A fever is all encompassing. It doesn’t pick and choose how, when or where it will strike, it just smothers you at a moments notice to the extent that all you can concentrate on is the fever. It becomes your master.

I am now well truly in the grip of World Cup consumption.

My mid wanders away from tasks at hand and I find myself trivialising over every little detail of the upcoming festivity.

He looked at first glance as if he had all the agility of an antique Victorian wardrobe, or worse still, Kevin Kilbane.

Upon hearing the news I was quite calm. In fact I was quite nonchalant about the whole thing.

Had England done their usual trick of struggling and plodding their way through the group stages, leaving themselves reliant on earning a point from a trip to a little known eastern European state then the game would obviously be of greater importance and the news that England’s World Cup qualifier with Ukraine is only being streamed online would be harder to swallow.

The news has prompted many angry fans to label this decision as an outrage. Of course their vain complaints are a load of bollocks.

In the run up to England’s World Cup qualifier with Croatia on Wednesday I was filled with hope that the Three Lions could avenge the nightmare of two years ago and qualify for the World Cup in the process.

This though only represented half of my thoughts. I also harboured feelings of dread, images of England once again failing to put in a performance when it mattered and visions of Scott Carson making a nightmarish return to the England team.

I was astonished and delighted then to witness a clinical and ruthless England comfortably sweep aside Croatia and cruise towards the World Cup with two games left to play. Does this now mean that England are a genuine hope at the World Cup or am I just hopping on the bandwagon of expectation that rides around every two years at tournament time?

Summers where the year ends in an odd number always drag. Summers that end with an even number offer a football season that never ends, with the prospect of either the European Championships or the World Cup.

As it’s 2009, there is no summer of football beyond speculation and gossip. This holds my attention, but is nothing compared to a full 90 minutes.

Instead I find myself flicking past the golf, cricket, tennis and other summer sports of limited interest to me, in search of anything to give me a fix of the football drug that I crave. Of course I’m interested in what ever little morsels I can find, but it’s just not the same as watching the real thing.

Football and politics are rarely friendly bed fellows. Often the beautiful game is seen as an escape from political troubles and an opportunity to indulge in a world devoid of any political leanings.

So when football and politics do cross paths, it signals the strength of importance to the players, that they are willing to step out from behind the veil of football celebrity and express their political opinions.

This is exactly what happened on Wednesday night, when Iran met South Korea in a World Cup qualifier. Six of the Iranian players sported green wristbands in support of defeated presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi and they were not alone.

The Premier League has witnessed many World Cup winners in its brief but illustrious history, but only 10 players have appeared for clubs other than Liverpool, Manchester United, Chelsea and Arsenal and witnessed the humdrum of mid-table obscurity. Those brave souls who have tasted the pinnacle of football success as champions of the world, but chose to play for a club whose existence is based around more than just winning trophies every season have finally been recognised in chronological order.