For those who find the foreign invasion of the English game not to their taste, there may be some payback. If the FA does bid to host the 2018 World Cup, England’s vaunted domestic league and its extraordinary cast of international players, coaches and owners could be crucial in helping to deliver it.

You want a tight friendship with Michel Platini, the new Uefa president? Send in Thierry Henry. You need the ear of the Russian member on the Fifa executive, Dr Viacheslav Koloskov? Call up Roman Abramovich. And you want Chuck Blazer, the American on the executive, to feel at home here? Well, there are three Barclays Premiership clubs with American owners who can help to push those buttons.

Ambitious? Perhaps. But this is what the London bid leaders for the 2012 Olympic Games would have done.

They analysed every one of the 100-plus possible voters and worked out how to court them and their interests. Indeed, they went beyond the International Olympic Committee (IOC) voters who could influence the outcome of the 2012 race and targeted those who might influence them.

The breadth of knowledge about each IOC member and the mini-campaigns to influence them was one of their winning cards. And if it seems an obvious one, it was one that the England 2006 World Cup bidders failed to play. Their knowledge of — and attempts to manipulate — the Fifa executive were schoolboy in comparison.

Indeed, lobbying the Fifa executive should be a comparatively simple process if only because it comprises 24 voters as opposed to the IOC, which, when London won in the final voting round in Singapore, had 104. And because of its international flavour, there cannot be more than one or two in those 24 who do not have some kind of foothold in English football.

What else can the England 2018 team learn from their Olympic cousins? Lesson one, repeated over and over by Lord Coe: stay humble. Lesson two: sell the world an excellent technical bid, of course, but the sales pitch should go way beyond how good England could be. It should be explaining how much good England could do for the world game. When Coe stood to make his address in Singapore, he focused solely on the Olympic Movement and what London 2012 could do to regenerate it.

England 2018 would also do well to mirror London 2012 in the set-up of its bid company. It was not the British Olympic Association that led the bid — it was merely one of the stakeholders. Likewise, the FA should create the bid company, remain a key stakeholder, but take a step back.

London 2012 also managed the balance of governmental involvement well. It had the Government onside — otherwise it would have been a nonstarter — but it also remained sufficiently independent of government so that its management process did not get stuck in Whitehall.

The Paris 2012 bid, crucially, was led by politicians and the IOC membership was happier dealing with a figure from the world of sport — Coe — who was not necessarily going to have been voted out by the time the event rolled around.

But there is one element that England 2018 may never match. No one in English football comes close to ticking the number of boxes that Coe does as a political leader in a sporting world, though — Franz Beckenbauer aside, perhaps — no other Olympic or World Cup bid has had anyone quite like him either.

England 2018 must nevertheless use Coe, who has welcomed the bid and said that it will not conflict with preparations for the London Olympics. As head of Fifa’s ethics commission, he has influence.

The choice of bid leaders nevertheless throws up a few obvious candidates. Richard Scudamore, the FA Premier League chief executive, and David Sheepshanks, the chairman of Ipswich Town, are as able as any politicians in English football and would make excellent chief executives.

Figureheads from the playing side of game are less easy to spot. Sir Bobby Charlton, Sir Trevor Brooking and Gary Lineker each have attributes that would suit the chairman’s role. Whether they would want it is another matter altogether.

Everything you need to know about playing host to the tournament

Who decides where World Cups are held? The host country is chosen in a vote by Fifa’s 24-member executive committee. This is done by secret ballot under a single transferable vote system. The decision is usually made six years before the tournament.

What does England have to do to? Each candidate submits a bid document, including a hosting agreement and government guarantees, along with details of stadiums and other facilities, as well as related concerns, such as security and transportation. An inspection group visits stadiums and talks to interested parties. Finally, each host makes a presentation to the committee.

What will be in England’s favour? Government backing is essential, but England will also be able to lean on tradition and history as the birthplace of the sport and a proven level of supporter enthusiasm and attendance. Euro 96 will be a positive factor and the experience in landing the 2012 Olympic Games will be invaluable. It will help if Uefa supports an England bid.

Will England have any influential supporters? Franz Beckenbauer, who masterminded Germany’s hosting of the 2006 World Cup, has said that England should get the 2018 World Cup. Lennart Johansson, the outgoing Uefa president, pointed out that the other leading European footballing countries — Spain, Italy, France and Germany (twice) — have staged the World Cup since 1966, when it was last here.

So it’s in the bag? No. There is resentment about the perceived arrogance of some FA lobbyists during the unsuccessful bid to host the 2006 tournament. Rebuilding political bridges in other Fifa territories, such as Africa, will be essential.

Will the 2018 tournament definitely be in Europe? Probably. A policy of continental rotation until “at least 2014” was decided after controversy dogged the award of the 2006 tournament to Germany. Until 1998, Europe and the Americas hosted alternate tournaments, but since then Asia (2002) and Africa (2010) have been given slots. The 2014 World Cup will be in South America — probably Brazil — but after that, in theory, there could be a free-for-all. Oceania has a claim as the only populated continent yet to host a World Cup, but if the 2018 tournament goes to Australia or even Canada, the 16-year gap between 2006 and 2022 will be the longest between tournaments in Europe.

Who else is interested? Australia, Canada, Mexico and the Benelux countries, who would submit a joint bid.

Have we got the facilities? The stadiums should not be a problem. Wembley, the City of Manchester Stadium, Old Trafford, the Emirates Stadium, Stamford Bridge, Villa Park, the Stadium of Light and St James’ Park, all at 40,000 plus, are large enough to host matches and Liverpool’s planned new ground will be. Transport, however, might be a problem, with a creaking and expensive rail system struggling to cope with fans’ needs during a normal weekend league programme.