ENGLAND boss Sven Goran Eriksson has hardly put a foot wrong since he took up his post at FA headquarters.

But I've got to say I think his decision to leave David Dunn out of his squad to face Sweden on Saturday could turn out to be a big mistake.

David Platt can argue until he's blue in the face that he needs players like Dunn for the Under 21s because they've got a 'massive' game against Holland on Friday night.

But in my book, a full international will always take precedence over the Under 21s -- regardless of what's at stake -- because it provides the manager with a vital opportunity to experiment with players on the fringes away from the pressures of qualification.

Dunn is clearly in Eriksson's thoughts otherwis the Swede wouldn't have watched Rovers as regularly as he has done recently.

And the only way he'll be able to determine whether or not he's ready for the step up is by throwing him in NOW to see how he copes.

Platt will argue Eriksson can watch the Rovers youngster showcase his talents in the Under 21s.

But is that really an accurate barometer when it comes to assessing whether or not he can hack it with the very best?

At 21, Dunn has time on his side and it's not so much a case of if he gets an England chance but when.

However, holding him back for the senior international friendlies after Christmas -- as Platt has hinted -- is a dangerous game to play.

What happens if he suffers a loss of form or -- even more pertinent -- picks up an injury which keeps him out of those games?

That would see a great opportunity lost at a vital time for our national game.

With just seven months to go, most of the pieces in Eriksson's jigsaw are starting to fall into place.

I think most would agree that Steven Gerrard, Paul Scholes and David Beckham are now immovable objects in midfield.

But if Dunn maintains his current form, then I don't see why he can't put the likes of Darren Anderton, Trevor Sinclair and Danny Murphy under threat -- all of whom WERE named in the squad to face the Swedes.

There are still places up for grabs, as England's ragged performance against Greece demonstrated.

And Dunn deserves the chance to show he could be capable of filling one.

Meanwhile, on a completely different tack, just what is football coming to when Steve Bruce is allowed to leave Crystal Palace for Birmingham with the ink barely dry on his contract?

It's a pity they've stopped performing public executions because Bruce deserves to be hauled off to the Tower of London for the way he's acted over the last seven days.

There was a time when loyalty existed in the game but that seems to have gone by the wayside over the last 10 years.

I know people will argue loyalty is a two-way thing and cite examples of managers like Stuart Gray who have been just as cruelly cast aside by their clubs at the first whiff of trouble.

But how many other industries exist where people get huge pay-offs for doing atrocious jobs?

Bruce has made a mockery of the term 'contract' and in my opinion he doesn't deserve to work again.

It's not as if he's been a raging success since he left Old Trafford anyway!