I put him up there with some of the very best
How good was David Beckham?
- Thread starter Lord SInister
- Start date
no chance . although without injuries anderton would have been brilliant , much as i hate spurs
my guess is Becks could still hit a given spot with a cross today... anderton would break an arm putting on his shirt: almost as injury prone as Martial
Along with all his talent Beckham was also a real grafter, chasing back tracking etc. I enjoyed watching him.
He could easily adapt to CM like a KDB. To say he wouldn’t fit in the modern game is what’s annoying me, it’s such absolute tosh
Very good player, just a notch below prime De Bruyne.
He’s become underrated over the years for some reason.
I hear a lot of “he’s overrated because of his celebrity status”
I believe that the reverse is true.
I hear a lot of “he’s overrated because of his celebrity status”
I believe that the reverse is true.
Stupid post. KdB wish he is as good as Beckham in his prime.
People tend to overrated KdB to underrated Beckham. Mind boggling.
Hes gone reverse Scholes overrated to underrated.
By far my favorite player at the time, brilliant he was.
I'd still say that de Bruyne is a tad better than Beckham, even though Beckham definitely had aspects of his game that de Bruyne couldn't match. Both phenomenal players, mind.
I'd still say that de Bruyne is a tad better than Beckham, even though Beckham definitely had aspects of his game that de Bruyne couldn't match. Both phenomenal players, mind.
De Bruyne is a better midfielder in central areas, in terms of dribbling, drive, bit more pace, more two-footed, better short passing.
Beckham is a better wide player, people saying he’d be a CM in today’s game but I never thought he excelled there when he did play there. Beckham was really good at specific skills, devastating really in that right midfield.
Whoops, that's just a bit of a massive error of mine.
Anderton had a fair bit of quality, so it's no slight on him. Fergie tried to buy him.
But even the player Anderton could have been was no Beckham.
With a bit of positional training, I think Becks could be great as a deep lying playmaker in the modern game. Something like Pirlo.
Mind you, I do wonder how he would fare as an inverted winger on the left wing. It's something that would never have been done in the 90s, so we'll never know!
Mind you, I do wonder how he would fare as an inverted winger on the left wing. It's something that would never have been done in the 90s, so we'll never know!
In 1999 he was the best player in the world
Next to Cantona, he was Mr United along with Giggsy. In that era.
Absolutely. And what's most unfair about this notion is that his playing style couldn't be further away from his celebrity status. Whenever i discuss Beckham with other people, especially those who don't follow United, they remember him as a lightweight and blasé but also extremely technical player. I guess, for some people, it's easier to remember the haircuts, Victoria, the shoe Fergie threw at him etc. I wonder, how many players have gone from being the most hated football person in their country to having the whole country praying for his ankle to heal in time for the next WC.
I believe Beckham was an incredibly talented player with an amazing work rate. He would cover every inch of the pitch, a leader on the pitch and, quite often, our go-to player whenever we were chasing a goal. He was also more of a wide midfielder than a winger. His starting position was on the right wing because of his unparalleled crossing ability, but you would find him everywhere. Of course, he had the tools to play as a midfielder in the modern game.
It feels the same with Keane. A lot of people remember him as midfield destroyer when he was also an amazing passer of the ball.
He was bad in that role though when he was put there, that job isn’t just playing Hollywood passes it’s as much about setting the tone for the game with short and quick passes and good close control. Didn’t suit Beckham. Roaming centre midfielder on the right of a midfield 3 or attacking right back would suit him best. Was better with room out wide than anywhere else.
Imagine a hotter version of Dan James but with less pace and wicked crosses. Thats not how you should imagine Beckham, so try again.
The de Bruyne-Beckham comparison always makes me laugh. In modern football few teams are playing 4-4-2 with two target men in the box waiting for you to pick a cross to. Playing in the central area is also completely different from playing down the flank. It is much more crowded and opponents are closing down from different angles, and of course the pressing intensity is much higher nowadays. There was one occasion where Southgate tried Arnold at CM and he failed uglily, and the opposition wasn't strong either. The only reason for the comparison is that de Bruyne is capable of delivering brilliant crosses like Beckham when he occasionally drifts wide, and this just shows how good and versatile he is.
Like I said Beckham was a great, great player back in the day, and let's just keep it that way. It is actually doing him a disservice comparing him to modern players. Many midfielders or even defenders can comfortably pick a long pass nowadays, while doing lots of other stuffs. Players specializing in a single skill ultimately fail in modern football, with Inzaghi-like Chicharito as a prime example. It's just a different era, success in one doesn't translate to success in another, just like I think many modern defenders can't survive back in the day. All those "training" arguments are just too far-fetched to me.
Yeah it's super weird, how many other 'overrated' footballers got their own video games, movies named after them, captained their club and country, almost won a Ballon D'or, had haircuts that swept the nation, had rival fans kids wearing his England shirt and played for Manchester United, Real Madrid, AC Milan and PSG?
If anyone thinks he's overrated, just watch his performance when he was on his way out of United against Madrid in the Champions League.
His celebrity status came about because of his ability. Not the other way around.
Well he married a pop star of the most famous pop band of the time, and the haircuts have nothing to do with football.
Beckham is a true global icon. Not many athletes reach the same status.
Clearly, Messi and Cristiano are on another level in terms of football ability. Pele, Maradona, Zidane, and OG Ronaldo are also household names.
But to have it all—a good look, a celebrity wife, an illustrious career, fashion influences (tattoos, haircuts), popularity in entertainment media—I can only think of him and Michael Jordan.
Clearly, Messi and Cristiano are on another level in terms of football ability. Pele, Maradona, Zidane, and OG Ronaldo are also household names.
But to have it all—a good look, a celebrity wife, an illustrious career, fashion influences (tattoos, haircuts), popularity in entertainment media—I can only think of him and Michael Jordan.
Is that why we have so many shitty free kick takers nowadays? Or what was it a few years ago? The keepers got better than they were 20 years ago that's why we don't see as many free kick goals.
So did Ashley Cole, Peter Crouch and Wayne Bridge but they weren't on the same level Beckham was in terms of ability or appeal.
They also weren't on the same wavelenght celebrity wise. Spice Girls were HUGEE back then. Girls Aloud, Saturdays were huge domestically but internationally nowhere near them.
He absolutely was up there with the best in the world for a couple of years. Even so his level of fame was over-stated compared to his performances, but that's more due to him being the most famous footballer in history (at least until Messi and Ronaldo exploded).
Which one are you saying is better? De Bruyne has been at the top level for longer, but Beckham's three year peak was arguably better.
I know, I'm not comparing apples with oranges but Posh was the least appealing of the group, she didn't even sing and was the first to quit the group. I'm just saying that Beckham's celebrity status was earned mostly through his ability and consistency. He was a steady 7 or 8 out of 10 most matches, a big game player and a match winner.
It's true that fewer players are specializing in free kick taking nowadays. Short free kicks are preferred as controlling possession is emphasized in modern football. Another explanation is that some good takers aren't regarded as free kick specialists as they are also good at something else.Is that why we have so many shitty free kick takers nowadays? Or what was it a few years ago? The keepers got better than they were 20 years ago that's why we don't see as many free kick goals.
https://theanalyst.com/eu/2023/04/free-kicks-why-are-teams-not-shooting-as-much/
Mostly, but not entirely. You can't deny there are better footballers who couldn't reach his celebrity status.
nice article thanks for posting. Free kicks was the thing that brought my attention to football at the time. So it's kinda annoying to see such a decline.
De Bruyne's peak has been high, he went 1st, 1st, 2nd in 3 years in PFA Player of the Year while Beckham never won it.
Beckham was by far the biggest celebrity in football back in the days. he is like Michael Jordan in football, in terms of his global popularity.
As for his footballing, he wasn't exactly the best in the world at any stage of his career, but he definitely was among the elites footballers during his time for sure. I'd say he is probably among the top 5-8 player in the world during his prime (96-03), behind the likes of Zidane, Ronaldo, Figo, Rivaldo etc.
As for his footballing, he wasn't exactly the best in the world at any stage of his career, but he definitely was among the elites footballers during his time for sure. I'd say he is probably among the top 5-8 player in the world during his prime (96-03), behind the likes of Zidane, Ronaldo, Figo, Rivaldo etc.
Of course, Beckham always wanted it and was comfortable with it also, but it wasn't undeserved celebrity status
Well but he did win UEFA player of the year award, while De Bruyne never won it. And he also finished higher in Ballon D'or than De Bruyne (2nd place vs 3rd place), but not that it matters much.
Couldn’t disagree more. You are acting as if all Becks did was crossing and free-kicks. He wouldn’t have played at such a high level for so long if this was the case. His short passing, reading of the game and link up was good as well. Not as good as Scholes’ but still good. Combined with his incredibly stamina he was made for the “modern” game. The top managers currently would love him in their team.
@hmchan is a failed poster because he didn’t have it in him to adapt to the new forums