IBWM. Colours. Mast. Nailed

Spain.

That's it. IBWM cannot look past Spain.

I can sit here for ages and spout froth about Argentina, or England; but ultimately, I just can't see it for either of them. Spain enter this tournament by far and away the best international side around; possibly the best around for the last ten, twenty or thirty years. They have a system, they have the players, form and, after the Euros, they've conquered that psychological first trophy hurdle.

They also have an unbelievable level of strength in depth. Spain can go into a game without their (arguably) best player, Fernando Torres, and still comfortably beat what's in front of them. In fact, Spain could probably go without Casillas, Ramos, Xavi, Iniesta, Villa and Torres, and still beat what's in front of them. Now that's impressive.

Even the players who have maybe got a touch too senior, such as Marcos Senna, have been replaced by even better players (Cesc Fabregas, Xabi Alonso), or have given way to outstanding youngsters (Sergio Busquets). So the continuity is there too.

Up front, Spain coach Vincente Del Bosque has been able to add to his embarrassment of riches by calling on in-form, quality players like Juan Mata, Pedro Rodriguez and Sevilla's Jesus Navas. Navas had been barely able to leave his front door for the last 4 years due to anxiety problems, now he finds himself in the form of his life and, thanks to Del Bosque, on the plane to South Africa. Talk about things falling into place.

Navas. 'I don't want you to worry son, but..........'

If Spain do have a weakness though, it could well be the defence. Pique excepted, Puyol and Capdevilla are the wrong side of 30 without obvious replacements, and Ramos is prone to going walkabout. Of course, to attack Spain's back four, you have to get the ball off them first, which is much easier said than done. Even then, Spain, like Barcelona, play a high tempo, high line pressing game which strangles the best of opponents.

So there you go. Only clear issue for the European champions is that they are in the more difficult half of the draw, along with Brazil, who would be IBWM's other contender, for no other reason than they have the next best set of players.

Of the rest, Argentina and England could get near, but I can't see either winning. Both have a potentially decent run to the semi's at least, with La Albiceleste having a formidable forward line compromised by an erratic coach, while England posses one of the most competent coaches, but a now erratic defence. I note Rio Ferdinand is now out of the tournament. Michael Dawson anyone? Jesus.

As for the rest, despite the location factor, I'm not convinced this is a vintage crop of African sides, despite some decent young players for Ghana and Cameroon especially. With Didier Drogba today breaking his arm, the strongest of these sides, Ivory Coast, may well have been badly dented psychologically.

Holland look particularly good, and despite having no form whatsoever, France and Portugal have match winners all over the park. And of course (please forgive me for this one), you can't write off the Germans, although this may be a tournament too soon for the latest side. On the other hand, it has to be a tournament too far for champions Italy though....surely?. From the Americas, Mexico have an impressive young side and Chile are fantastic to watch, dark horses could also come from one of the eastern European sides.

Not written off

All impossible to tell though. I, like most people, have followed the 'x will win that group and will then play y, with z as runners up playing.......', but it never works out like that.

History has shown that the (true) best side usually makes it to the final at least, with one of the favourites falling at the first hurdle, while another finishes runner up in their group instead of winners and screws up the whole next round draw. Some real stars will still crock themselves over the next week, while there will be some new ones that come from nowhere. I haven't even mentioned conditions or that bloody ball yet.

Spain it is though.

Comments welcome.