Click here to take part in Patrick Barclay's debate

No wonder Fabio Capello, far from sharing the concern of most England followers, looked relieved at the Khalifa International Stadium late on Saturday night. One of the most devilish tasks facing the national team manager of a country of England’s scale is that of whittling his squad down to 23 for a World Cup — and Capello’s selection process had just been made a lot easier.

To the margins, on the stark evidence of his reserves’ merciful defeat by a Brazil near full strength, had been consigned Darren Bent, Joleon Lescott, Jermaine Jenas and Shaun Wright-Phillips; they ought to make contingency plans for holidays next June. As for the families and close friends of Matthew Upson and James Milner, the best advice would be to book something in South Africa, but avoid game-drives on match days.

Neither the result nor the performance in Doha will have bothered Capello unduly; the former was predictable, given the sides’ relative strengths, and the latter owed much to the heat of the Qatari capital.

England’s distaste for playing in very warm conditions, although largely psychosomatic — as if Brazilians or anyone else do not prefer the cool — does tend to affect the quality of their pressing and the speed of their counter-attacking.

The more possessive teams, such as Spain and Brazil, are less troubled. But Capello knows that heat will not be a problem in the World Cup, at which it will be a rare kick-off that takes place in a temperature exceeding 70F (21C). All remains set fair for Capello’s England and nothing that happened at the weekend shook my belief that they can return triumphant from South Africa.

Not, of course, with Saturday’s team. Their loss of shape was emphasised by Brazil’s discipline; Capello, in praising Dunga’s side, notably the physical qualities that, he implied, elevated them even above Spain, all but pointed to the deficiencies of his own.

As was the case when England lost 2-0 to Spain in a friendly match in Seville last season, however, they lacked most of Capello’s leading players. The manager knows his team and the nine who did not appear alongside Wayne Rooney and Gareth Barry against Brazil were David James, Glen Johnson, Rio Ferdinand, John Terry, Ashley Cole, Frank Lampard, David Beckham or Theo Walcott, Steven Gerrard and Emile Heskey.

The shadow team now appear to be along these lines: Robert Green or Ben Foster, with the loser also to travel as third goalkeeper; Owen Hargreaves (if fully restored after tendinitis), Wes Brown, Upson and Wayne Bridge; Michael Carrick, Beckham or Walcott, Joe Cole and Milner in midfield; and, up front, Peter Crouch.

Finished counting yet? Yes, the single place this leaves would be for Jermain Defoe, back to his least impressive in Doha, to defend against such a challenge as Michael Owen might muster or the prospect of Aaron Lennon’s pace being used with, rather than as an alternative to, that of Walcott.

The versatility of some players offers additional options. There are some who argue that Hargreaves is required, but as a sharp-tackling midfield player rather than a right back. The Manchester United absentee can do either job. Milner, too, may prove more than a filler of gaps.

So, when you look at it from where Capello must, the cupboard is far from as meagrely stacked as the full house at the Khalifa International Stadium might have imagined. There is lots for Capello still to do. He will keep monitoring the youngsters in case Kieran Gibbs, for instance, makes enough of the opportunity Gaël Clichy’s injury has given him at Arsenal to put pressure on Bridge.

He will keep an eye on Carlton Cole when the West Ham United centre forward returns, just in case he shapes up as a younger Heskey. Bent, tried with Rooney on Saturday, was presumed to be one of those whom Capello said had run out of time. The manager can see more clearly now. For him it was, believe it or not, another good day at the office.

Qatar able to meet us halfway and house excesses of minority

It was lunchtime and the flag of St George flew over the hotel swimming pool on Doha’s Corniche. Fat men with tattoos and an ill-concealed allegiance to England’s football team waddled waist-deep clutching bottles of beer. And guffawing.

No one guffaws like today’s Englishman. For the ordinary tourist seeking only a peaceful hour in the sun, it is like being machine-gunned with bonhomie bullets. But why should they complain, these genteel couples who rolled up their towels? After all, the lads were only having a laugh. And there is so much to laugh at in Qatar.

Like the poor man leading camels along the beach. The lads astride their humps beamed and waved their bottles at him. “Not saying much, are you, mate? Fancy a drink? Go on — you know you want one!” Or the dainty waitress brayed at across the pool the previous day: “Eh, darlin’ — how much d’you cost, then?”

You had to laugh. You had to laugh at the chaps in crusader outfits; they like a laugh so much that, when England took part in the 2006 World Cup, they imported 20,000 inflatable Spitfires from China and sold them to fans for waving in German faces. Laugh? I nearly spilt my pilsner.

It was the best laugh since a group of Americans appeared on the Tube travelling to Wembley Park and chanted at England fans (to the tune of We’ll Fly The Flag): “We win your wars for you, Eng-a-land, Eng-a-land!” Of course, that one never happened. Even if an American entertained such a joke, he wouldn’t inflict it on us in our country.

This is not to say that the English travel badly in general, or to deny that the majority of England fans in Doha behaved as the hosts would have hoped. It is just to note that quite a minority seemed unaware — and this is to be charitable — of Muslim customs.

While listening to them, I thought of a friend’s text message before I met representatives of Qatar’s 2022 World Cup bid: “Ask them how they’ll cater for 50,000 England fans drinking in the open air.” They told me fans would be able to drink not only in hotels and licensed premises, but in the “fan zones” now familiar at World Cups.

In other words, Qatar, a modern Islamic state, would be more than willing to meet us halfway culturally (restrained drinking would be less problematic for the Italians, say). We should have to compromise, too. And wouldn’t that make life at a World Cup more pleasant and edifying, not least for children?

There are other reasons to think seriously about Qatar, including its ultra-modernity — stadiums and training grounds would have artificially cooled air — and the compactness that means no one would ever be more than an hour from any stadium.

Addicts would be able comfortably to watch every match, two a day in person if they wished and could afford the tickets. Banished would be that familiar feeling, as you spend so much time on the road, of the tournament passing you by. The more I think, the more I like the idea.

Debate: Can England win the World Cup? Could Capello outwit Brazil in South Africa? To have your say, click here.