There could only be one thing worse than messing up to the extent of England on the approach to football's second most important international tournament.
It would be to lie down in the consequences of neglect and a scarcely believable complacency.
It would be to shuffle in and out of the tournament which Spain won so gloriously in Vienna four years ago and was distinguished by some brilliant football from the likes of Russia and the Netherlands along with fresh evidence that no one can touch the Germans when it comes to making the best of what they have.
It would be to accept the status of tournament makeweights as some dismal fait accompli.
But then how to avoid such fate? One possibility is for England manager Roy Hodgson, the man who has been required to delve into the ruins, to follow at least in one respect the footsteps of his predecessor Sven Goran Eriksson.
Arguably the best thing Eriksson ever did as England manager – and with better luck it might just have been a defining move – was to pick Wayne Rooney for his first competitive game at the age of 17.
The kid was on fire at the time and England, recall it or not, had been cutting almost as sad a spectacle as the diminished Euro squad which in the last few days has persuaded so much of the nation, including Hodgson, that probably the most sensible idea is to hope for some miracle resurrection before the onset of the Brazilian World Cup in two years.
There was another possibility, however, as Hodgson mulled over his team for tonight's psychologically important second warm-up game against the multi-talented young Belgian team at Wembley.
It was that rather than persevere with the worthy but too often deeply predictable James Milner and Stewart Downing, as the word from the camp was suggesting yesterday, he made the same kind of investment as his Swedish predecessor.
This demanded that some time between today's kick off and the opening game against France he should give Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain the same chance to make a similar impact to the one produced by the young Rooney. It is not, after all, as though there is much else compelling in the air.
No, the Arsenal 18-year-old is not such a rounded, sure-fire prospect as Rooney when he so brilliantly exploded across the face of a Euro qualifier at Sunderland's Stadium of Light one April night nine years ago. But, yes, he does have some of the same fierce qualities, the same self-belief, the same refusal to tread gently amid his betters, or should we just say seniors.
Rooney did it quite magnificently that night on Wearside – and with a little more time Oxlade-Chamberlain might have had something of a similar impact in Oslo last weekend. As it was, he was still quite the brightest aspect of an ultimately turgid 1-0 win over an extremely poor and unambitious Norwegian team.
He reminded you that there are good, promising young players with plenty of ability – and there a few others who announce that they are ready when they take their first taste of action at the highest level.
Rooney did it so consummately well when he came into the Everton team as a 16-year-old that it was only the most conservative instincts that questioned Eriksson's decision to inject such young blood into a flagging "golden generation". A few days earlier they had been wretched against the postmen and the goat-herders of the Alpine principality of Liechtenstein, labouring goalless in the first half, then simply outlasting the part-timers and the amateurs with two second-half goals.
England were not much better in the opening exchanges with Turkey, who had played their way into the World Cup semi-finals less than a year earlier. There was little or no impact from David Beckham, Steven Gerrard and Michael Owen before the new boy took over the game. The moment of transformation came when Rooney chested down the ball and went by two Turkish defenders as if they didn't exist. He played with optimism and a power which spread confidence throughout the team.
We will never know where Eriksson's initiative might have ended but for Rooney's injury in the quarter-final of the Euro 2004 tournament he came to illuminate so brilliantly. However, we do know what it did achieve, which was nothing less than the animating of a jaded team, one which had come to lose belief in itself.
Nor can we be completely sure of Hodgson's reward for putting faith in Oxlade-Chamberlain, but there is encouraging evidence. Some of it came in Oslo and before that there was his performance against Milan, when Arsenal came so close to preserving their Champions League life. Also, there was that stirring effort against Manchester United. However he explained his expression later, Robin van Persie was undoubtedly aghast when his young colleague was required to leave the field in favour of Andrei Arshavin.
Oxlade-Chamberlain created sparks and passion on those nights and now he says at a time not hard to mistake for national football despair: "When you are a young lad you want to play in massive tournaments. I can't wait."
It was a statement without guile or caution and hopefully some time over the next few weeks we will be able to recall it with some considerable warmth.
Rodgers follows the true Shankly doctrine
All those who feel that Liverpool may not have made just a sound choice in Brendan Rodgers but quite possibly an outstanding one can only be heartened by a confident, candid performance when he arrived at Anfield yesterday.
Most encouraging was his revelation that he made it quite clear to the American ownership that he was not prepared to serve under a director of football, even one as worldly and as successful as the veteran Dutchman Louis van Gaal.
It was another way of saying that, while he understood certain duties had to be delegated in a big and ambitious club, there could be only one boss, only one voice in the vital matter of building a new team. It is a time-honoured principle and no one believed it more implicitly than Rodgers' great predecessor, Bill Shankly.
Rodgers also talked about the need to measure the team's progress in terms of league performance rather than the vagaries of knockout competition. It was another classic principle that used to be written in stone at one of the great clubs.
Rodgers admitted he could offer no guarantees in his huge challenge but what he could do, apparently, was hit some very true notes indeed. It was very much a case of so far, so good.
Pietersen's Test exit would be too big a loss
When Kevin Pietersen announces he has given something "a great deal of thought and deliberation" it is not quite the same as anticipating a decision of great, selfless wisdom.
His decision to abandon one-day cricket for England, and focus on the rewards of the Indian Pyjama, sorry Premier, League, is disappointing – especially with his superb revival in the 50-over format – but it was hardly a total surprise in someone whose frequent enthusiasm for the team ethic has not always passed the test of reality.
However, it wasn't so hard to share some of his recent angst in the controversy which came when he criticised Sky commentator Nick Knight. As one of the most persuasive selling points for any TV audience, he too was entitled to have his say.
Sky may provide superb coverage of big-time cricket, they may have reason to believe they own it, but this was going rather too far.
The big hope now must be that in all the fallout, Pietersen is not lost from Test cricket – and especially the next Ashes battle. His sublime double-century at Adelaide in the last series would be just one reminder of the extent of the loss.Reuse content