"Didn't they do well."

Bruce Forsyth's famous catchphrase became a clich because of its condescending tone, and it was heard more than once during coverage of England's progress in the Women's Euro 2005 championship.

Well didn't they just. After turning over a tougher than expected Finnish side they went head-to-head with Denmark. They took the lead. They looked on course for automatic qualification to the semi-finals... and then they remembered they were English and let in two late goals to lose, leaving them to face the third best women's international team in Sweden needing a draw to progress.

It was all so very Euro 2000. Who can forget that particular agony?

England had a guaranteed place in the quarter-finals if they could draw with outsiders Romania in the final group game. At half-time it was 2-1 England. But Romania equalised early in the second - and then struck with a 88th-minute penalty.

Much of what happened after that has been blurred at the edges by five years of rose-tinted rage but I cannot remember a single pundit, newspaper reporter, commentator, analyst, or general hanger-on coming out with anything even vaguely resembling a "well, they've done well up to now" or "they've got plenty to be proud of".

Because - and let's be frank here - they hadn't. The chronic lack of ability to perform on a major international stage had not reared its head so much as vaulted over the rails at Royal Ascot wearing nothing but a fluorescent orange lampshade (sorry, couldn't resist).

And did anyone hold back? Er, no. There were enough post mortems to fulfil an entire Midsomer Murders series quota.

But following Saturday's exit, there was little of the same. Where there should have been an in-depth look at what went wrong, including the patent lack of cohesion in a team with several dazzling individual talents - stand up Rachel Yankey, Katie Chapman and Kelly Smith - there were patronising pats on the back.

Yes, they attracted tens of thousands of spectators to women's football in this country, and yes, nearly three million viewers tuned in to follow their national team.

But for all the classy BBC trailers and first-rate marketing, they failed to deliver.

Women's football in England has been bubbling away under the surface for decades including a flirtation with professionalism when Fulham went full-time for a season.

But it has never had the credibility of the men's game, always being seen as the poor relation. The 'if only' brigades preached the virtues of the beautiful game to the unconverted, tales of better skill levels on the ball and a more considered approach than the break-neck 100 miles-an-hour version seen week in, week out in the Premier League.

"If only you had a chance to see it," they would say, "you'd realise what you're missing."

Hosting the Euro 2005 championship was their big chance. One huge shop window that, from the semi-final stages, will extend across the Atlantic and around the world.

Yes, they beat Finland and ran Sweden close. But they could - and should - have done better.

It was never going to be easy with injury crises and key players actually sitting 'A'-Levels - but they will be the first to admit that, try as they did, some of the passing wasn't up to scratch, the finishing below par and the defending decidedly shaky.

Their effort should be applauded - but without the "well they are only girls" routine. They are highly experienced athletes dedicated to the game like any of their male counterparts.

They may be the fairer sex but they should still be fair game. It's what they deserve as footballers. And internationals, no less.

This week's TKO was written by Claire Hughes

Updated: 11:08 Tuesday, June 14, 2005