For many people the answer is simple. It’s Manchester United.
Hungry for an identity that gives them sporting bragging rights, they want to align themselves with what they see as the most successful football club in the world.
Others may choose Newcastle United, Dundee United, or even Sheffield United, in the hope that – like their Manchester counterparts – they, too, will be able to walk tall, knowing their club is supremely successful.
For the politicians and leaders of the Western world, the choice is different. And maybe not so easy.
Just now, with their embroilment in Syria’s affairs – and none can fail to be embroiled, if only at a debating level – it’s either the United Nations or the United States of America.
On the one hand, we have an organisation whose stated purpose is to “maintain international peace and security” and – to that end – to “take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace”.
On the other we have the most politically and militarily powerful nation in the Western world.
We have an organisation that seems to have been cast as the world’s policeman and a nation that seems to want that role for itself.
We have a choice between what looks like the crippling impotence of the commitee-bound Nations or the terrible potency of the law-enforcement-minded States.
So pity the politicians.
Unlike us, they cannot make their choice based on the colour or design of a football kit or the skill and athleticism of an individual player.
They must side with someone in the Syrian conflict – the peacemakers or the warmongers – or face the probability of being mere spectators as the situation worsens, the fighting escalates and the number of lives lost increases day-by-day.
In the meantime, the rest of us can only watch and wait, hoping that – in the light of the British Parliament’s brave decision to be guided by both the law and right-minded thinking – none of the principal players scores an own goal.
Were that to happen, we would all be losers. Even the football supporters.