Is Wayne Bridge being a bit too precious?

John Terry's friends certainly seem to think he is. At least that what was the report in the Guardian said on Friday morning. Bridge had just announced that he was pulling out of the England squad because he thought his presence would be a distraction. "Sources close to Terry" suggested that Bridge was a bottler and always had been.

I must say I had pondered this suggestion myself with the information I had read on the internet, by internet I mean some soccer websites I frequent and not women's magazines. I prefer to call it information rather than facts. It is those rumours and innuendos which inform my opinions. The facts are anyone's guess.

The information I have is that Wayne Bridge and his ex-girlfriend (let's call her the "underwear model") broke up about this time last year. This coincided with his big move to Man City but that doesn't seem to be connected. Then in September, John Terry stepped in to Bridge's shoes so to speak and had an affair with Bridge's ex. The trouble started when they were photographed leaving a house near Terry's other house. You know you're rich when you have one house for your family and another for your mistresses. No matter what way you look at it, it's hard to feel sorry for these guys because you only have these problems if you're filthy rich and go around shagging supermodels.

John Terry having affairs is not big news in itself. He has been the subject of quite a few kiss and tell stories in the tabloids. A bit of like Tiger Woods. Very similar to Tiger really, except Tiger was better at covering it up, until he got caught and his wife chased him into a tree with a golf club. It's a lucky for John that Toni Terry is more forgiving and prefers to take out her anger on the shopping malls in Dubai.

Let's try to stick to the information. After the papers told Terry that they had these photos, he applied for an injunction to prevent their publication. I'd call the the photos incriminating but that would be an exaggeration. Sleeping with underwear models is very much a legal activity. Although in my case it could be called 'so unlikely it's criminal'.

Terry argued that the photos were an invasion of his human right to privacy and no one had a right to know his business. On appeal the court held that the right to free speech outweighed his right to privacy and the story could be published.

I don't know if the judgment itself was also a one liner but that was how it was reported. The relationship between Bridge and Terry has been given broadly defined in the media from just plain old former teammates to best friends and now it would appear former best friends.

In defence of the underwear model whose name has escaped me and you will forgive me I'm sure if I don't google her, she was broken up with the Bridgey by the time she hooked up with the centre back. I stand to be corrected here but surely on breaking up with a chick, you acquiesce all rights to what she gets up to next.

Supposing on the other hand that Terry and Bridge were good friends and Terry abused that friendship by shagging the man's ex. That would be bad form. Would JT do that? Of course he would. Is it wrong? Yes.

But what if Bridge had moved on himself at that stage? Would that have changed things? Surely. Yet it keeps coming back to whether Terry betrayed Bridge's trust and that is what it is starting to look like more and more.

Still and all with Ashley Cole's injury Bridge looked odds-on to be the England full-back at the World Cup. Being English, he must think the World Cup is in the bag already which would mark the pinnacle of his career, well either that or his contract with Manchester City which made him one of the world's best paid players. Not bad for a guy who has underachieved on (and perhaps off) the pitch ever since he left his comfort zone at Southampton.

To think, it could all have been so different if Terry had signed for Man City during the summer. The whole controversy is really only scandalous because Terry himself is married and the English are obsessed with such things. If Terry was single and the same thing had happened, wouldn't the underwear model have been fair game and there is no way in hell Terry would have been stripped of the captaincy. Who knows, it might even have been true love!

As for Bridge, while I totally respect him for not shaking Terry's hand, he should really just get on with it and play for England if called upon. That's what professional footballers do.

Now if I knew the facts, I would probably have a different take but I don't and from what I know, it looks like Bridge is hiding and taking the easy way out as he so often does for Man City.

An Exercise in Futility- Defending Rafa.

It can be a thankless business defending Rafa Benitez. Especially when Rafa himself is prone to the odd decision which would leave even his most ardent supporter baffled. I tend to give Rafa the benefit of the doubt. He trains with the players all week, sees them up close and so if he plays David Ngog ahead of Ryan Babel with Kuyt out on the wing, you would have to conclude that Rafa believes that he is putting out his best team.

On Babel, the only plausible explanation is that in spite of his big reputation, high price tag and occasional flashes of potential, the Dutchman is not as good as what Rafa and everyone else thought after his impressive showing at the European U-21 Championships a couple of years ago. You can see why one would have thought he was good but he obviously can't sustain that level of performance for 90 minutes week to week.

One of the biggest criticisms levelled against Benitez is that he just can't spot a good player. Torres and Reina were no brainers but there are question marks over the others. It is said that Benitez has had more than enough time to build a team capable of challenging for the Title and after six seasons at the helm, Liverpool find themselves out of the Champions League and it will be just shy of miraculous if they finish in the top four.

Last season was arguably Liverpool's best chance since Benitez took charge. They drew too many home games and the signing of Robbie Keane was a disaster. Did Benetiz ever really want him in the first place? I don't suppose we'll ever find out. That's the problem when analysing the performance of Benetiz at Anfield- nobody knows exactly what goes on behind the scenes.

We can't say for sure how much control Benetiz has had over transfer policy. Even the players he has signed, did he sign these because they were simply the ones he could afford rather than the ones he wanted? Were certain players like Robbie Keane imposed on Benetiz from above? The manner in which Benetiz made Rick Parry's disposal a deal breaker in his contract talks would suggest that the former Chief Executive was sticking his oar in where it didn't belong.

Even looking at the Keane signing, the rumours and stories are endless. One is that Liverpool only paid 8 million upfront with the balance to come from appearances and silverware. Another version is that he was bought for 20 million in August and sold back for 14 million in January at a loss of 6 million. It has also been said that only 14 million was paid and that this was simply given back when Keane returned to White Hart Lane. So many versions regarding a single transfer for which Benetiz has been vilified even though no one seems to know what really happened.

Robbie himself is the quintessential big fish/small pond player. He fits in at clubs like Spurs, Celtic and with Ireland but when he's asked to be a squad player he's not so amenable. When Harry Redknappp said that Robbie was not happy to sit on the bench and pick up his paycheck, I think he meant that Robbie was sulky and disprutive and had to be be farmed out on loan rather than that Robbie was willing to fight to get back in the team.

Every manager should be given the benefit of the doubt on the odd bad signing. Mourinho, Ferguson and Wenger have all had their share of disasters in that department. Signings are a risk and by in large, Benitez's signings have held or increased their value. Few can be said to have dramatically improved the team but at least he has been able to offload them for what he paid for them.

Benitez can also be accused of impatience with those players. He has had a severely high turnover of players and unlike Ferguson he has been unwilling to persevere with homegrown talent like Stephen Warnock and Danny Guthrie. These players may not win the league for Liverpool but they understand the nature and spirit of the club, much in the same way that players like Fletcher, Brown and O'Shea at United personify the attitude required by Ferguson and set the standards for what is required of new players.

Benitez has failed to grasp the concept that players improve with time and teams get better the more they play together. Either that or he has decided that Guthrie (now with Newcastle in the Championship) and Warnock (with Villa) were just not up to it. In any case perhaps with the exception of Alonso, the players Benitez has let go are really no better than their replacements.

What Liverpool really needed last summer was a striker in the mode of David Villa and a winger like David Silva. Instead Alonso was sold and Aquilani was brought in. That is not the transfer policy of a rational man let alone an intelligent and highly qualified coach. Surely what happened was that the money for Alonso was too good to turn down and Aquilani was a cheap as chips replacement. Only a 5m down payment for a younger and potentially better player. Having sold this deal to Benitez, the Americans made no further money available to him. Johnson was signed for money already owed by Portsmouth. With the state Pompey are in, this is now starting to look like the shrewdest bit of business of all.

Fans will ask why he didn't quit if he was faced with such constraints. The answer I suppose is what would have been the point? Benetiz still had Torres and Gerrard, decent players around them and the potential of Aquilani to come into the side as well. Why not have a crack and who knows a Man City style investor might appear during the year if you can give the impression of solvency.

It has not worked out that way. Torres will probably never be 100% fit again. Without him Liverpool are blunt in attack, leaving a burden of expectation on Gerrard which even he can't carry. Others have not performed well without the comfort of having Alonso to direct operations. Skrtel and Agger have failed to fulfil their potential, while Lucas never really had any. In fact man for man to look at the squads, Liverpool are probably where they should be in the league. If Torres and Gerrard stayed fit they might be higher up but they do not have the squad to compete at the very top.

Is this Benitez's fault? The team still play with heart and desire. They lack quality players in key positions and we can only assume that he has been denied the funding to improve the team. Maybe the Americans decided that fourth place will be good enough to maintain the revenue streams and so Rafa was left with a squad which could just about finish top four. The money men have no motivation to finish any higher.

Even allowing for the unknown factors that go on behind the scenes at Liverpool- debt, American owners with no money or ideas, interfering chief executives and strict budget restraints- it could reasonably be concluded that after six seasons Rafa has not built a squad capable of winning the title. That is the bottom line and therefore unacceptable for a club of Liverpool's stature (self-delusion being the outstanding characteristic of any Liverpool fan).

Overall Benitez has performed as well as possible with the players available to him. He has not exceeded expectations but it would be fair to say that Liverpool have been the third, maybe fourth best team in England since he took over. A large part of that is down to the presence of Gerrard and Carragher because unlike Ferguson or Chelsea, Benetiz just has not had the resources necessary to build a good enough team.

The question most Liverpool fans seem to have answered already is that he has had more than enough time.