Alarm goes at 5am, and have to admit that I am already awake, as the nerves have kicked in....

We packed and loaded the bikes onto the back of the car to head down to Hampton Court for the start of the race. Mick (my brother in law) and I were fairly quiet in the car, Mick because he kept packing and unpacking his bags, something he did not stop doing until we arrived in Paris.

Hampton Court was heaving, and heaving with very fit looking cyclists who all looked confident, thin and ok in lycra.....

It is weird when you are walking into another sport, you know you are not good at it and you know that they all know you are not good at it....and to be honest I was bloody bloody nervous!

Mike and Ian were there, the other members of our team, plus the other 350 plus riders. We had received an email from the charity, Right to PLay, the day before saying that our fund raising of £42,000 would put 1500 kids through their programmes for a year, so great timing and we did mention it to each other a few times as our arses got worse and worse!

It was an amazing experience, not neccessarily a completely enjoyable one, but it was tough and bloody hard at times with the temperatures at 35+ on the road for eight hours at a go.

There was a hill outside Dover that was just brutal, it was just not funny, and I psyched myself out before it even started resulting in the worst cramps that I have ever had! In my quads, both, then my hamstrings, then my hip-flexors and calfs! All at once! I was kneeling by the side of the road leaning on my bike - the other riders must have thought that I was praying before taking on the hill...! Not if they had heard my language.....

The best part of day one was the Burger King was had before getting on the ferry! Bloody lovely! Burger, chips and coke, the food of champions.....

Day two was the toughest, rolling hill after rolling hill, interspersed with bloody long hills! One of the guys I was cycling next to summed it up perfectly 'F***ing hell, if we were in a car, we would be looking out saying what beautiful countryside, look at the lovely rolling hills... and all I can think of is f**k the rolling hills, I hate the f**king rolling hills' Had me laughing for quite a few miles.

Once you started day 3 you knew that it was nearly over, and although we had to complete 80 miles before lunch, once there we knew that we could smell Paris......or our guts were in a bad way.One of the ladies was shaking so badly at lunch she could not hold her bottle of water to drink. The shaking hands did provoke the inevitable jokes.....what a waste and all that..........luckily after a few litres she was ok to finish.

We rode in as one huge group of 350 into Paris, with the 25 odd outriders blocking off all the junctions etc. So we cycled up a deserted Champs Elysees - which was awesome. Shame I was too bloody knackered to take it all in.....

So after about 330 miles in three days, we finished. Standing around outside the hotel, in the shadow of the Eiffel Tower it was hard to believe we did not have to wash out our bike bottles, get the powders etc ready for the next day, get the power bars into the tops, gels, jelly babies etc etc. We could stop and relax..............

It was a great feeling, so we got pissed.......which was very sensible when we were no doubt dehydrated anyway! But it was a good end to a pretty intense three days.

So apologies for my absence on here, a huge huge thanks to those that sponsored me and here's to being able to sit unaided in a few weeks............haha

Experience does count for so much and I have to admit to a big grin watching Thompson 'trying' to put his contact lense in when there was an injury! Brilliant! haha. It took him so long and if you watched closely he actually flicked it off his finger once the ref was not watching................

But hey, some people will no doubt get annoyed and say that is cheating.............

As for the game.........well this was the style and approach that we all hoped for last weekend, so a little late but very welcome none the less.

England played with pace, in attack and defence, they pressured the Aussie's with their defence, the hits were better and the intensity was better. In attack it was similar, forwards ran onto the ball, basic I know but it was missing last week, the backs were similar and there was more variety.

It is too simple to say that Youngs was the factor even though he was sharp, passing was crisp and he looks an awesome prospect, but there was far more to it than that. The backrow for a start were a different group of animals, Easter was strong on the ball, Croft immense in the line-out and Moody was back to hunting at his best. The were helped by a more dynamic front five with Lawes carrying powerfully and the scrum retaining it's dominance.

The forwards and at times the basks seemd to understand how important the tackle area was, and we were far more physical once there and far quicker to get there in sufficient numbers.

Above all it seemed that the mind set was right. Foden was counter-attacking from the off which showed the frame of mind was significantly different from the week before and how much more effective did he look as a player as a result. The back three are becoming an effective unit, I am still yet to be convinced of the balance in midfield. We still lack one centre with the vision and ability to pass with speed and accuracy and hence release that back three with even more effect.

I also did not understand the substitution of Youngs at such a crucial time?

Those points aside, to win against the Aussie's on their patch is a great achievement and massive congratulations to the players on that achievement. Hopefully they will now stick with that style and mindset as they move towards next year's World Cup

So Lawes is in, at last ,and so is Youngs as the two changes to the England team to face the Aussies.

I know it is easy to be negative and I have tried to be positive about England selection as often as possible, I suppose deep down I want Johno to succeed if I am being honest, and at times this makes me biased I admit, but the Lawes selection leaves me just a little confused.

Lawes was in epic form at the start of the season, but was deemed too 'green' and he needed experience before he could start for England. Being honest his form then dipped slightly, but now suddenly he is ready......?

I am waffling I know, but what I am trying to say is that I get the feeling that none of England's selections are ever pro-active, they are reactive. Foden was only picked for the last 6 Nations game after Armitage's from had really hit rock bottom.....Lawes was the new young buck ready to be blooded during the 6 Nations, but nothing............Youngs has been in amazing form but missed the first Test.............Barkley has been 'the' form midfield player at the end of the season and.................

If a player has the ability, then age is not an issue. And many players just can not perform at Test level because they do not have that ability, and no amount of seasons at club level will ever give it to them. I have always believed that young players should be given their chance, in an environment that encourages and develops.....

Players need to understand their roles within a team and be confident that those roles allow them to deliver their full potential. In that respect I feel very sorry for Care, he is a different animal for Quins and looks inhibited for England. I hope we are not saying the same about Youngs in a number of Tests......

I am also very concerned by the midfield. Hape and Tindall are not subtle, they are not players with guile, vision, distribution etc. They are brave, physical, honest. But to break down the Aussie defence we need nore than that, as shown by the first Test. So the creative responsibility falls entirely on Flood's shoulders............is that a good thing? He stikes me as a good guy, struggling slightly to impose himself at Test level, and needing a little help / encouragement to get him there. Instead he is left as the sole creative, the sole distributor..................not a great call in my book.

Yes any selection can be pulled to pieces, mine would be laughable I am sure. But I just wish we could see some pattern from England, some attack, risks, adventure, fire, pace, variety, anticipation, angles of attack, speed of hand and mind -all the things I am convinced that the likes of Ashton, Foden, Cueto, Barkley, Youngs and Flood possess, but are just not showing us.

Hopefully Wells will instruct his forward pack that quick ball, and plenty of it is the only way to break down Test defences. Slow, grinding pick and drives went out with my lot, let's move on FFS ! Part of me would like to see Ward-Smith in at 8, but maybe that is just a change too much, but he does have the power and pace that is needed at Test level on the hard grounds. Easter needs a big game, as do Croft and Moody at the breakdown where Aussie dominated last week.

Fingers crossed that we fire this time......

Once you have congratulated England on their scrummaging, it is pretty hard to find any other positives to their game.

Australia on the other hand looked sharp, inventive, creative and unbelievably heroic in defence. They played with their heads up, they took on the forwards in front of them when running in open play, they attacked with pace and with variety in their line of attack, and not surprisingly it worked and worked well. All common sense really for an attack coach.......isn't it?

So what are England doing?

At times I have to hold my hands up and say I have no bloody idea. We seem to kick a huge amount of first phase possession, and OK that might well not be the most positive of strategies, but it is a strategy, but what is amazing is our chase!!! There were times when just one guy was chasing hard, and he was easily beaten. Now that is just simple preparation and attitude. No excuses. If you are to play a tactical kicking game, then your chase has to be good, very good and England's was poor, very poor !

I am not making excuses, but Danny Care seems to be straight jacketed into a game that is completely alien to him. Why? Didn't Burgess show us what a damage a threat at number 9 can do?

Also Australia are known to be a good defensive team, so to break them down you need creativity and guile. We pick Hape and Tindall in the midfield. Both strong, powerful men, but neither is known for his creativity, pace or guile. It struck me as a strange selection and sadly proved to be sterile in attack and even vulnerable in defence. At Test level you need pace for both, is that not obvious to the coaches?

And now for a terrible generalization, but the one game in the last ten or so that England have played, where we looked threatening, relaxed, natural even, was the performance against France. And it was a performance that was very 'un-Leicester'. Sadly the performance against Australia was classic Leicester, and yet again at Test level it failed. Yes the set piece has to be good, but it does not win Test matches as Australia have just shown us in bright Technicolor !

You need to place the defence in front of you, you need to attack it's weak points as it is right then, not as you pre-planned it to be. You need to attack it at pace, you need to vary your lines of attack, points of attack and ball carriers who do the 'attacking'. Sadly England do not seem to look at what they are attacking to see if there is a front five forward caught out of position, they do not attack with pace, with variety, or even with numbers.

Inevitably unless there is a huge improvement in the next Test, big and uncomfortable questions will be asked of the coaches, and the players as they can not abdicate all responsibility. But the coaches really should have had enough time to establish a style and an intent with this group of players. How can Ashton and Foden be so effective with the Saints, and yet so redundant with England......

The biggest glaring sign for me after this defeat is that England need to accept that Shaw, Thompson and even Easter might well be effective in the wet and mud of the Premiership, but on the hard grounds of the Southern Hemisphere it is time for younger more athletic models....

Now that is an explosive title.......but I hope this is a balanced piece.

Wales had a golden opportunity to beat South Africa this weekend, it was not a South African second string by any means, but it was weakened of that there is no doubt. So Wales, at home, had a great chance for their second victory, ever, over South Africa.

It did not happen.

I do not want to go over the technical points of the game, the scorers, the missed tackles etc etc, what interests me more is the mental side...

It does beg the question as to whether Wales have the mental strength to beat the Southern Hemisphere sides, and whether there is still a mental block about playing them..

I should know, we had it when I was playing for England and only towards the end could I honestly say that it had gone, and only in Martin Johnson's era did we ever dominate them.So I do know what it is like and how it feels.

We used to do all the right talking, all the right preparation, but deep down, and I mean deep deep down when you were alone in your room, you did not believe that you could win. The hype about the Southern Hemisphere was too ingrained, too deep and your felt that they had an edge....

I watch Wales at the moment and wonder if this is the truth with them. Skillful players, fit players, tough players, but maybe players that just do not believe.....

It took us, me, until we lost in the 91 World Cup Final to get really pissed off with the whole thing, and decide that enough was enough. I was f*****g livid, as we all were, and from then on I really believe our attitude and approach changed.

Wales need enough players with some steel, some real edge, who have had enough of nearly, enough of playing well but just failing, enough of mediocre, and have enough balls and fire to make sure they drag the rest of them along too.

If this is to be a great generation as Gatland alluded to, then they need to find some nasty bastards who will start to instill some real hard edge into the squad, a new code of behaviour and attitude that no longer tolerates 'nearly'......

I have read some of the coverage of Dean Richard's 'involvement' with Worcester, and to be honest I am staggered yet again at the vitriol and moral arrogance in the stance that so many of them have taken.

Let's get the facts. Dean rang the RFU to check whether he could help Worcester review their coaching set up and maybe suggest some possible candidates. So he was proactive in ensuring he did nothing that was against his 'ban'.

He got the green light, helped Worcester, job done.

If there is any flak that should come out of this, then it should be aimed fairly and squarely at the authorities, who rushed through such a draconian and over zealous ban with such religious fervor, that they were bound to have legal issues as a consequence.

And before the saintly ones amongst you accuse me of forgetting what it is Dean did, I haven't ! And I agree that what he did was wrong, as he does, BUT, to you 'saintly' ones, do you really really really believe that he was the only coach who ever used this tactic? And when the RFU set up a panel to investigate the game and the use of such 'tactics', do we really believe that they uncovered nothing???

Far from it. They uncovered too much. Too may high profile names, and I mean 'high' profile. So surprise, surprise, it was brushed under the carpet, and Dean Richards was cast as the heinous villan, and all the ills of the game were placed squarely at his door!

Predictable! So bloody predictable! 

But what is the man supposed to do? He asks permission, is granted it, and does what he was asked to do. Are the faultless, perfect, morally pure journalists saying that he should not be allowed into a rugby ground? Or maybe even close to one? Maybe he should be banned from saying the 'word' rugby, and he should surely not be allowed to wear a rugby shirt, or sock or tie.

Foolish I know, but so is the preaching of some journalists, who I know live by an 'interesting' level of morals.

Apologies for the rant, but this issue does really p*ss me off !

Easter is a good shout as captain. He is in good form, has the qualities and values that will be good for the team, and I hope will continue to play a crucial role even when Moody is back as captain on the tour to Aussie land.

The Front row looks interesting ! That is all I can say as I have no idea what the hell goes on there, but those that do tell me we have some good prospects on the way, so let's see what two of them can do against the Barbarians.

Palmer had a great game against the French, so the onus is on him to make a similar impact again. Attwood alongside him is another sign that this management team have started to shake off the conservative selection policies that hindered their earlier teams.

Good to see Ward-Smith on the bench, at last he might get the chance to fulfill his potential in an England shirt. Haskell will be feeling under pressure, with him there and Croft to come back for the tour......

Strettle back to show if he still has the elusive magic, and Hape at 12. I have to admit I would have liked to see Barkley at 12, to keep the momentum he has built up during the run into the end of the season and I believe he has the full skill set to play that position. The longet he ahs there in an England shirt the better. But let's see what Hape can do, and maybe he is there to 'mind' Hodgson's return at 10? The Barbarians are bound to run hard at his channel, and early, so we will get a good chance to see if his defence has improved.

The crucial aspects for England are that they manage to maintain the sense of adventure, confidence and momentum the generated in Paris, the likes of Foden and Strettle need to continue the counter attack theme and continue the belief that we can break down defences with the ball in hand.

As in any game against the Barbarians, the pack will be crucial. England need to dominate against a talented, but invitational forward pack that will not have the understanding, or drilling that the England boys should have. If England can dominate the set piece and breakdown, then the excitement of the Paris display should be ignited again.....

It is quite obvious already, that the 2011 World Cup Final will be France V South Africa. Sorted.

Joking, obvioulsy, but an interesting situation at the moment with two countries dominating the two hemispheres so clearly.

France produced both finalists in the Heineken Cup, and South Africa will be delivering both finalists for the Super 14 final this weekend.

Does this automatically mean that they will be the strongest sides come the World Cup? Of course not, but it does mean that they are producing the strongest teams at the level just below, and that those players will therefore be confident and positive - a big requirement for any winning team.

But the WC is still a long way off, injuries, form etc will still have a huge part to play. The Froggies look strong, and will be the top side from the NH, but the beauty and frustration with the garlic munchers is that you (and they) never know what they are about to produce. At times brilliant, really brilliant and at other times stunningly bad......So who knows with them.

So a long way to go, but the pressure on the AB's will be growing, their form in this years Tri-Nations will be fascinating to watch, as will the WC dark horses our Aussie friends (when I say friends obviously I do not meant it :-))

Awesome - no other word for it.

Heineken Cup Final in Paris, pretty good location in itself, but how good is the atmosphere going to be with two French giants slugging it out.

And then just to add International flavour, the semi-finals of the Super 14. Very cleverly located in South Africa, so that us British can enjoy the games at a sensible time whilst sipping tea........

So Heineken first.

Bloody great beer

And the rugby, well it should be fascinating. Toulouse the favorites, but as with any French side, who the hell knows.They have such a strong squad that they can leave Heymans out.

Will Skrela handle the pressure? The scrum battle should be equal, as I think the line outs will too, but Toulouse will edge the back row and this could and should give them the key to control the game. Kelleher will have to be at his best, decision making crisp and fast so that the Toulouse backs can capitalise on the breakdown advantage. If for some amazing reason HairyDonkey, or Harinordoquy as some people call him, can inspire the Biarritz forwards to some supreme performance, and they have had a good long break, then he and his fellow backrowers might just negate Toulouse's breakdown advantage, and then it is game on. The only fly in that ointment is that Hunt does not release a backline well, and if Biarritz are to win, they need to threaten and puncture the Toulouse defence......

So have to go with Toulouse on this one.......

Then we have the Crusaders trying to topple the dominant Bulls, in Soweto at altitude. best of luck......

But of anyone can do it, then you would choose the Crusaders to give it a go. Can they hold their own line out, if so, then they are a huge step further down the line to being able to win the game. They also have to have far more impact and control at the breakdown, as this is where the Bulls caused them huge problems a few weeks ago.

I think the Crusaders will try to take the Bulls on with a wider game, and so much will then depend on McCaw, as usual. Carter will have to be at his best and the lungs generally will have to be ready for a real burning.

This will be a cracker, home advantage and altitude, as well as line out genius should all point to a Bulls win, so I will go for an upset and the Crusaders to sneak it (not a convincing argument I know)

So to the Stormers V Tahs.

Attack versus celebrated defence. Can the Waratahs young attacking guns accumulate enough pints against the brilliant Stormers defence? And can the rest of the Tahs game hold up under the intence pressure the Stormers will subject it to?

Mitchell and co will have to have the confidence to run, counter attack and run some more if they want to turn the Stormers over. Risk taking, calculated and executed effectively will be the key, not flamboyant and suicidal 7's rugby from the kick off will be the order of the day.

Another upset? I would love to go for the under dog again, it is always more fun, but I have no real belief that the Crusaders can do it, and sadly entertaining as I am sure they will be, I think the Waratahs will fall short......or will they be the ones to turn the Stormers over and the Crusaders will stumble.......bloody hell, who knows!!

The sensible and sane belief is that both South African sides will win, and a large part of me believes that too, but there is just that hope of an upset, as that is what makes sport so compelling (unless you are a Stormers of Bull's fan!!)

Enough of sitting on the fence, my arse is really hurting, especially after 75 miles on my bike yesterday....

After such a week with all the excitement about the election and such impressive and inspirational behaviour from so many of our esteemed politicians, I thought it time to be very 'un-PC' and have a laugh. So here are some famous people passing on their well thought out views on sex and relationships.....;

'Ah, yes, divorce, from the Latin word meaning to rip a man's genitals through his wallet' Robin Williams

'I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, natural, wholesome things that money can buy' Tom Clancy

'You know 'that look' women get when they want sex? Me neither' Steve Martin

'Having sex is like playing bridge. If you don't have a good partner, you'd better have a good hand' Woody Allen

'Sex at age 90 is like trying to shoot pool with a rope' George Burns

'Woman might be able to fake orgasms. But men can fake whole relationships' Sharon Stone

'My girlfriend always laughs during sex - no matter what she's reading' Steve Jobs

'Clinton lied. A man might forget where he parks or where he lives, but he never forgets oral sex, no matter how bad it is' Barbara Bush

'Women complain about premenstrual syndrome, but I think of it as the only time of the month that I can be myself' Roseanne

'Women need a reason to have sex. Men just need a place' Billy Crystal

'According to a new survey, women say they are more comfortable undressing in front of man than they do undressing in front of other women. They say women are too judgemental, where, of course, men are just grateful' Robert De Niro

'Instead of getting married again, I'm going to find a woman I don't like and just give her a house' Rod Stewart

'See, the problem is that God gives men a brain and a penis, and only enough blood to run one at a time' Robin Williams