to my mind, that happened as it all began to unravel

he didn't really rate Cole - but picked him as the pressure to do so mounted when it was all going pear-shaped before the tournament.

But it meant he was lumbered with a player he didn't really want to play at the tournament itself.

I suspect that had Capello folllowed through on his selections in the qualifiers, and stuck with Walcott for the squad, then Walcott might actually have found himself starting when it was all going wrong. Whereas Cole was never going to get himself in the starting XI.

Posted By: Tricky Hawes, Jun 28, 16:13:53