I get most of my sports news from the BBC Sport website and I've been very dissapointed in the coverage afforded the Nation's Cup. I reckon its a good tourni, one Scotland even have a chance of winning, but seems to be receiving very little coverage anywhere. not just the BBC. Does this smack of the usual english bbc bias? or am being over paranoid.

The fact Wilshere maybe, if he is handled right, the future of england (again with the pinning of hopes on one player, idiots)seems more important than the story that 3 of the 4 nations covered by national media are engaged in an international tournament.

yes people could say it is a non-tournament but i reckon it is much better than playing meaningless friendlies. mind you even the organisation seems slightly suspect. one game now and then the last 2 games not until May? probably contributes to the lack of interest that. but i digress

is this not worthy of more attention?

I think its worthy of more attention, most English folk I've spoken to down here are disappointed they're not taking part.

http://www.carling.com/football/nationscup/

I'd like to see 6 teams taking part with Engerland and France added to the current 4.

I'd like to see the tournament winners get an automatic place in the next Euros and World Cup. Oh, and best give one to the runners up too, just in case!

All friendlies count towards ranking points. What they should do, right, is at the time the world cup, or Euros come round, the top 32 teams in the world get in, ie the best teams in the world.

Also, Wiltshire's name is beginning to grind my gears. I keep hearing it, every where I go. Who is he? A young boy that plays for two of Europe's most whiny under achievers. Well done, take a bow son. Why do they (they = England) bang on a about any player with a slight bit of form. We've got TWO Caldwell's, and we're all cool about it.