United deserve the title

Going into the final day of season with two teams capable of winning the title makes a hugely refreshing change. Only goal difference separates Manchester United and Chelsea so a win for Avram Grant's boys coupled with either a draw or defeat for Sir Alex and the title goes to Stamford Bridge.

On the other hand, if they both win and Chelsea fail to score 17 goals more than United, the title stays at Old Trafford. And, let's be honest, with the type of football Chelsea have been playing this season, they probably wouldn't score 17 goals if their opponent had no goalkeeper and the game lasted a week. United, on the other hand, could probably do it in a couple of hours. Against 12 men. Blindfolded.

And that very point, ladies and gentlemen, is why I sincerely hope that, by the end of play today, it is the Manchester United players who are being showered with confetti while doing that questionable jumping up and down on the spot thing.

I have nothing in particular against Chelsea anymore. I have come to terms with the fact that they bought themselves a couple of titles and the departure of Mourinho means they no longer have the planet's most irritating manager.

But, based purely on style of football and on the levels of entertainment they have provided, there is only one team that deserves this year's trophy. And they don't wear blue.

By my calculations I have watched both these teams play at least 30 times each this season. In United's case the vast majority of those games have been a joy to behold with football of the highest order on display. Attacking, free flowing football that rarely fails to excite.

Chelsea, on the other hand, have, more often than not, been marginally less exciting than watching paint dry. With a few notable exceptions - like the game against Manchester City and the first half against United - they have just eked out results by boring their opponents into submission.

Don't get me wrong, the fact that Grant's boys have taken the title down to the wire is a tribute to their determination and resolve and for that they should be given maximum credit.

But champions should be about more than scraping results. They should be about style, panache and skill. And, on that level, this season United have left Chelsea trailing in their wake.

Hopefully the type of football we have seen at Stamford Bridge over the past seven months or so is just a hangover from the Mourinho era when results were all that mattered.

Because with the players they have on their books Chelsea should be able to put out a team capable of matching United for flair and fluency, if not bettering them.

But that hasn't happened this season. And, on that basis alone, I will be cheering for United this afternoon.

And that, I can assure you, is not something that happens very often.

Aiming for failure

If we had any doubts where England's tradition of international failure comes from, they should have been dispelled this week.

The FA, in mapping out its blueprint for the future, set Fabio Capello a target for his time as boss - reach the semi-final of either the 2010 World Cup or 2012 European Cup.

Unbelievable! How on earth can you expect to win anything if you set failure as your objective? Surely the Italian was employed on a vast salary to win something, not come fourth?

This latest example of settling for something other than outright success epitomises all that is wrong with the national game in England.

Can you imagine a big club side ever giving Fabio such a pathetic target? Would Real Madrid ever dared make a public announcement that finishing fourth in the league was their aim? There would have been riots in the streets.

But the English FA seem to think merely going one step further than Sven did will be enough to appease the fans.

Well, I have news for them. It isn't. For almost half a century now England have been the 'nearly' team, losing at the semi-final stage or worse. Normally on penalties. Often to Germany. And the fans, myself included, are absolutely sick of it. Utterly fed up. We don't want to see England reach another semi and bow out. We don't want them to be gracious losers. We don't want them to be the fourth best team in Europe or the world.

We want them to win. We want them to come home with a trophy. We want to dance in the streets of London and carcade around Sliema. We want to be able to feel superior to our Italian supporting cousins rather than perpetually inferior.

And by settling Fabio targets that fall considerably short of that the FA has shown it is totally out of touch with reality.

When you hire someone of Fabio's ability on wages equivalent to a small country's GDP, then winning something should be written into his contract, not as an option but as a requirement. No trophy, no pay.

Of course you could argue by setting less ambitious targets you have given the manager and players something realistic to aim for.

I would argue that by setting out to achieve fourth place before a tournament has even started you are merely suggesting failure is inevitable.

Can you imagine the Italians, Germans or Brazilians ever entering a tournament with their minds set on finishing fourth? It just wouldn't happen. And, until the English FA realises that positive thinking combined with genuine ambition is crucial to actually winning anything, fourth place is probably all we ever will achieve. Unless we play the Germans.

Getting shirty

OK. I need a question answered here. Why is it is such a crime to take off your shirt when you score a goal?

I readily admit it is a rather childish thing to do and serves no apparent purpose, but does that mean it warrants a booking? Surely not.

When the ruling first came into force a few years ago I remember thinking at the time that it was rather petty. But I also thought it was not the sort of thing that would be strictly enforced. How wrong I was. Now, hardly a weekend goes by without one player or another finding his way into the referee's book for bearing his chest to the masses. Even if all they reveal is one of those lycra bodysuits they seem to like to wear underneath these days.

Last weekend we even had a case of a pathetic fourth official reminding a referee to book a player who took his shirt off after scoring a goal which kept his team in the Championship. Minutes later the striker in question got a second yellow and was dismissed.

Is this fair? Does the punishment fit the crime? I think not. In just about every match that takes place, incidents considerably more serious than this go unpunished by the ref - two-footed challenges and elbows in the face, for example. Does the fourth official point these out to the referee? Not a chance. So why has removing your shirt become such an issue?

And, if it is such an issue, why are players not punished when they remove their shirts at the end of a game? If catching sight of the odd nipple is such an offence to our delicate eyes during the 90 minutes, how can it be any less offensive as the players walk off the pitch?

There are many qualified referees in Malta and I would love to hear from one who can give me a decent explanation as to why this rule exists and whose delicate sensibilities it is aimed at protecting.

I agree that rules are rules and a player only has himself to blame for breaking one, even if it is a bloody silly one. But I think the people who make up the laws of the game need to take a serious look at this one and see if maybe, just maybe, they haven't let political correctness get in the way of common sense.

sportscolumnist@timesofmalta.com