attacked at every opportunity by a gang of experts out there who moan with diatribes, insults and jeers. For goodness sake, get a grip. It's like those football commentators who complain that easy goals have been missed and someone or other should have scored. There are no easy goals. Otherwise the scores wouldn't be 1-0 2-1 and so on it would be 14-18. As for cricket I am getting sick of the mantra that everyone who gets 50 should have converted it into a 100 otherwise they have failed. It's the same kind of hyperbolic logic. 300-400 wouldn't be a good Test innings score if that was the case. It would be more likely to be 600-700. I sometimes feel there are quite a few who never see the game or follow the radio commentary but just look at numbers: the scores, batting averages etc. Cricket isn't played in the abstract but on real pitches with very different conditions. If I were an England cricketer I would be really fed up with all this our top order isn't scoring. In the last three ODI games no-one in the top order has scored, and that goes for Aussies too. It was one player down the order who did the trick. Over to you Andrew and the lemmings who want to throw themselves in disgust over the cliff.

the english cricketers are good at playing other nations back to form. as in the loss of empire, england will never regain lost ground save from the odd victory at home.

I think England's ODI problems (and test troubles too, for that matter) persist because their coach Duncan Fletcher is too fixated on having "multi-dimensional" cricketers. Sure, its a good thought but then you need people who win you matches with either the bat or ball, not someone who might do a bit of this and that but can't warrant a place in the team on the basis of his stronger suit alone. We've seen that with Ronnie Irani, Ian Blackwell and numerous others. Now its Dalrymple's turn. What do you say about someone who bats No. 7-8 and bowls only 3 overs? Is there any value of keeping him around then really? Secondly, England cannot afford to have both Bell and Strauss in the top 3. On belters, England will always struggle to get a par-score with those guys around. I'm sure Trescothick is being sorely missed. I think by and large, the setup is pretty stagnated and their sour-puss coach is well past his sell-date. Duncan is living in denial and refuses to accept that he's done anything wrong. England need new ideas, a new coach and as Fleming put it, they "need to play a different team". Except that I'm not talking about the opposition.

hey guys, if its any consolitation, the West Indies will be hosting the World Cup in a few weeks and cannot get their act in order. Take a look at the last two ODI matches against India, the results speaks volumes

I feel Feltcher should have resigned immidiately after the Ashes 5-0 drubbing, or should have been pushed. He has nothing more to contibute to England, and ODIs were never his area of expertise anyway. By parting ways after the tests, England could have atleast had a (small) chance to inject fresh thinking into the mix, with the World Cup in mind. Ok, it would have been expecting a miracle from a new coach to turn the inept into match winners in a matter of two months, but hey, we'd never know now, would we?

What has been gained by persisting with Fletcher until after the WC, when we all know where this going? It's just an extended farewell party (wake?) for the sullen, sulky man who once had something to contribute to English cricket.

Why is Dalrymple in the side? Is there no true batsman in the English county system who can bowl some miserly medium pace. Take Craig McMillan and Nathan Astle, for example. What about batsmen who bowl economical offspin, say, a Chris Gayle or Virender Sehwag? What a waste.

To their credit, England, with their mediocore talent, almost pulled out a victory over Australia, which takes some character. Had Hussey been given out, who knows? I do believe they're giving their best effort. I suppose this group of players simply aren't good enough to win at the international level. Period.

Perhaps the ECB can hastily setup a pre-WC tri-series with Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Scotland and Ireland, maybe?

England have at least bowled well in the last 3 matches. Freddie, Anderson, and Lewis have been good, this isn't the worst attack in the world. As in tests, the bowling is well ahead of the batting. Without Pietersen and Trescothick, England haven't got the batting. Also Bopara should play instead of Dalrymple.

It is hard to win at something that you don't care about, and the England leadership does not seem to care about this game. You can't just start paying attention in a World Cup year; it is too little too late.

Moreover, I think that Fletcher has fundamentally misread what succeeds in one day cricket. As one of the readers also mentions above, trying to groom all-round cricketers for ODIs is fine and good, but the cricketer has to be good enough at *some* facet of the game to merit his place in the side on that basis alone. Should the Aussies have left McGrath out of the ODI teams all these past few years because he can't bat and is a so-so fielder? Now Fletcher has started to carry the same flawed logic into Tests (no Read or Panesar until the hand is forced), and the results are clear. Fletcher may have been fine for an era when the England talent pool was different than what it is now, but in my opinion, the call of the day now is to say thanks for past services, but we need different leadership for the future.

I Personally think that while England are on the field, they just exude this feel that if things go wrong they will always have the 'domestic' cushion to fall back on. It surely steals a lot of fire from their game in my opinion. From the looks of it, there has really been no vision about it all. The english team haven't really cared about ODI Cricket Post World Cup 2003, and it shows.

Hi Everybody,
There is nothing wrong with the current team. These are bunch of very talented lads and there is no doubt about it. The only problem which persists is there in the Minds of the players. They need some serious reforment in the way they think. Where is the passion for playing for England gone???? I dont see that at all... There are some minor technical issues which can be resolved but they need to have a solid self belief installed in them....

Sumit,agreed that Fletcher has to go after the World Cup. I also believe that Flintoff should be binned from the Captaincy as well, to keep them both in the current roles is unthinkable. I wouldn't keep either in their Test management/Captaincy roles either. As good a job as Fletcher has done in that arena he has made some disastrous decisions recently, and his time is up. Flintoff is too important a player to burden with 3 roles and "nice blokes" don't make good Captains,even at village level!

You know what the problem with your British sports teams is? You always go back to the old players. You did it with the Lions rugby team when they went to New Zealand in 2005 with old players that were past there use by date, thinking that there world cup form from 2 years ago would get them through the series even though they hadn't played at a decent level for 2 years. And now you have done it with your cricket team, Ashley Giles for example. By playing him you gave the Aussies the momentum they needed straight away and you couldn't come back. And Im afraid, you never will. You need young, enthusiastic players to be a good team against Australia and your selectors refuse t believe it!

We've seen this even with rugby, where england tried to hold on to their players from 2003 and did not evolve their rugby and blood new players and give them experience before the world cup. Same with England they seem to be looking backwards at 2005.Why not bring in Bopara, recall Shah and take a gamble on Adil Rashid?

Nothing wrong with this England side - they are just too focussed on each other's performances that one failure leads to another. Unlike those rude Aussies who all like to score together, or the selfish Hussey types who stays out there alone and wins(gasp!) matches, England are in the whole tour with a sink or sink attitude. That's great. Just great watching, I tell ya. Until 1992, England kept reaching WC finals and in exasperation (either we reach the finals and win, or we dont bother), it looks like they have made their bed now!

oh dear Mr Miller, if you're really that unhappy and disillusioned perhaps you should step down from your post and let someone who can write objective and balanced match reports do the job instead. Your hysterical and hyperbolic piece is about the laziest piece of journalism I've ever read. Did England bowl well? Did Jacob Oram play an heroic innings ? Did New Zealand bowl out of their skins- especially James Franklin and Daniel Vettori? Did Andrew Strauss (once again) and Paul Nixon get rough decisions? The worst aspect of this whole tour has been the unhinged reporting of it by the majority of UK journalists. Cricket fans want to know the full story, what actually happened- not these increasingly personal rants

Sir, Thanks for your truthful words on the debacle being enacted in the anipodes!

Might I respectfully suggest that you campaign for the present touring party to ride in an open topped bus through the city centres of the main English cities?
They were quick enough to accept the plaudits of the crowds after their good play against the Australians in England. They REALLY SHOULD be made to see the other side of the coin. I mean to say, this debacle is beyond realistic and far worse than nearly any Tour I can remember - and I've followed every one since WW2. There was a bad tour immediately after the war - likely the first if memory serves - and we have lost very many series but, the overall standards in the past were far superior to that being displayed by the current bunch of incompetent'lay-a-bouts'.

Andrew Miller your columns always keep me amused this latest offering is superb. I tip my hat to you sir. Good luck with the rest of the ODI's that you have to watch

Hats off to Andrew Miller for his 23 Jan column! He has managed to say what no other cricket journalists seem to - and be quite funny at the same time! Terrific writing :)

Depressing isn't it? Things have gone very wrong indeed. The flagrant abuse of the touring selectors this winter will have long lasting effects for England in both forms of the game.

Old favourites without recent match fitness selected on past performances and wishful thinking
was irresponsible and has let down players and fans alike.

As for the captaincy: Flintoff has reacted to the extra responsibility by looking like he's got the world on his shoulders and underperforming. Strauss reacted to the added responsibility (just as he had done at county level) by getting hatfuls of runs. Only when it was stripped from him for no good reason did he lose his confidence and ability to build an innings. And it looks like more of the same to come for the foreseeable future.

It's almost impossible to believe that it was less than six months ago that we drew an ODI series with Pakistan. Strauss(Captain),Joyce, Bell, Pietersen, Collingwood, Dalrymple, Yardy, Read, Lewis, Mahmood and Broad were the somewhat unlikely team that won the last two ODIs of the series to pull it off.

We also pick too many bowlers and not enough batsmen which does little to help avoid the embarassing collapses.

We should just pick an ODI team and stick with it for a bit to gain some sense of consistency. Out of the myriad of people we seen in the last few months:- Strauss(captain), Bell, Loye, Pietersen(when fully fit again), Joyce, Flintoff, Collingwood, Read, Lewis, Broad, and Panesar would be worth persisting with for a bit in my opinion. But as Gilo has thrown his hat in the ring for the WC I dread to think what will happen.

to Jackie Litherland

About your point regarding England having a batting collapse. If it was just A batting collapse it wouldn't be a problem. But since England arrived in Australia, it has been a long series of batting collapses.

watching England play is like watching a cockroach dying over and over again. Australia watch for a few overs before stamping it out of its misery.

I was very surprised to read this piece from you Mr.Andrew Miller. This is what Duncan Fletcher meant when he spoke about "people criticising now are the ones who run with the foxes and hunt with the hounds". In your previous articles a few months back, when england was losing in one day cricket badly, you articulated that how only the ashes mattered and that playing one day cricket was beneath the nation..so why this volte-face now?
May be I am wrong, but I feel that good cricketing teams will do well in both forms of the game - erstwhile WI and the current Aus teams are cases in point.
By the way, I read most of your articles. They are a good read, albeit lacking consistency on certain occassions.

To all English supporters:

I am an Australian living in England, who went home to watch the whole ashes series. I must admit that after the series before I quiet enjoyed the result, even if I didn't enjoy the cricket - which at some times (and lets be completely honest) was pedestrian at best.

With all this said, the one thing that disappointed me more than this was the effort / desire and lack of preparedness - which is now leading into the one-day series. I have a few English mates who came out and toured - some who had saved for this moment for 4 years - that's right 4 years of hard earned cash down the drain. Now they had fun away from the field, but hanging over their tour was a sever sense of disappointment. I think that some of the English players / coaching staff / ECB board would do well to go and have a chat to a few of these lads and actually get an understanding the cricketing world is made up by not just players and officials but by people who actually live and breathe it but are unable to represent their country due to lack of talent – but still support them with their hard earned cash. From a commercial stand point, what was gained after the previous ashes series has been lost and probably set back even further.

From an Australian point of view, we are now so uninterested in the one-day games as we know we’ll win and really there will be no challenge. Pathetic, start making some decent long-term decisions and get a decent team and ethos in place before 2009.

You know, it would be really nice, just once, to hear Andrew Flintoff or Duncan Fletcher to say what people are thinking now, something like "Today we were village!" Using the same soundbites helps no-one and doesn't help to generate any respect or belief in the team. If they started calling a spade a spade then there might well be more belief both there and at home.

As an impartial observer I think it's clear that the problem in the one day format (as well as the test side) is lack of desire.

In international cricket the vast majority of players are good athletes with the requisite talent and ability. However, the key to getting the most out of that talent consistently is sheer desire. You see it with the Australians where cricket is an obsession as it is with the teams in the subcontinent. You also see it in individuals like Flintoff when he takes a wicket. His fiery celebrations aren't just show but his genuine feelings and intensity boiling over. Same with Peterson. Every time he steps on the pitch with the bat you can tell he craves to prove South Africa and the rest of the world wrong and show he is a great one. That sort of desire is missing from not just the rest of the squad but also in Fletcher.
That is why we see players who are hesitant on the pitch and guys like Harmison remarking that he's glad for a cricket break because he doesn't have to think about it.

A recent sports based scientific study indicated that the common theme among athletes at the top of their profession have one thing in common. The absolute work ethic/practice to rectify and sort out the weakenesses in their game. Years are literally spent to isolate and work on weakenesses until they are improved to near perfection. That is achieved through a burning desire to do so. Surely, it is obvious to even the casual observer that most of the English cricketers would rather be at home now with their families/friends instead of playing cricket down under.

In all my years (24) of, for the most part, watching England humiliated, this winter has been the most dismally depressing of the lot. My question is this - if the selectors are happy to bring the likes of Nixon and Loye into the one-day squad, why not go the whole hog and fill the side with proven one-day peformers? Why not bring in Darren Maddy or James Benning, Mark Ealham or even Ronnie Irani? Bell, Cook, Vaughan, Strauss, Joyce - hardly destructive limited overs batsmen, are they?

Time to face reality, England suck. The moment people start realising it will be the time they start getting better.

Disgraceful, the treatment of certain players is shocking. Strauss plays badly and nothing yet Solanki get pushed out of the team or up and down the order. We have an inept no. 3 in Bell, incapable of hitting big boundaries and if bowlers like Harmison can't bebothered with ODIs what sort of message does that send out to younger bowlers. Absolutely disgraceful. Lets get Moody/Wright in to sort out ODIs

Spot on Andrew... as ever ;-)

I can only imagine the frustration in the press box this last winter and somehow thought it might be you who broke ranks with some refreshing honesty.

Re: England are giving one-dayers the cold-shoulder

If England are indeed giving one-dayers the cold shoulder, they'll be better off quitting one-day internationals altogether instead of being repeatedly humiliated by all and sundry, leaving writers like Andrew at a loss for words (remember bull generator!) and forcing them to seek inspiration from the past! Although England were compatively better at one day cricket in the 80s and 90s, they were never the best one day team. In fact, England is the only major cricketing nation never to have one a major one-day tournament apart from some insignificant victory at Sharjah! So, there has not been such a fall from great heights as the author seems to claim. Also, it's amusing to note that Andrew considers DeFreitas, Dermot Reeve and Derek Pringle as genuine all-round talent. If they are genuine all-rounders, then the "dibbly-dobbly" kiwi trio of Gavin Larsen, Chris Harris and Rod Latham are all-time great all rounders!! Besides, stalwarts like Gooch, Lamb, Botham et al were well past their prime in the 90s. So, the 1992 WC team surely cannot be the best-ever England team!

Highest chances of winnin' the world cup

1. Australia
2. Pakistan
3. SA
4. SriLanka
5. Newzealand
6. India
7. Windies
8. Bangladesh
9. Zimbabwe
10. Kenya
11. Netherland
12. Canada
13. Scotland
14. Ireland
126. Brazil
170. Iraq
193 (LAST) England

Jon Lewis, Paul Nixon and Mal Loye...kinda looking a bit like "Dads Army" now, aren't they?

By the way, on England's dismal performance; hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe...so deserved.

Time to give back the MBEs boys, or go for a ride on Roy Anderson's bus (see above).

Of course, all jokes aside, it will be rather therapeutic watching England play in the World Cup - laughter is the best medicine, after all.