The criticism that Roy Hodgson has been subjected to over his decision to replace Gary Cahill with Martin Kelly, overlooking Rio Ferdinand in the process, has been excessive.
Labelling Roy Hodgson and the Football Association as disgraceful and disrespectful, as Ferdinand's representative did on Sunday night, was very unfair. Roy holds the top position in English football and he wasn't being disrespectful: he was making a big decision.
He chose someone who can play at full-back and maybe centre-back and does not have any fitness problems: crucially, he knows that Martin Kelly is not going to break down with a long-standing injury. You cannot say the same of Rio Ferdinand, and even Sir Alex Ferguson admitted recently that the Manchester United defender can't play twice in four days.
However, you don't need Sir Alex to come out and say Rio isn't right. If you watch Rio regularly you can see that he wasn't running comfortably this season. He was kicking with discomfort and he was playing within himself for United; you can't have that when you go to a major competition.
Regarding the Rio situation. I don't think his exclusion has anything to do with the looming court case regarding allegations that John Terry racially abused his brother, Anton - a charge which Terry denies. It can't be that way; Roy wouldn't do things that way.
You have to put football first and if Roy had thought that Rio would be the best man there he would have included him. The problem is that Rio has been blighted by injury in recent seasons: you just don't know how many games you are going to get from him.
Kelly replaces him but he has had a poor season. He is another Liverpool player who has been disappointing in the Premier League yet finds himself at the European Championship. If you had said at Christmas there would be six Liverpool players in the England squad then people would have thought you were mad.
But Kelly has benefitted from Micah Richards's refusal to be on stand-by. If you take that attitude then you don't deserve to go to a major tournament. You should be disappointed, of course, but you should always been there if your country needs you.
Players saying 'no' wouldn't happen in any other country. We must be one of the only countries in Europe were people say they don't want to play.
It is incredible that we have these players, like Michael Carrick, who have said they do not want to be on the stand-by list. If he had made himself available then with Gareth Barry and Frank Lampard both out injured, he would be there right now. He could have made a much stronger case for himself by arriving late and demonstrating why he should have been picked in the first place, rather than sitting on the sidelines.
That is the way to get back at people - not turning your back on England. I cannot understand why people are saying they do not want to be on the standby list. If England were at war and you turned round and said 'no', you would be in prison for refusing to fight for your country. Why are people saying no straight away? I don't understand it.
England have a very small pool of players to pick from already, and when other players refuse to be on standby then it makes Hodgson's task all the more difficult. His hands were pretty much tied to be honest.
It is not like we have a deep pool of talent - just look at our goalkeeping situation and the fact we have a player from League Two in the squad. We are not in the top grade of football and we have to be honest about that.
We are on the periphery and whether it is Martin Kelly or Rio Ferdinand in the squad, that will not change.