So England won Hiddink's Russia 3-0 at Wembley, with 2 goals from Michael Owen and one from Rio Ferdinand. I wasn't expecting such a convincing win, after Steve McGoreng promised change, which on hindsight meant nothing, even in the scoreline.

Most notably, England did this without many of their first-teamers, namely Gary Neville, Owen Hargreaves, Frank Lampard, David Beckham & Wayne Rooney. Instead, what was on show were the fringe players of Micah Richards (okay he's not a fringe player but rather the next big thing), Gareth Barry, Shaun Wright-Phillips & Oh-my-gosh-is-that Emile Heskey.

I'm sure that after seeing Micah Richards dominate the right-flank, all would agree that England has finally found a good successor to Gary Neville's right-back position, meaning its time for Neville to move on. Micah Richards is a very powerful and athletic player, he'strong, fast, tall and has superb technical abilities, far more than we can say of Neville, whose only ability is that of aimless long-throws into the penalty area. Verdict: Keep Richards and boot Neville.

Also, if its not obvious by now, Lampard and Gerrard cannot and will not be able to play together. For the pass 3 games McGoreng has been able to give this tough decision a miss with injuries or suspension to one of the two. But seeing that they cannot play together, one would have to go. I say Lampard should. Gerrard is the more complete player, he can pass, shoot, bring the ball up and by that i do not mean side-ways like what Lampard does before whacking it, tackle and his faster. Gerrard is also a more forceful player, more power. Lampard may be an established set-piece taker, but with David Beckham, you do not need and will not find a better one. Gerrard is also vice-capt. So McGoreng, just drop Lampard and stick with Gerrard. its good for england.

While Barry's recent performances have been good, I believe he's not good enough to take Owen Hargreaves' spot in the team. Barry is versatile but he's not a natural defensive midfielder, it would be like asking Lampard to hold back: Adequate but not accomplished. Hargreaves has firmly established himself in the England team after the World Cup and rightly deserves so after being on the fringes since 2001. Go Hargreaves, but keep Barry in the squad.

SWP is a revitalised man. After being on both the fringes of both Chelsea and England, he looks like he's back to grab both spots back. But wait. What about David Beckham, the man with the golden balls? SWP is pacy, agile and can dribble, all of which Beckham can't. But Beckham isn't the player with one of the most assists in premier league history for nothing. Beckham can cross like no other. Can take free-kicks like no other too. To dismiss this would be stupid. SWP still can't get the final ball in consistently like DB and that is what being a winger is all abt, throwing the final ball in. GO DB.

The final spot in question is a little complex. Rooney/Heskey/Owen. Should we just go for who's the proest and dump him in or do we go for who works best for the team. Rooney is undoubtedly one of the most talented England strikers in recent times. His brute force-style of running with the ball certainly terrfies the wits out of defenders. But as his record shows, he works best with someone in front of him to occupy defenders and give him space to roam and his goalscoring record isn't terribly impressive at all. To depend on him to score your most of your goals is suicidal. But Rooney's game isn't about goals: it's about the power, the influence and the inspiration from someone consistently getting stuck into the challenges, never staying away from one.

Michael Owen has just returned from injury but is looking back to his best already despite obviously losing a yard of pace. 3 goals in 2 england games, and before that scoring consecutively for newcastle, is quite really peak form. His goal count for England is currently at 40, 9 off Bobby Charlton's all-time record of 49. Should he stay injury-free and continue playing like this, Owen would have surpassed Charlton's record by the time he's 30. Owen seems to have been around for such a long time already, but he's only 27 and just approaching his peak. Owen is also the only consistent goalscorer for England and the time he spent out with injury was also testimony that England cannot do without him and his goals.

Leaving us with Emile Heskey. He's goalscoring record is pathetic to say the least, shambolic and catastrophic to be a bit more accurate. But Heskey, like Rooney, is not about goals. It's about their contributions to the team. Heskey is a big player, one full of power and causes mayhem in defences, leaving his smaller and more skillful teammates to exploit the space that he creates. Heskey may not be able to finish, but someone big is needed to knock-down David Beckham's crosses for Owen or Gerrard to finish. And when Heskey partners Owen, Owen normally scores, and England normally plays well.

Comparatively, we have 3 potential partnerships: the tried and tested and successful at all levels Heskey/Owen, the tried and tested but not that successful Owen/Rooney, and the untested Heskey/Rooney. the first one will definitely bring goals to Owen if not to Heskey, but would benefit the team. provided the service from DB and gerrard is there. But what about Rooney? the most gifted striker England has in recent years? To partner him with Owen would mean a lesser reliance of crosses and more play through the middle, but DB specializes with his crosses, and his crosses are always of a high quality. What about Heskey and Rooney? Sounds good, but what about the goals? There wouldn't be any goals from this pairing, considering both their dismal goalscoring records. Owen is definitely indispensable because of his goals, which leaves us with Rooney and Heskey. Owen works best with Heskey, who brings out the best of Owen. For the sake of the team, Heskey would have to partner Owen while Rooney would have to sit out. Football is ultimately a team game. Whoever can contribute best shall play, be it you are the phenomenon or not.