EURO 2008:Emmet Malone finds John Henderson, the main man behind the joint Ireland and Scotland Euro 2008 bid, in bullish form

To the rest of us John Henderson's job might look tough. From his windowless office in Glasgow's Hampden Park he sells what many see as little more than a pipe dream - the Celtic bid to stage Euro 2008. But when you've sold the Scots the idea of private money building public sector schools, surely nothing could ever look quite so daunting again.

Until 18 months ago, that's more or less what Henderson, then part of the Scottish Executive's private finance group, did. By the end of next week he could be back doing it but, as he wanders through the corridors of Scottish football's headquarters, he doesn't look like a man who feels it's time to pack up and head home.

As he chats about his work since being seconded to the Scottish FA and the bid he will see voted on at UEFA's headquarters next week there's a good deal of talk of his respect for the rival bidders. There's more, though, about why the Scots and Irish, despite being widely derided here, can and should prove successful in Nyon on Thursday.

The bookies, like UEFA insiders, rank the Austrians and Swiss as favourites as the campaign enters its final week. Most observers have the Nordics still in the hunt too.

"It's an assessment I wouldn't dissent from, ours are the three strongest bids," says Henderson before adding with a hint of a smile, "I'm still confident we can win."

The Scandinavian bid is not hard to pick some holes in - four hosts nations, large distances between venues, and a method of ensuring at least two of the four hosts are involved in the finals that is hellishly convoluted.

"Even then," observes the Scot, "you have the prospect of games taking place in two countries that aren't part of the tournament at all."

The Swiss and Austrians look much stronger, with the major flaw in their proposal being the size of the venues, all but two of which barely scrape over the required 30,000 mark. Then there is the little matter of the World Cup that is to be played in neighbouring Germany in 2006.

"There's no question that we have an edge in the stadium issue," says Henderson. "On the one hand we will generate more revenue from ticket sales because, even on a conservative estimate, we can get around half a million more spectators into the games. On the other hand our venues will provide a better setting for the tournament because there's a particular sense of occasion that you get from seeing games in bigger stadia that is missing in smaller grounds. That comes across on television which in turn makes the whole spectacle more attractive to people watching back at home. All of that counts in our favour," he says.

He is also adamant that attempting to hold the event so close to Germany is a problem even if there are those who believe UEFA will not allow themselves be influenced by what unloved big brother FIFA chooses to do with its showpiece event.

"I'm not sure you can dismiss it as easily as that," he says. "What you have here is a product and you have to look at it as something that needs to be differentiated in marketing terms from the product in Germany. This is where sponsors and TV people are going to see Scotland/Ireland as a very attractive option."

Thomas Helbling, his opposite number in Vienna, maintains, however, that with ticket sales generating perhaps a tenth of the revenue of television rights size, in this instance, really doesn't matter. Asked about the prospect of staging the event so soon after the Germans have hosted the World Cup he replies simply that it is not a factor. "Otherwise, how could it have been possible for the 1998 World Cup to take place in France and the Euro 2000 championship in neighbouring Holland and Belgium?"

HENDERSON, though, is adamant that the widespread perception his bid team have been obliged to play up such minor factors while also flogging the reputation of the two countries' fans for much more than they are worth is misguided. The small print, he maintains, supports his case that the Scots/Irish bid is "technically superior" to that of its rivals while the good-natured fans, he says, are simply a bonus.

"A lot will depend next week on our ability to get our strengths across but I have little doubt about the hand that we have to play. People keep pointing out what we don't have but look for a moment at what we do have, four first-class stadia and 229,000 seats already in place compared to 80,000, so far, in Austria and Switzerland.

"Ours is the only bid to come entirely from within the EU, we share a common language and have enormous cultural links and even though we are not linked by land as Austria and Switzerland are, the way we have designed the tournament there are only three movements between the two countries in the whole tournament - you have one team and its fans going from Scotland to Dublin after the group stages for a quarter-final, another going in the same direction for a semi-final and the winners of that game travelling back for the final.

"If you look at the Austrians and Swiss you have a lot of movement back and forth between Berne and Vienna after the group stages because they are the only two venues with a capacity of more than 40,000.

"Another point that I'd make is the bid is good for UEFA because it allows them to show that smaller member countries, seen to be removed from the heart of things, still have a chance of hosting the world's third-biggest sporting event."

From Dublin, however, it's not easy to overlook what the bid doesn't have and inevitably the issue of quite how UEFA can be successfully sold the idea that two stadiums from three here, one dilapidated, one currently off limits to the sport and the third little more than a glint in the eye of the nation's political leader, will be available when the time comes.

"The fact is that the Taoiseach has given the necessary assurances on the issue of the stadia over and over again. He has given it to UEFA in writing, when he and Jack McConnell (the Scottish First Minister) put their names to a letter clearly stating the necessary venues would be in place when required if the bid is successful. If the Taoiseach says the venues will be there then I have to say that is good enough for me and I am certain it is good enough for UEFA.

"In fact they made precisely the point they were very comfortable with these assurances when they came to Dublin for the technical inspection.

"Of course, it would be nice if all of the stadia were simply sitting there but that's not the way these things are done; every one of the bids relies on UEFA accepting assurances that certain things will be done and we have a lot less ground to cover than most of our rivals."

The case of Portugal's successful bid for the 2004 championship does tend to support his argument with the government there committing itself to a vastly expensive building programme - 10 stadiums are either to be constructed from scratch or renovated beyond all recognition - to beat Spain to the prize.

Some time after the bid proved successful the government was defeated in a general election but, after agonising for a while about the possibility of reneging on the promises made, the new administration opted to deliver. It is seen as being unthinkable around UEFA's headquarters that the Irish would not similarly deliver on the Taoiseach's promise.

The smart money still says the matter won't arise. Henderson, though, has been betting against the smart money since he moved to Hampden a year and a half ago.

With less than a week to go, he reckons, he's still on course to hit the jackpot.

'If the Taoiseach says the

venues will be there then that is good enough for me and

I am certain it is good

enough for UEFA.'