Mark Andrews: A nail-biting win for Andy, and why Argentina should not be in the World Cup Final

Sixty years of hurt then.

As they say, you can live with the disappointment, it’s the hope that kills you. No doubt that England were beaten by the better team. But Argentina should not be playing in tomorrow’s final.

Nothing to do with the performance on the pitch, or even one or two of the questionable refereeing decisions. But because of the incident at the end of the game, when the Argentina team unfurled a bedsheet bearing the slogan ‘Los Malvinas son Argentinas’, or ‘The Falklands are Argentinian’.

This is in direct and flagrant contravention of Fifa rules that strictly forbid any political campaigning during the tournament. While I may feel uncomfortable with any rule which seeks to constrain freedom of speech, the fact remains that this was a calculated and deliberate act to defy the laws of the game. If the rules mean anything, they must be enforced, and the fact that Argentina breached them so flagrantly means they cannot be allowed to compete in the final. Or at the very least, the players who took part should be banned and stripped of their medals.

It’s not even the first time they have done it - they were fined £20,000 for displaying the same words in 2014.

And ask yourself this question: How do you think the US authorities would have responded had it been a message about Donald Trump?

As a Villa fan, it was a relief to hear goalkeeper Emi Martinez had distanced himself from the protest. But had he held the banner, I would have had no hesitation in demanding he either apologises or be shown the door.

No such reticence from Manchester United’s Lisandro Martinez, though, despite being quite happy to pocket £120,000 a week from English fans. It would be nice to think United will come down on their errant defender like a ton of bricks, but we all know there are few principles in modern football. Let’s hope that supporters of every other team in the Premier League make their feelings known in the way only they know how.

And why were the Scotland fans suddenly declaring their allegiance for Argentina? Yes we all know they have got a chip on the shoulder about England, and football is all about rivalries, even if that one is completely one sided. But given that a significant number of Scottish troops gave their lives liberating the Falklands from Argentina, could they not have put their prejudices aside for just one game?

That was a bit of a cliffhanger, wasn’t it?

In scenes reminiscent of the X-Factor finale, circa 2005, Shabana Mahmood strode up to the podium and announced she was finally ready to put us out of our misery and declare the result of the Labour leadership contest.

And the winner is...Andy Burnham!

Yep, Andy received the backing of 379 Labour MPs, compared to a single nomination for Catherine West. Who had herself backed Mr Burnham. A bit tighter than expected, but he made it over the line. As they say about everything these days.

Meanwhile, the former King of the North announced that he would govern for all of us, which I thought was jolly decent of him.

“I will be a leader for the North, the South, the East and the West,” he promised. Did anybody notice anywhere missing?

I suppose it is good that our next prime minister, the eighth in a fraction over 10 years, has the overwhelming backing of his MPs - at least for now. It is certainly better than the ludicrous situation when party activists forced Liz Truss and Jeremy Corbyn on to their reluctant MPs, something that our political parties really need to address. Giving ordinary members the final vote on political leadership may have looked a good idea on paper, but democracy can’t function properly if elected MPs do not decide who governs us.