THE PRETENSIONS of England's football association - still styling itself "the" Football Association - have taken a few knocks lately. Just when we were becoming accustomed to a team failing to negotiate the quarter finals of major tournaments, we see a squad of golden hue failing even to qualify for a major tournament.

Equally, it seems like only weeks ago, perhaps because it was, that we were asking if Steve McClaren was actually the best native-born coach England could produce. The FA has answered that question. Thanks to its stewardship, it transpires, there is now not a single Englishman competent to manage his country.

Apologists, of which there are many, like to blame the Premier League. Too many foreigners on the pitch and in the dug-out, you see, and they're just - the impertinence of it - too damned good. Salt of the earth Sams and Harrys don't stand a chance. Hence 41 years of hurt (and hilarity).

The truth is that the Premier League reflects, but does not shape, reality. These days it is English in name only, whether in terms of coaching, players, or club ownership. When an Englishman can claim the title in that contest, the national team might possess a contender.

For now, says the FA, no one is ruled out (except Alan Shearer: a joke's a joke). Money is no object, even with the cost of the Wembley wetlands. If you can pay McClaren £2.5m just to go away, imagine the money you could offer to someone who might actually win something. England expects, and can afford, the best.

Brian Barwick, the FA's chief executive, has been consulting widely. This appears to mean he has been listening to anyone capable of forming an opinion, plus a few who know what they're talking about. Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger may not necessarily have England's best interests at heart, but they represent the quality the FA covets. They are unlikely, though, to have mentioned people named Sam or Harry.

Instead, according to leaks and rumours, Barwick has a shortlist of five names. Each has impeccable credentials. Only one is not a certified winner at the highest level. Then again, Martin O'Neill would count both as an honorary Englishman and as a chance for the FA to rectify a horrific mistake. He should have got the job that went to McClaren, as everyone - probably including McClaren - now concedes.

The trouble is, the Irishman continues to insist that he prefers Aston Villa. Why give the FA a second chance? Why, come to that, offer yourself as a second choice to a certified calamity?

Then we have Jurgen Klinsmann. Is it just me, or is there a tiny flaw in this suggestion? True, the candidate enjoyed a distinguished career in England, combining a sublime ability with a gift for questionable acrobatics. Equally, he somehow managed to turn a lacklustre national squad into World Cup challengers. For the FA, that's a job description in a sentence.

It doesn't seem likely, however, that the London tabloids would take to a manager who insists on commuting from California. Then there's the other detail. What was it again? Something to do with cultural differences.

Ah yes: is anyone, anywhere, seriously suggesting that a German should take charge of the England team? Hasn't the FA taken note of certain people who pay Barwick's wages? Even if Klinsmann could whistle the Dambusters March he would face a lynching, metaphorically speaking. Deplorable but true.

I doubt that Fabio Capello or Marcello Lippi would fare much better. I doubt, too, that an England squad could master the sort of football these men tend to favour, or overcome language difficulties, or surrender those Premier League egos to the will of either enigmatic foreigner. That, in a nutshell, is England's problem. Parochialism runs deep.

So then there is one. The Special One, indeed. Jose Mourinho has been manipulating the English media with his usual aplomb. Stories were being fed to the London papers, the Observer in particular, even before Croatia put the final nail in McClaren's coffin. Jose, said "friends", would be delighted to grant Barwick an audience.

In other words, Mourinho has been planting the idea that Mourinho would be an excellent idea for England. Not for the first time, he happens to be right, but as always his tactics remind you why he is a problematic figure. He refuses to speak "publicly", but manages to get himself mentioned on a daily basis. He refuses to lower himself to actually applying for the job, but makes it clear that he is the obvious choice.

He is, I repeat, perfectly correct, but if he is testing the FA he could regret his own cleverness. This is an organisation afflicted by institutional cowardice. If it calls to mind Mourinho's antics at Chelsea it may leap to the conclusion that he is more bother than he is worth.

He is, however, worth a great deal. The Chelsea players in the England squad - with the possible exception of John Terry - would treat Mourinho as a saviour returned. The others would see him as the class act he is. Certain clubs - Manchester United, Man City, Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea above all - would be deeply wary of his influence. That, though, would not be the FA's problem.

Mourinho would certainly not stand for the nonsense that saw two "injured" Chelsea players miss the Croatia game before turning out, days later, for their club. Equally, he would not treat international football as some exotic, baffling variant of the domestic game. He understands both the English and "foreigners". And he wins. Three words. No more are required.

He would undoubtedly give the FA more grief than any coach since Terry Venables, but that's of no consequence to disgruntled fans. A bigger worry is the possibility - never put it past him - that he is using the England job as a bargaining chip. London papers tells one story. Those more interested in the affairs of Real Madrid tell another.

Still, if Mourinho means what he says - or rather what he doesn't say - England could do worse. A great deal worse. In fact, they already have.