What's new

David Beckham

donny1013

Well-Known Member
Nov 4, 2005
5,646
946
If only more England players had his humility and drive to succeed we may stand a chance at the WC. He is the most famous England player by a long way but yet he is the most humble and down to earth.
 

jamesc0le

SISS:LOKO:plays/thinks/eats chicken like sissoko!
Jun 17, 2008
4,974
944
maybe he'll play for us in a testimonial one day, but i hope he comes and finishes his playing career here for a season as a player-coach

who knows maybe next year if we get CL!?
 

BringBack_leGin

Well-Known Member
Jul 28, 2004
27,719
54,929
BBLG, I think your point is fair enough. But it's noticeable that your analysis doesn't cover his post-United years.

Written off by England - recovered and then some
Written off by Capello/Madrid - made them look silly and rose to be their most crucial player
Written off in the US - came back and was a major driving factor in his team reaching the 'Grand Final Shootout SuperDraw' (or whatever)
Now at Milan - Doing not bad for an old bloke

Time and again he has disproved the doubters. To look at, he doesn't seem to be worthy of the very highest accolades but his career speaks for itself, especially when compared to other comparable icons such as George Best, Fat Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, etc.

I agree that post United he has come back several times when written off, but there are a couple of versions to each tale you tell there.

For instance, with Madrid he was a very mediocre player for his first 3 seasons. Then, in his fourth season, Capello used him sparingly as his Madrid side charged to the title for the first time since before Beckhams arrival. In reaction to this, as well as his lack of inclusion by McLaren in England squads, Beckham effectively gave up on a top level career by signing for Galaxy, going for the money. Capello saw this as weak and dropped Beckham altogether, but towards the end of the season, Madrid began to get sloppy and results began to turn, while injuries decimated their squad and Capello had to put Becks back in. Admittedly, Beckham took his chance and played extremely well for those final few months of his Madrid career, and it was the first time in his entire Madrid career that he even resembled the Beckham of United.

His return to England was the last resort of a desperate England manager in Mclaren who was about to fail to qualify. As for the most recent qualifying campaign, I think his use was at best limited and I don't think he did anything to justify inclusion in the upcoming world cup squad barring an unprecedented level of genius for Milan during their remaining games, or injuries to 6 players.

As for any resurgence in the U.S, it is criminal that he has not taken that league by storm from the very beginning, it truly is football of the lowest quality. I used to follow it avidly when Djorkaeff went over there because my uni flatmate was a Bolton fan and thus, a Djorkaeff admirer, so MLS was always in the background while writing essays in the early hours, and the teams over there make Bassetts Wimbledon look like Cruyffs Barcelona. There's a reason why Capello has insisted Beckham play in Europe if he is to have any part to play for England.

And moving on to that, Beckham at Milan last season was quite novel, he went there and after a slight bedding in period actually rejuvenated them. This season, and this is no shame at his age, he is actually quite abysmal. I actually watched that first leg against Utd and thought to myself 'wow, Ambrosini is playing better than Beckham' and I hate Ambrosini. I've seen Beckham 5 or 6 times in Italy this season and he's been awful every one of them.

However, I do not base my opinion of him on anything that has happened since he left Madrid. I base it very much on his Man U and Madrid time. With Madrid he was poor, and in my opinion, a failure for 7/8 of his time there. For Man Utd he was one of the best players in this league for a short time, and one of the better players in the league for most of his time here. He was, however, never as good as the media, or the sheep I like to call England fans, maintained, at least not in my opinion. I will never deny that he was a very good player, and due to the injuries Anderton sustained, the best choice on Englands right hand side untill the emergence of Lennon in 2005/6, but I can't buy into the hype because I guess my expectations of any attacking player are far beyond just a few goals and assists.

I expect an entertainer. Ginola, Giggs, Figo, Nedved, Rivaldo, and in more recent history, Messi, C.Ronaldo, Robben and Ronaldinho. These players give me what I expect from widemen, be they inside forwards, out and out wingers or just playmakers shifted out of position.

As for him comparing favourably against Best, Ronaldinho or Fat (buck toothed, tranny f***ing) Ronaldo, I couldn't disagree more. The first of those is arguably the best footballer of all time anywhere, and after leading Utd to the European Cup was voted European Player of the Year. He would not be left out of anybodies top 20 of all time, and the IFFHS actually had him 16th in the list of greatest players of last century. Moving on to Ronaldinho, he has had more personal accolades than any player I can remember in recent history, including being FIFA player of the year in 04 and 05, and FiFpro player of the year in 05 and 06. He also was amongst the best players in the 2002 World Cup winning team. His issue is that he did everything that he needed to do by the time he hit 26 and lost motivation. A slight on his character but in no way takes away from his greatness. Lastly, Fat Ronaldo is the top goalscorer in World Cup History, having won the thing twice, a three time World Player of the Year, and all this having sustained crippling injuries constantly since a young age.

Basically, in naming those three players, you have helped me display my point about what I believe is a great player, and I honest to God believe that Beckham pales into insignificance when measures against all three of them.

When I think of Beckham, I think of a once very good right midfielder who's international career should have remained a thing of the past, who's adulation has far outweighed his ability, and a man who, as soon as the going got tough, went to earn a lot of money playing in an inferior league rather than stick around to prove himself.
 

mattdefoe

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2009
3,182
2,572
dont agree to much, sticking around and proving yourself at 33-35? He is hes at milan. Also alot of footballers stop football at this age. giggs and scholes are exceptions. Look at cantona.
 

Coyboy

The Double of 1961 is still The Double
Dec 3, 2004
15,506
5,032
Fuck me you are the rez of Spurs Chat. Two (hungover) points.

1. Le Tiss was a striker so of course he scored more goals.

2. Posh isn't fit.
 

mil1lion

This is the place to be
May 7, 2004
42,344
77,598
The thing with Beckham is, he doesn't have a large skillset. But what he does have, he is exceptional at. His final ball is still one of the best in the world. His reading of the game is excellent. He has a great shot on him. He is a set pice god. Add to that his workrate, and he is no doubt a world class player.

Whether he's overrated or not i'm not sure. Heck, if he was ugly he probably wouldn't be. I think a lot of the hype about Beckham is as much the image as anything. He is the most recognised footballer in the world. He is also one of the most recognised sportsmen in the world. With that comes a lot of attention, so that's where most of the hype over Beckham generates from.

Above all else, he is a top pro. On the field aswell as off it. Not to mention all the charity work etc he has done over the years. He may not be a Zidane or a Messi, but he has brought in more publicity than those 2. That can only be a good thing for the development of the sport. Maybe we wouldn't have had as many big stars come over here if it wasn't for Beckham. He played a big part in putting the Premier League on the map.

We now have the biggest league in the world, and i think Beckham played a key role in that.
 

BringBack_leGin

Well-Known Member
Jul 28, 2004
27,719
54,929
Fuck me you are the rez of Spurs Chat. Two (hungover) points.

1. Le Tiss was a striker so of course he scored more goals.

2. Posh isn't fit.

1) Le Tiss was a midfielder. Not sure where you get the Le Tiss was a striker thing from. Anyway, my point wasn't "Le Tiss scored more goals so he is better", my point was "Le Tiss goal record from midfield would have earnt him far more recognition where he at a fashionable club and not ugly as sin".

2) Fine, conceived by the masses to be fit.
 

Vecellio

Member
Mar 13, 2007
208
21
I've always preferred Scholes.
What, that wasn't the question?! :wink:

Gotta agree and disagree with BBLG. First, and most important, trannies are great in the sack, so Fat Ronaldo is something of a sexual conossieur i'd say. (Well, he's brazilian after all so it figures.)

I too reckon Anderton was of a similar ability to Beckham in terms of passing/shooting etc. Unfortunately injury and having the genetic makeup to keep your body going is a big factor in pro sport and thus he goes by the wayside in real terms.

In terms of this 'being an entertainer' thing..hmmm...Beckham was never really a player who the whole crowd would be that excited by when they got the ball (like a Gazza)...but as already mentioned he's kind of an economical player, a minimalist in style if you will. The exquisite pass or cross is really all he's got (plus good shooting, although he never really did score enough). I used to think he was overrated because he rarely beat players. But these days..i am more of the opinion that yeah, he rarely beat players by dribbling...But the thing is - he didn't need to.

I'm also reminded of the George Best quote 'he's half a great player'..'He (Beckham) cannot kick with his left foot, he cannot head a ball, he cannot tackle and he doesn't score many goals. Apart from that he's all right.'
Maybe a tad harsh from George but he is being honest, he just had very high standards.

But on the other hand Beckham has got to go down as one of the best crossers there has ever been..
In 1999 United would certainly not have won the treble without him..but that can also be said of half a dozen United players that year.

As far as his England career is concerned..it's a mixed bag. Good in 98 but with a cockup at the end. Good in Euro 2000. Great in 2001 to get to the world cup. But should not really have featured in the 2002 tournament..he simply wasn't match fit and made another fuck up against Brazil. Pretty poor in Euro 2004. Not great in 2006, but i suppose still worth having in there for set pieces.

It is a conundrum...

I personally reckon this 'world class' term is bandied about far too readily...It should be reserved for (current players) of the likes of Messi, Iniesta, Ronaldo, Xavi, Rooney. It should really be an elite term but isn't. I'd say Beckham qualified in 1999 because in real terms his contribution was exceptional in that year. But i don't think he really was for many other years.
But i like the guy, he's a model professional and all round good bloke. It's just that i think there have been a number of better english players, and lots of better foreign players.
 

BringBack_leGin

Well-Known Member
Jul 28, 2004
27,719
54,929
I've always preferred Scholes.
What, that wasn't the question?! :wink:

Gotta agree and disagree with BBLG. First, and most important, trannies are great in the sack, so Fat Ronaldo is something of a sexual conossieur i'd say. (Well, he's brazilian after all so it figures.)

I too reckon Anderton was of a similar ability to Beckham in terms of passing/shooting etc. Unfortunately injury and having the genetic makeup to keep your body going is a big factor in pro sport and thus he goes by the wayside in real terms.

In terms of this 'being an entertainer' thing..hmmm...Beckham was never really a player who the whole crowd would be that excited by when they got the ball (like a Gazza)...but as already mentioned he's kind of an economical player, a minimalist in style if you will. The exquisite pass or cross is really all he's got (plus good shooting, although he never really did score enough). I used to think he was overrated because he rarely beat players. But these days..i am more of the opinion that yeah, he rarely beat players by dribbling...But the thing is - he didn't need to.

I'm also reminded of the George Best quote 'he's half a great player'..'He (Beckham) cannot kick with his left foot, he cannot head a ball, he cannot tackle and he doesn't score many goals. Apart from that he's all right.'
Maybe a tad harsh from George but he is being honest, he just had very high standards.

But on the other hand Beckham has got to go down as one of the best crossers there has ever been..
In 1999 United would certainly not have won the treble without him..but that can also be said of half a dozen United players that year.

As far as his England career is concerned..it's a mixed bag. Good in 98 but with a cockup at the end. Good in Euro 2000. Great in 2001 to get to the world cup. But should not really have featured in the 2002 tournament..he simply wasn't match fit and made another fuck up against Brazil. Pretty poor in Euro 2004. Not great in 2006, but i suppose still worth having in there for set pieces.

It is a conundrum...

I personally reckon this 'world class' term is bandied about far too readily...It should be reserved for (current players) of the likes of Messi, Iniesta, Ronaldo, Xavi, Rooney. It should really be an elite term but isn't. I'd say Beckham qualified in 1999 because in real terms his contribution was exceptional in that year. But i don't think he really was for many other years.
But i like the guy, he's a model professional and all round good bloke. It's just that i think there have been a number of better english players, and lots of better foreign players.

You have said what I have been trying too but with far more diplomacy, so hopefully your words are taken more seriously than mine.
 

Coyboy

The Double of 1961 is still The Double
Dec 3, 2004
15,506
5,032
1) Le Tiss was a midfielder. Not sure where you get the Le Tiss was a striker thing from. Anyway, my point wasn't "Le Tiss scored more goals so he is better", my point was "Le Tiss goal record from midfield would have earnt him far more recognition where he at a fashionable club and not ugly as sin".

2) Fine, conceived by the masses to be fit.

Well I think he was a number ten, played just behind a striker- he was hardly a midfielder with other duties like Beckham was. Anyway the comparison is rather odd and doesn't prove much.

Number two was meant in jest.
 

BringBack_leGin

Well-Known Member
Jul 28, 2004
27,719
54,929
Well I think he was a number ten, played just behind a striker- he was hardly a midfielder with other duties like Beckham was. Anyway the comparison is rather odd and doesn't prove much.

Number two was meant in jest.

I agree that he was a number 10. I was speaking to my father about it the other day actually, after you said forward and I said midfielder, and he believes that the role was neither midfielder nor striker, and compares Le Tiss in role to Baggio, Gazza, and Hoddle. I guess it's what pundits are forever referring to as 'the spare man', except that in the past it was utilised in a 4 man midfield with 2 strikers in front, and these days it is not.

I know that there are modern examples of players who play between midfield and attack, but not with the same freedom to merely dribble, create and shoot. Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney, they are far more disciplined and regimented in their roles than players like Le Tissier were.

Agreed that Beckhams type of player, in that case, is one who shouldn't be expected to score as much, but I think my point was more along the lines of 'with that goalscoring record, for a poor club, as a player who was not a striker, Le Tissier should have been given far more recognition than he subsequently was'.

Anyway, this shouldn't be a debate a Le Tiss, the thread is about Beckham, so I'll zip it on that point. I think Beckham was a very good player, but not World Class or deserving of the hype that came with him, others disagree. In a nutshell, everything else I've said/ other's have said in response to me, is pretty unimportant in the context of this thread.
 

Shanks

Kinda not anymore....
May 11, 2005
31,159
18,914
Le Tiss was a striker.

Becks was never an attacking midfielder, just a right midfielder of the old sorts.

And it's not just his on field antics that come into play.
He was up there with the very best players in the world for a fair period of his career, voted by all the experts in the game.

Says it all really.
 

yawa

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2005
12,590
9,415
And it's not just his on field antics that come into play.

See thats just wrong...whether a player is world/elite class should be based on what he does on the pitch and nothing else.

As many people have said he seems to be seen in higher regard because of what he does off it. Which in my opinion is not right.
 

Bill_Oddie

Everything in Moderation
Staff
Feb 1, 2005
19,120
6,003
Great post on the last page, Bringers. Always a pleasure to be debated with in a constructive way. I think you are too easily dismissive of Beckham's career achievements, but that's natural when you're defending a point. I really rate the ability to cope mentally with the brickbats hurled his way and how he has come through it.

This is a guy who was battered by fans after 1998. Really battered. It's a distant memory now because of his strength of character and his tenacity as a player. Not to mention his talent.

He went to grounds where fans were shouting that they hoped his newborn son got cancer and died. He was the original victim of crowds in their tens of thousands verbally abusing his wife and making outrageous slurs against her (they were good fun, though and won't pretend I didn't indulge... in the songs, obviously). Less funny was the Euros quarter final where we lost 3-2 to Portugal and the England 'fans' abused him the whole game. He set up both goals. :|

I think he did much better at Madrid than you give him credit for. He wasn't in many respects a Madrid player, a Zidane or a Figo or whoever. But he managed, where so, so many others failed, to convince. And convince at a club where winning a regular spot in the starting line-up is like being inducted into the Hall of Fame at most clubs. He did fantastically.

Galaxy obviously are bad. And the league something of a joke. But his spat with Donovan was huge and the situation in LA was very sticky. Almost any other footballer would have walked away but Beckham went back and didn't just silence the doubters (more hideous abuse from moronic American fans, well documented) but got the whole team onside and won over many of these supporters on the way to their grand final.

Summing all the above up - the technical and ability side we could argue for days but that can't be the only way to judge if a player is 'great'; such a generic term needs wide parameters - you have to concede Beckham is a leader. Both by example and as a managerial manner. He is there for those around him and you never hear anyone to have met him say anything other than what a magnificent ambassador he is.

He has led England - one of the very best football nations in the world - 59 times, more than Bobby Charlton, Gary Lineker, Tony Adams, Kevin Keegan. Only Moore, Robson and Wright have done it more often.

If World Class doesn't mean that you stand alongside those names on merit then it's a hell of a tough benchmark we're setting here.
 

Bill_Oddie

Everything in Moderation
Staff
Feb 1, 2005
19,120
6,003
portugal 3-2 was first group game m8, i agree aswell

Sorry, you're quite right. Although you have just caused me to recall that horrendous 'tackle' from Phil Neville prior to their third goal, so I will have to curse you 'til all eternity now. :wink:
 

Coyboy

The Double of 1961 is still The Double
Dec 3, 2004
15,506
5,032
Spot on re his time at Madrid mate, he didn't have the talent of Zidane (who did? I saw him twice live and it was mind blowing) but he complemented them very well and not just by his industry. 'White Angels' by John Carlin gives a fascinating insight into the early galactico days when Madrid were playing some fantastic football before it all went tits up!
 

BringBack_leGin

Well-Known Member
Jul 28, 2004
27,719
54,929
Great post on the last page, Bringers. Always a pleasure to be debated with in a constructive way. I think you are too easily dismissive of Beckham's career achievements, but that's natural when you're defending a point. I really rate the ability to cope mentally with the brickbats hurled his way and how he has come through it.

This is a guy who was battered by fans after 1998. Really battered. It's a distant memory now because of his strength of character and his tenacity as a player. Not to mention his talent.

He went to grounds where fans were shouting that they hoped his newborn son got cancer and died. He was the original victim of crowds in their tens of thousands verbally abusing his wife and making outrageous slurs against her (they were good fun, though and won't pretend I didn't indulge... in the songs, obviously). Less funny was the Euros quarter final where we lost 3-2 to Portugal and the England 'fans' abused him the whole game. He set up both goals. :|

I think he did much better at Madrid than you give him credit for. He wasn't in many respects a Madrid player, a Zidane or a Figo or whoever. But he managed, where so, so many others failed, to convince. And convince at a club where winning a regular spot in the starting line-up is like being inducted into the Hall of Fame at most clubs. He did fantastically.

Galaxy obviously are bad. And the league something of a joke. But his spat with Donovan was huge and the situation in LA was very sticky. Almost any other footballer would have walked away but Beckham went back and didn't just silence the doubters (more hideous abuse from moronic American fans, well documented) but got the whole team onside and won over many of these supporters on the way to their grand final.

Summing all the above up - the technical and ability side we could argue for days but that can't be the only way to judge if a player is 'great'; such a generic term needs wide parameters - you have to concede Beckham is a leader. Both by example and as a managerial manner. He is there for those around him and you never hear anyone to have met him say anything other than what a magnificent ambassador he is.

He has led England - one of the very best football nations in the world - 59 times, more than Bobby Charlton, Gary Lineker, Tony Adams, Kevin Keegan. Only Moore, Robson and Wright have done it more often.

If World Class doesn't mean that you stand alongside those names on merit then it's a hell of a tough benchmark we're setting here.

Always happy to debate with you BO, especially given that your opinions on football receive remuneration and carry some weight beyond the world of internet discussion forums.

I probably come off as far more dismissive of Beckham and his acheivments than I should be, so I'm going to back track just a little, because I do actually have a lot of admiration for the very things you mention above, especially with regard to how he has dealt with the vulgar abuse he has had to endure, and also with regard to the fact that he has been a great leader.

I think it appears as though my issue is with Beckham. It isn't, not in the slightest. The guy has played some incredible games, he has shown strength of character in abundance and he has had a fine career. My issue is more with the way he has been received. I will stick to my guns on this one, I don't think he was every the World Class footballer that he has been portrayed as. A fine player, of course, but I do not think, taking career honours out of the equation and just focussing on individual, on the pitch, performance, he should be spoken of at the same level as others.

I won't talk about Best, Cruyff, Pele, Hoddle, or even Gazza, because all of those players are before my time (well, Gazza I was aware of, but being born in 85 I cannot argue a great appreciation of the football untill after Gazza left Italty). However, I have witnessed some footballers who I consider World Class, or Great, and I feel that the common factor is that they all proved themselves by going unimaginably beyond that which would ordinarily be expected of a player of their type, and I don't feel Beckham fits in with that.

Ronaldinho at his best, Messi and Rooney now, Eto'o, C.Ronaldo, Real.Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Shearer, Del Piero, Van Nistelrooy, Fabregas, Kaka, or looking at defensive players and goalies, Keane, Makalele, Maldini, Puyol, King, Cafu, Ayala, Schmeichel and Nesta. These are all players off the top of my head who have, at some stage in their career, for extended periods of time (multiple seasons) looked absolutely tremendous, players who one could not imagine they could be improved on by any player of their type. You may disagree with some who I mention, but you get the point I am trying to make here. Good as Beckham was, when he was at the peak of his powers I still never felt this about him.

Figo, for instance, was also superb from set pieces and a top class passer and crosser of the ball, but he was also a brilliant dribbler and scored a fair few goals. Rivaldo even more so on all these facets at one stage, and he wasn't even a natural wide player.

You could say that I'm over simplifying things, and that Beckham's type of player isn't 'winger' but 'wideman who crosses from deep' and therefore it's only his end product that really matters, not the entertainment factor in building up to it, and in that case Beckham would be world class, and possibly the best ever, because he was the best at crossing from deep, but that just doesn't sit easy with me. For all creative midfielders, the entertainment factor in my opinion is a vital ingredient. Gerrard and Lampard are top class players who have had superb careers, but Kaka, Iniesta, and Fabregas can do what they do with the added bonus of bringing pure, unadulterated verve to the show. Same goes for Beckham in my mind. If I compare him to his contemporary widemen, Figo could do everything he could do (even if, lets say, his crossing was not quite on a par, though still at a very high level) but complement it with dribbling and flair. Basically, to use that horrible David Pleat-ism, I quite like a fancy dan.

Perhaps I'm clutching to my childhood ideals far too strongly. My first real heroes in football, Ronaldo, Ginola, Baggio, Cantona, etc. This also might explain why, when 90% of this site were hailing Bentley as the chosen one, I was very firmly beating the Lennon drum. I just can't buy that Beckham, despite having amongst the greatest crosses, cross field passes and direct free kicks that I might ever see, and being a great leader and a very hard working man, had enough to him to ever be spoken of as the World Class player that the media and the fans of England pained him as.
 

mattdefoe

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2009
3,182
2,572
Sorry, you're quite right. Although you have just caused me to recall that horrendous 'tackle' from Phil Neville prior to their third goal, so I will have to curse you 'til all eternity now. :wink:

you could do mate but wasnt that v romania in the 3rd game in the last minute? Sorry if it feels like im correcting you which i am but strangely enough i was watching these highlights on youtube the other day lol
 
Top