The final of the most eagerly anticipated athletic event of the sporting calendar is drawing closer with each minute. The tension is rising. At 19:30 BST…the end…

One would think it’s Armageddon. No, it’s only the World Cup final. But it may as well be Doomsday.

This year’s final features two formidable European teams, Spain (who were early favourites) and the more-surprising Netherlands who have shown real flair and played entertaining, fast-paced football, pulling out some outrageous goals to qualify through each stage.

Spain have been a consistently strong side with smooth passing being the predominant feature of their playing tactics. Under the management of Vicente Del Bosque, they have taken advantage of their readily-available talent. The Spanish approach to football has often been commended by a myriad of footballing experts for majority of the players in the Spanish league are natives, showing a stress on the importance of rearing home-grown talent. Arguably, this is the downfall of the Premier League, which comparatively depends more on foreign players, leading to a weaker national team.

Liverpool’s Fernando Torres has been a massive disappointment this tournament. El Niño has seemingly lost his scoring prowess during the tournament and I predict that he probably won’t start the game on Sunday. Contrastingly, his strike partner David Villa is stealing the show, storming his way up to the Golden Boot for the entire Cup and looks set to nab it. It will be interesting to see what Del Bosque decides to do with his team – fortunately, he has an array of creative midfielders at his disposal.

Spain enter the game with high expectations, both from themselves and the world. After their complete domination in Euro 2008, they were clear favourites for the World Cup this year and have met their minimum requirements. One must consider that the expectation placed on them could shake them as they remain a particularly young side. However, having set a world record of 15 consecutive victories as a unit, the youthful side prove that it is skill and talent rather than experience which succeeds.

Similarly, the Netherlands consists of a young squad directed by Bert van Marwijk, who has barely altered anything of his predecessor’s (Marco van Basten) team. Netherlands qualified with 100% victory record and are so far the only team in the tournament to not have lost a match, which clearly demonstrates their power and could also prove to be a crucial factor in the match – their technical skill may not match that of Spain, but their creative flair may cause an upset for the Spaniards. They are not a particularly favoured team and very few would have honestly chosen them as contenders for the title, despite their big stars such as Robben, van Persie and Sneijder, all of whom are core to the team’s success, flow and creativity. As seen throughout the tournament, it is their moments of genius which give the Dutch team the edge against their opponents.

Surprisingly, the Dutch enter the match with a better history of success, having reached the final twice but unfortunately losing on both occasions. Spain have already exceeded themselves this year, previously only reaching a best of the quarter-finals. Could this be an omen? Will Holland find themselves third-time lucky?

Personally, I don’t think that the Netherlands will topple the might of the Spaniards. Spain have played like champions (despite a temporary blip against Switzerland in the group stages). The Netherlands aren’t as structured as Spain and often rely purely on creative sparks rather than technique, which could prove costly if one of their key players has a bad game. Spain also possess creativity but also have a foolproof plan of passing to cut teams open and ensure an end result.

To conclude, I predict a Spanish win as they have shown that they can still drill out a result in a deadlock (against Germany in the semi-final, where neither side looked to have a particular dominance over the other, although there were sporadic moments of sheer footballing delight). They have both creativity and technique: a winning formula.

I was absolutely horrified as I read through the news to see that David Villa had just completed a €40 million transfer deal.

David Villa is one of the best strikers Spain has ever had, and probably the best in the current Spanish squad. The Spanish International squad is full of top quality players such as Xavi, Fernando Torres and Sergio Ramos. Even Arsenal captain Fabrégas has failed to break into the first team, but Villa is a definite choice for Del Bosque, at any times.

There have been transfer rumours surrounding him starting ages ago, so it shouldn’t be so surprising that he has moved, and with a staggering transfer fee (yes – small compared to the likes of Ronaldo and Kàka) too, but I find it hard to believe that Barcelona were the team to actually buy him. Many newspapers claimed that Villa’s first choice was Barcelona if he were to move on from Valencia, however, I had never expected Barça to take him so soon after they bought Ibrahimovic.

What Villa’s transfer means is that Zlatan will probably lose his place; possibly leading him to leave Nou Camp. Some might argue that Villa and Ibrahimovic would make a perfect pair, but that’s not going to happen. Barcelona’s main tactic is 4-3-3. This formation is particularly useful with the strength of their midfield, and their brilliant wing forward Messi. If Villa and Ibrahimovic were to play up front together, the most obvious tactical choice would be 4-4-2. However, by using this tactic, Barça lose their midfield advantage since they can only put two players incentre midfield. Additionally, if the transfer rumour of Fàbregas departing Arsenal (I’m sorry Arsenal fans – it’s just going to happen) for Nou Camp were true, then Pep Guardiola wouldn’t dare to waste the best part of his team. Other formations other than 4-4-2 which could maximise the effect of Barça’s midfield suggest getting rid of wingers, which is simply unacceptable with Lionel Messi in the team. There can only be one striker. Other options may include putting Villa as a left winger, but the young Pedro is beginning to establish his place in the first team. He was more assuring in front of the goal than Ibrahimovic this season I thought. Furthermore, having Villa as a left winger is maybe too ineffective, as we know that he is a prolific finisher (i.e he plays well when in the box). People might criticise him for his height, but he has been deployed often as a lone striker at Valenica and has done well.

So what happens to Ibrahimovic?

I reckon he would admit himself that his season has been pretty bad. There’s no doubt Barcelona fans would be disappointed with his performances. I still believe he’s a quality striker and I’d give him 1 or 2 years, by then he would have settled in perfectly and would be a great asset to the team; but the addition of David Villa has left little options for the Swede: either he warms the bench, or he leaves. Being subs for most of the games is not what we would expect from a ?65 million-worth player.

Football has become such a reckless industry; as seen in Villa and Ibrahimovic case. It looks as if Barça are going to throw away an expensive acquirement in just a single season. This deal would be damaging to the club’s long-term finance, subsequently the economy centred around the club and most importantly to Ibrahimovic himself. Welcome to the grim side of football.

by  Ricky Won

“The press and politicians would have you think that David Cameron and Nick Clegg’s arrival at 10 Downing Street means the big questions of how we do politics have been settled. No more rallies, no more protests, no more calls for fair votes now.

They couldn’t be more wrong.

There will be a referendum on changing the voting system – and you helped make this happen. AV may be a small step in the right direction, but it’s not a fair, proportional system. The politicians need to understand that we demand more. We want fair votes. And on Saturday they’ll hear us. Our voices still matter. We still have time, and we still have the power, to send a deafening message to the new government demanding a fair electoral system.” – Pam Giddy, Take Back Parliament.

Current estimates suggest that AV would result in only around one in every 75 seats switching hands, which is only around 8. It has become abundantly clear that our own system FPTP no longer works, with AV now the consensus option. But it’s far from reform. It doesn’t even attempt to ensure that everyone’s views are represented, just that the MPs elected are okay with a majority of the votership in each seat. That leaves us with at least 40% of votes uncounted in that seat, and of the 50% many in marginal constituencies may still be reasonably unhappy with that vote despite having ‘OKed’ it.

In a few months, perhaps a few years, we will be able to judge the success of this coalition government. But the clear message now is that it can be done, and that we will be able to do it again. All the problems that once arose from Proportional Representation have now been dismissed, and with AV +, the MP remains responsible to his constituents, whilst a proper and fair system of proportional representation is still in place.

If you’re interested in protesting, or would just like to sign the petition head on over to Take Back Parliament. Also comment below and/or follow us on twitter!

David Cameron (CON) is the man in charge as Prime Minister and to his right will be Nick Clegg (LIB) in his role as Deputy Prime Minister with the added dispensation to clean up politics and reform the system.

As Foreign Secretary, William Hague (CON) retains the position he earned in the shadow cabinet, and will also be Chairman of the Northern Board of the party, fighting to reshape the perception of the party in the north of England. The next top job falls to George Osbourne (CON), in an appointment some may consider a surprise, having become Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Theresa May (CON) become Home Secretary, and gains the remit of being the Minister for Woman and Equality as Harriet Harman was in the last parliament. Dr Liam Fox (CON) has become Defence Secretary, despite being shadow health secretary under both William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith.

Lord Ken Clarke (CON), seen as a thatcherite by many for his hard-line right views and his years of service in the Major and Thatcher government’s, leading Britain out of its previous recession, has become Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State For Justice. Andrew Lansley (CON) is now Health Secretary, whilst Michael Gove (CON) is Education Secretary. Vince Cable (LIB), once toted as a possible chancellor, and deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats has fallen to Business Secretary but will be part of several committees linked with taxation and banking. Iain Duncan Smith (CON) takes over Work and Pensions and Chris Huhne (LIB) will now be Energy and Climate Change Secretary. David Laws (LIB) seen by many as on the liberal side of the Liberal Democrats economical policies will become Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

Danny Alexander (LIB) will be Scottish Secretary. Patrick McLoughlin (CON) will remain Chief Whip. Eric Pickles (CON) becomes Communities and Local Government Secretary. Dominic Grieve (CON) becomes Attorney General. For Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport, Jeremy Hunt (CON) will take up the mantle. Baroness Warsi (CON) will become Conservative Party Chairman.

Caroline Spelman (CON) is environment secretary; Philip Hammond (CON) is transport secretary; Cheryl Gillan (CON) is Welsh Secretary; Owen Paterson (CON) is Northern Ireland secretary; Lord Strathclyde (CON)  is leader of the Lords. Details of the new Policies can be found on the BBC.

LATEST : David Cameron has just left Buckingham Palace and is now Prime Minister, having formally signed the agreement with the Queen. He has arrived at 10 Downing Street, place of dreams.

ON THE SPEECH : There are “Deep pressing problems”,but Cameron has decided to form a “proper and full coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats” and “put aside party differences”, “to take difficult decision”  and form a “strong government, to “rebuild trust in our political system”, reforming parliament and ensuring that politicians are always “their servants and not their masters.” He asks us to be responsible to our country, and to have a sense of duty, and that “those who can should” and that “we will always provide for those who cannot.” He wants to build a society of “freedom, fairness, and responsibility,” by rebuilding our communities.

It has finally happened. At this very moment Gordon Brown is on his way to speak to the Queen, only minutes away from handing over power to a Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition, which David Cameron will lead. It remains to be seen what the terms of the agreed deal are, and the Liberal Democrats federal executive committee still does not meet until 9.30pm and he requires a 75% majority, but it has become evident that the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives have agreed some sort of a deal. He has spent a while with the Queen, explaining the process to the Queen, and how he will form a majority.

Gordon Brown’s departing words where “I wish the next prime minister well as he makes the important choices for the future. Only those who have held the office of prime minister can understand the full weight of its responsibilities and its great capacity for good. I have been privileged to learn much about the very best in human nature and a fair amount too about its frailties – including my own.” He made a gracious exit, with his two sons and wife with him, and has quickly been greeted with good wishes from members of the press and MPs.

The deal still has to be ratified tonight at 9.30pm, and Simon Hughes, a senior member of the Liberal Democrats, stated that “I will use my head rather than my heart, and if it’s something I believe will deliver the sort of more liberal and more democratic future that I’ve fought for for 30 years or more then I’d be prepared to support it.” But the question still remains as to the nature of the deal, despite many Conservatives being highly optimistic about it. The draft agreement included a fixed-term parliament of three years or more and an agreement by the Liberal Democrats not to vote against them while they are in power. There is also said to be no tax now on the first £10,000 one earns according to Lord Carlile. Whether this is in the final agreement remains to be seen.

Labour will begin its search for a new leader over the coming months, but it is expected to take until July.  Harriet Harman will now be Acting Leader of the Labour Party. Already the spin has begun from Labour, as Peter Mandelson excused the loss, saying Labour had had”a good, long innings”, whilst Ed Balls pointed to their losing the election as a fault of Gordon Brown supporting the country rather than focusing on politics often.

The question now to be asked is what to expect from the new leader. We’ll be reviewing key points of the manifesto shortly when the deal is announced. Comment below or follow us on twitter.

“The idea that the two parties that suffered most in this election, that were rejected by the electorate, that in the case of the Labour party lost a hundred of its seats, should put together an illegitimate government, this is the Robert Mugabe style of politics,” says Conservative MP and former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind. “It’s exactly what Mugabe did you know, he lost the election and scrabbled to hold onto power.” But that is the way Senior Liberal Democrats are attempting to pull Nick Clegg, despite him being one of the most right leaning Liberal Democrats in modern history. Unfortunately Labour members from Jim Fitzpatrick to a prominent scottish labour mp, as yet unnamed have expressed doubt in the ability of their party to form a workable coalition.

In terms of the Labour Leadership contest, Harriet Harman appears to have bowed out, saying that as Deputy Leader she cannot stand for Leader of the Labour Party, though it is unclear whether this means she intends to step down, as some have suggested. David Milliband is still the favourite, with some newspapers suggesting that Ed Miliband will also stand, either to help his brother by splitting the left, or with the real intention of becoming Leader of the Labour Party.

In other election news last night’s take back parliament protest went well, and the leaders are pushing the idea that they have been successful as “Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats heard our voices that proportional representation must be part of any coalition deal. They have now begun formal negotiations with the Labour Party, who may be inclined to offer this essential reform if the Tories refuse.” They also are cheered by the Tories offer of an Alternative Vote Referendum.

In short, Cameron is offering fixed-term parliaments and a referendum on Alternate Vote which he has just phoned Nick Clegg to discuss. Labour on the other hand offer on fuller proportional representation and a bill on the Alternate Vote scheme. It remains to be seen whether without a leader of the party how cast-iron Labour’s offer will be. Alistair Darling seems to hold little hope insisting that they are necessary but that he’s unsure if anything will come of it. At 10 o’clock the Liberal Democrats will meet to discuss the offer once more.

Michael Gove, the shadow minister for education would have us think that there is “unanimous” support among Tory MPs and peers for offering the Lib Dems a referendum on electoral reform, but all his comments are really showing is the Conservative desire to sign the deal and get into parliament. Most of Labour have given up, despite the talks, as the pact is unworkable, as it fails to secure them a majority, even despite the fact that Sinn Fein have never sat in on parliament. Labour MP Diane Abbott says that “tragically, the numbers mean that a Lib-Lab pact would be least stable”.

Harriet Harman, the deputy leader of the labour party is also set to make a speech at some point, outlining the future of the party. We’ll have news tomorrow on the speech and all the events as soon as they unfold. For now comment below, or contact us on twitter.

As Tory-Lib Dem talks move further on, Brown has finally announced that he will step down. It will perhaps signal the hope of a new wave to Lib-Lab talks which may even lead to a new coalition, though that seems unlikely considering its dependence on nationalist parties which may well cost them dear. Nick Clegg has finally agreed to set up official, formal talks between Labour and the Liberal Democrats.

Now the challenge is for Labour to decide upon a new leader who can pull the Liberal Democrats away from Labour. Constitutionally, the argument goes that an unelected Labour Prime Minister would not be unconstitutional as we have a parliamentary democracy whereby we vote for our local candidate who joins part of a block in parliament that elects a leader to speak for it, rather than the public electing a leader in the same style as a presidential democracy. Obviously the criticism is that after the TV debates and the past few years developments in politics, people vote more and more for the Leader and the party than just the party and its candidate.

But it is necessary to remember that Labour now lack a leader which it will take a while to elect democratically from within the party and the two parties together lack a majority. The ultimate sacrifice for the coalition or a vain gesture in the hope of keeping his party in power?

Fantasy Cabinet anyone? Tweet us, or comment below.

Amid emerging news that Liberal Democrat negotiators met with Labour, alongside this is the new developing story that at 5pm today Liberal Democrats will meet to once and for all decide just how important fair votes are, not just for themselves but for the people of this country. Anyone who feels strongly on this matter should join the waiting crowd outside The Work Foundation, at 21 Palmer Street wearing purple.

On a broader note, an increasing number of Liberal Democrats have been debating the renewed possibility of Lib-Lab time-limited coalition, though the obvious objection regarding the sacrifices that would have to be made to the nationalist parties has once again been raised. Dr Richard Grayson, former Lib Dem policy director said that “Any deal with Labour would have to be time-limited. I think, for example, if a deal could be done for two years that would allow emergency measures to be taken on the public finances, that would allow a referendum on electoral reform and some re-drawing of boundaries, the people would know that they’re going to get a chance to vote [after that].” But many of the Labour MPs have unfortunately been quoted as thinking that Gordon Brown has ‘blown’ his chance of forming a parliament, by simply sitting there waiting.

The obvious question to ask now is simply, what would Tony Blair do? As ex-prime minister, despite dropping lower and lower in the polls and in parliament before he resigned, has never failed to be dynamic and charming. He was truly a love-hate character in a way that the PM never was, and it was clear that had he stood for election once more, he would either have been thumpingly beaten on account of the two wars, or he would have been heralded from the roof tops, and perhaps even increased his majority. But even if he had not managed either of those two things, considering his relationship with the Liberal Democrats he certainly would have been first to be approached by them, and would never have suffered the humiliation that Brown must now face as he waits in Parliament for the phone call that will tell him his fate.

As always comments below, or you can check out our twitter!

Tomorrow dawns a bright and brilliant new day in British Politics. The Liberal Democrats stand ready to consult the rank and file about the proposed Lib-Con coalition. Whilst we don’t know anything about the deal it’s been evident since this morning through the language Clegg and the two parties have been using that some kind of conclusion is being reached.

David Cameron has been addressing his shadow cabinet perhaps warning them of any potential job losses and the exact nature of the detail, with William Hague and the negotiating team having just arrived. Earlier today Nick Clegg met the prime minister to update him on the nature of talks, and perhaps to finally tell him that it was time to walk the plank.

But the critical thing is whether or not the rank and file of the Liberal Democrats will agree. Jane Watkinson a prolific liberal democrat blogger had this to say “Well, personally, if Clegg continues these talks and actually does what it appears he is going to do – and that is back the Tories – he hasn’t listened to us. He has stabbed his party members in the back, most of who have campaigned on policies that are essential for political reform. If he joins the Tories, all those hopes and aspirations will die, it, in my opinion, will start the destruction of this party.” Many people have voiced the same concerns, but the real question is how many in number they are, considering that Lord Paddy Ashdown and several other MPs have continued to voice concerns about the scale of the debt and the importance of tackling it. Now that this issue becomes more and more tantamount, perhaps people will vote in an attempt to deal with the deficit, rather than with their hearts.

It looks like there’ll be no more news for today, but the parties have already decided what will happen, and now it’s time for their members to say yes or no. Are you a member of the Liberal Democrats? Which will you say? Comment below or add us on twitter.