SVEN-GORAN ERIKSSON would be more foolish than the players that almost scuppered England's Euro 2004 chances if he had chosen this moment to resign as coach.

He has shown commendable restraint, and no little skill, over the last week to guide England into next summer's football jamboree in Portugal.

Now, with a rich harvest awaiting Eriksson and his adopted nation, is the time for him to reap the rewards - not to quit and to be left wondering, 'What if ?'

The England squad's threatened mutiny revealed they are in conflict with the FA, but the players' togetherness is matched only by their loyalty to Eriksson.

Not only did their performance in Istanbul ooze character and passion, it was the display of a team that was playing for their coach. After Eriksson's ability to motivate his players was disputed during the World Cup, such a criticism cannot be levelled at him now.

All should, therefore, be sweetness and light in the Eriksson household today - not withstanding his wandering eye.

Then again, nothing ought to have diluted the jubilation felt in the England camp on Saturday night - but something did.

That something was the huge question mark that still hangs over Eriksson's future despite his promise to take England to Portugal next year.

Meeting Roman Abramovic as soon as the Russian had taken over Chelsea was an insensitive move.

Yet for all the denials that have come from Eriksson's agent, the rumours persist that he will shortly replace Claudio Ranieri at Stamford Bridge.

So, Eriksson might be pining for the different challenge that club management presents.

But so what? Setting aside the problems that coaching England has given Eriksson, it appears the chance to lead one of the favourites into Euro 2004 is too great an opportunity to pass up.

Moreover, there is one other reason why leaving England in the lurch and stepping into Ranieri's shoes would be an act of mass folly. Eriksson has often complained that press intrusion into his private life is a major downside to the England job.

Imagine how the media would turn on him if he abandoned England - no doubt arguing they were batting on behalf of the country. If a £3m-a-year salary were not sufficient recompense for that inconvenience, why would an extra few quid paid to him by Chelski ease the pain?

And that is not to mention the fan abuse that would confront Eriksson at every Premiership ground as the public showed their disgust at his treachery.

Never mind interference into his life away from football - as Chelsea boss, he would be faced with rancour at every turn.

Eriksson's achievement in steering England past Turkey ranks alongside his feat in Munich. Having achieved so much, deciding enough is enough would have bordered on the insane.