How good was David Beckham?

MiceOnMeth said:
Why sell one of the most marketable faces on earth who also happens to be a very very good footballer who ended up playing for another decade at a high level? I never got the selling him at the right time thing. A player like Beckham is rare why sell him at all if he was happy? Love Fergie but he wasn't always right
Click to expand...
The marketing thing held no weight if you fell out with the manager then, and rightly so
 
Beckham was a machine. He could defend and attack, his crosses and long passes were sniper like. He was also a better dribbler then one would suspect. I remember him beating 3 Real Madrid players with a dribble. There again dribbling is redundant to someone who could deliver a holly wood pass with the same accuracy that an EPL player can deliver a 4m one.

Keane was the cornerstone of that team. Every player in the 99 team worked hard but we had 5 attacking minded players in that team with Keano's CM partner being a striker in all but name (Scholes would transform into a brilliant DLP but that came later in his career). Keane held that team together defensively and in terms of leadership. There were 2 leaders in that team Schmeichel and him.
 
Sandikan said:
The only thing is Beckham was superb in the days of the standard 4-4-2. He had spells in the centre, but was best from a wide position.

It'd have been interesting where he'd have fitted in now everyone plays these 4-3-3 variations.
Click to expand...
He'd probably be deployed as a wingback in a 3-5-2 formation or as No.8 on the right hand side of a 4-4-2 diamond formation.

Pretty sure he would be Conte's and Tuchel's wet dream if he played today.
 
ArmaDino said:
He'd probably be deployed as a wingback in a 3-5-2 formation or as No.8 on the right hand side of a 4-4-2 diamond formation.

Pretty sure he would be Conte's and Tuchel's wet dream if he played today.
Click to expand...
He could absolutely be an attacking wingback. He had some engine on top of the ability.
 
When I saw the documentary about Beckham I realized that I had forgotten what an amazing player he was. Today, I actually think many people underestimate him. Beckham was among the best at the time. Just look at the respect he had among the other Real players. You don't get that for free.
 
MiceOnMeth said:
Why sell one of the most marketable faces on earth who also happens to be a very very good footballer who ended up playing for another decade at a high level? I never got the selling him at the right time thing. A player like Beckham is rare why sell him at all if he was happy? Love Fergie but he wasn't always right
Click to expand...
Beck's performances had been on the slide for a couple of years at that stage, and Fergie felt his off-the-field stuff was starting to get in the way. He'd lost his spot to Solskjaer for a while in his last season.

Could we have kept him for a few more years? Of course, and he probably would have been mostly good. But he wasn't the incredible performer game-in game-out that he'd been a few years earlier, and both the player that he was supposed to be replaced with (Ronaldinho) and the player that he actually was replaced with (Ronaldo) went on to be better.

Of course part of me wonders what could have been if we had kept him, but considering the way things went I'm not going to second-guess it too much.
 
devilish said:
Keane was the cornerstone of that team. Every player in the 99 team worked hard but we had 5 attacking minded players in that team with Keano's CM partner being a striker in all but name (Scholes would transform into a brilliant DLP but that came later in his career). Keane held that team together defensively and in terms of leadership. There were 2 leaders in that team Schmeichel and him.
Click to expand...
I actually think Beckham's huge workrate and willingness to do his defensive duty also played a part in how attacking we could otherwise be. If we'd had a normal attacking winger on that side I'm not sure we could have had as much success as we did with such an attacking midfielder as Scholes was in those days. Obviously Keane was the main one though.
 
MadDogg said:
I actually think Beckham's huge workrate and willingness to do his defensive duty also played a part in how attacking we could otherwise be. If we'd had a normal attacking winger on that side I'm not sure we could have had as much success as we did with such an attacking midfielder as Scholes was in those days. Obviously Keane was the main one though.
Click to expand...

Each and every player we had worked for the ball. Our attacking minded players back then would look like Roy Keane when compared to the likes of Rashford. TBF Beckham was the most hardworking of the lot.

But let's be clear here they were attacking minded players. Their natural instinct was to attack not to defend. Keane rein them in and he did that through leadership and an unbelievable level of work rate. When things got wrong he even fount time to go upfront and cause damage as well. His performance against an extremely disciplined and talent Juventus was spectacular. No one would do that to Juve at the Delle Alpi but Keano did. That's why I called him the cornerstone of our success.
 
MadDogg said:
Beckham was much better than Scholes at the time. Becks truly was one of the best players in the world for his three peak years (99-01), which was a level that Scholes never really reached. Any votes he got after that I'd agree it was his fame, but he deserved everything he got (arguably more) for those three years.

It wasn't really until the mid-2000's that Scholes overtook him, as Scholes just kept getting better while Beckham had dropped off quite a bit by that stage.
Click to expand...
I agree Beckham was better in 1999 but how can Beckham be almost winning the award and Scholes not even get a vote over his career, the gap was not that big, a lot of people would pick Scholes over Beckham. So the biggest factor difference between them was fame, Beckham was the most famous athlete in the world, Scholes was not close.
 
KeanoMagicHat said:
I agree Beckham was better in 1999 but how can Beckham be almost winning the award and Scholes not even get a vote over his career, the gap was not that big, a lot of people would pick Scholes over Beckham. So the biggest factor difference between them was fame, Beckham was the most famous athlete in the world, Scholes was not close.
Click to expand...
I agree, it’s a celeb thing. Don’t get me wrong there was no passengers in that midfield. Beckham, Giggs and Keane were amongst the best around at the time but Scholes was on a different level. Possibly the best player in the Fergie era (Ronaldo was at his best after Utd).
 
Put it this way, just a short while ago he was playing in a charity match at Old Trafford and still putting in a shift and crosses that only Anthony and Rashford could dream of. I would still have him in the team above those two, right now! He's still better than them approaching 50!

It broke my heart watching him, because it reminded me of just how good he was and how shite we had become. We don't have wingers like him now. If we did, then Hoijlund would be a 30+ goalscorer and De Ligt would probably score 10+ headers. Beckhams delivery was some of the most pinpoint crossing I've ever seen and it was consistent. When I say pinpoint, I mean it. You could stick a Cadburys Button on the forehead of a striker and Beckham would hit it from a 40yrd cross.

When I think back to Beckham, Scholes, Keane, Giggs...it was always a team you watched and never even panicked if they happened to go 1 or 2 nil down by halftime. You carried on watching the 2nd half because the likes of Beckham could always turn it around. United were never out of it, unless it was prime Barca with Messi.
Nowadays if we go 2 down by halftime I'm out mowing the lawn because we don't have a Beckham.
 
He was brilliant for that 3 year period but the celeb stuff did take over and he lost that competitive edge. Became a bit soft in his attempts to become a national treasure.
 
Jock Steins Boots said:
Put it this way, just a short while ago he was playing in a charity match at Old Trafford and still putting in a shift and crosses that only Anthony and Rashford could dream of. I would still have him in the team above those two, right now! He's still better than them approaching 50!

It broke my heart watching him, because it reminded me of just how good he was and how shite we had become. We don't have wingers like him now. If we did, then Hoijlund would be a 30+ goalscorer and De Ligt would probably score 10+ headers. Beckhams delivery was some of the most pinpoint crossing I've ever seen and it was consistent. When I say pinpoint, I mean it. You could stick a Cadburys Button on the forehead of a striker and Beckham would hit it from a 40yrd cross.

When I think back to Beckham, Scholes, Keane, Giggs...it was always a team you watched and never even panicked if they happened to go 1 or 2 nil down by halftime. You carried on watching the 2nd half because the likes of Beckham could always turn it around. United were never out of it, unless it was prime Barca with Messi.
Nowadays if we go 2 down by halftime I'm out mowing the lawn because we don't have a Beckham.
Click to expand...
I’ll never forget a warm-up before a game. Me and my father had seats right by the halfway line, and Beckham emptied a net of balls right in front of us. He began firing long balls towards Cantona, who stood near the penalty spot. I swear Cantona didn’t move an inch sideways, and each ball landed perfectly on his chest, which he effortlessly controlled before finishing with a shot into one of the corners of the goal.
 
Denis79 said:
I’ll never forget a warm-up before a game. Me and my father had seats right by the halfway line, and Beckham emptied a net of balls right in front of us. He began firing long balls towards Cantona, who stood near the penalty spot. I swear Cantona didn’t move an inch sideways, and each ball landed perfectly on his chest, which he effortlessly controlled before finishing with a shot into one of the corners of the goal.
Click to expand...
Exactly this mate.
I know Beckham gets a lot of stick because of his off-field antics and let's be honest, the sarong wasn't his best day fashion wise, but football wise he could pass and cross like a laser.
 
Beckham was replaced at United, who were getting better without him.

Solskjaer, however, suffered a horrible injury, leaving a novice Ronaldo to pick up the mantle.
 
doubleohseven said:
Beckham was replaced at United, who were getting better without him.

Solskjaer, however, suffered a horrible injury, leaving a novice Ronaldo to pick up the mantle.
Click to expand...

When I look back now, I'm thinking Beckham was just the first victim of a much bigger overhaul in terms of style that was coming down the line anyway. Once Beckham left, Ruud pretty much became redundant as he wasn't particularly suited to a team that had 3 fluid forwards switching round all the time.
 
He is better than any of our wingers in the last 10 years. He managed to contribute to every single team that he played for.
 
He was the best crosser of the ball, I have ever seen, he could cross the ball from anywhere on the right WITH HIS RIGHT FOOT! yes a right footed right winger!!! and it would be a perfect ball very hard to defend against, our strikers at the time were blessed.... imagine those sort of crosses now, with Hoijlund, Rashford and Garnacho running on to them, would be a weapon and a half!

He was also best free kick taker I have ever seen, better than Ronaldo IMO, more consistent

Other than that as a midfielder he was well above the average player but not a worldy, but those crosses man, elevated him to world class
 
His ball striking technique is so iconic and brings me actual joy everytime I see it.
The free kick against barca is amazing
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
In terms of accuracy, range and consistency… probably the best right foot I’ve seen.

Most players hope for 3/4 of this type of passes in a game. He was doing tons … and regularly… and on the biggest stages. Also had a fantastic winners attitude, his match v Greece still stands out.

Click to expand...

Reminds you how good he was and how good football was then.

Becks is progressing the ball into dangerous areas with one pass. Todays lot need thirty passes to reach the same outcome.

We now have to watch goalkeepers and CB's knocking it about half the game.
 
He was brilliant at his best, but his best had past when he was sold.
 
Steve 007 said:
I agree, it’s a celeb thing. Don’t get me wrong there was no passengers in that midfield. Beckham, Giggs and Keane were amongst the best around at the time but Scholes was on a different level. Possibly the best player in the Fergie era (Ronaldo was at his best after Utd).
Click to expand...
This is the thing people say now, but no-one really ever said that at the time.
The 4 were regarded as a supreme unit, all quality players, but I can't ever remember anyone suggesting Scholes was the best then.

However, Rooney and others in the era just after always named Scholes as the best player at United. Scholes' true level came later when he was bossing games from deep after Keane and Beckham had gone, and Giggs had changed role.
 
Prime Beckham is a reasonable shout for all time RW. True, he was no dribbler and in the end proficiency at beating a fullback is a core qualification for a RW but no footballer comes even close to his consistently outstanding crosses. And his defensive workrate was outstanding as well. He walks into any all time PL XI and if he doesn't make the all time world XI he's not far off.
 
Sandikan said:
This is the thing people say now, but no-one really ever said that at the time.
The 4 were regarded as a supreme unit, all quality players, but I can't ever remember anyone suggesting Scholes was the best then.

However, Rooney and others in the era just after always named Scholes as the best player at United. Scholes' true level came later when he was bossing games from deep after Keane and Beckham had gone, and Giggs had changed role.
Click to expand...

Beckham has become weirdly underrated because of his celebrity, because people assume his celebrity was what led him to be rated in the first place. It's really bizarre. Beckham was one of the best players in the world for a large part of his career and had the recognition from his peers to prove it around the turn of the millennium with a series of individual award wins and noms. If you even so much as say 'Beckham was a Ballon d'Or runner up' to a rival fan now you'll get an immediate response dismissing it as hype based.

I don't think I can think of another example of a player who's reputation has nose dived as a player for really no reason.
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
In terms of accuracy, range and consistency… probably the best right foot I’ve seen.

Most players hope for 3/4 of this type of passes in a game. He was doing tons … and regularly… and on the biggest stages. Also had a fantastic winners attitude, his match v Greece still stands out.

Click to expand...


Best right foot I’ve ever seen, absolutely outrageous.
He’d absolutely transform this current team too with his ability to switch play and stretch the pitch, something we’re absolutely shite at.
 
Ichabod Ferguson said:
Beckham has become weirdly underrated because of his celebrity, because people assume his celebrity was what led him to be rated in the first place. It's really bizarre. Beckham was one of the best players in the world for a large part of his career and had the recognition from his peers to prove it around the turn of the millennium with a series of individual award wins and noms. If you even so much as say 'Beckham was a Ballon d'Or runner up' to a rival fan now you'll get an immediate response dismissing it as hype based.

I don't think I can think of another example of a player who's reputation has nose dived as a player for really no reason.
Click to expand...
Going to America at 28 was it was a terrible move which probably didn't help much.

At least he toured major Euro clubs after, PSG and AC Milan to give it a proper send off.
 
lex talionis said:
Prime Beckham is a reasonable shout for all time RW. True, he was no dribbler and in the end proficiency at beating a fullback is a core qualification for a RW but no footballer comes even close to his consistently outstanding crosses. And his defensive workrate was outstanding as well. He walks into any all time PL XI and if he doesn't make the all time world XI he's not far off.
Click to expand...
He was on the right as 442 was the formation of the day, nowadays he would play on the right of a midfield 3, and would be amongst the best in the world in that position.
 
Steve 007 said:
I agree, it’s a celeb thing. Don’t get me wrong there was no passengers in that midfield. Beckham, Giggs and Keane were amongst the best around at the time but Scholes was on a different level. Possibly the best player in the Fergie era (Ronaldo was at his best after Utd).
Click to expand...
Scholes was by far the most replaceable part of that midfield when that midfield was at its peak. Heck, he often was replaced and/or moved around, even though after all it's Scholes, not Butt or Veron, who people think of when they try to complete that Giggs - ? - Keane - Becks quartet, and rightly so.

His peak, which was absolutely magical, came way past that time — when Beckham & Keane were long gone, Giggs was trying to reshape his game after his blistering pace was not there anymore... and Carrick was brought in as Scholes' long-term partner in midfield. And you can argue that Scholes was the most important part of the team despite how flashy that new fluid attack was and how impenetrable that Rio - Vidić - van der Sar - Evra unit at the back became during these years. Although no one was truly irreplaceable in Fergie's teams.
 
redNATION said:
He was on the right as 442 was the formation of the day, nowadays he would play on the right of a midfield 3, and would be amongst the best in the world in that position.
Click to expand...
This is exactly right. Beckham was a midfielder, not a forward. In a modern system he would rarely play as a RW, not least because most 4-3-3 formations used inverted forwards with an opposing strongest foot.

He would, as you quite rightly say, play on the right of a midfield 3, and he would be brilliant at it. Naturally able to overload that right hand side and whip a lot of balls into the box, but also being at the heart of the midfield. His switches of play to create overloads is something that would be gold dust in todays game where coaches love to bring all the play over to one side, and then look for a quick switch to the opposing flank to create one on one’s out wide in space. No-one in today’s game could make that quick switch with the speed of thought and accuracy that Beckham was able to.

Just think how people marvel every time TAA pulls off a great 60 yard pass. It ends up with interminable rantings about his suitability for midfield. Beckham would pull off 5-10 of those every game. Probably the best medium and long range passer I have ever seen. It’s amazing to think that at one point United had two players, in Scholes and Beckham, who could be counted amongst the top ten long range passers of all time, in the same team. Couple that with one of the best, most complete wingers of all time, and one of the best box to box midfielders of all time, it’s no surprise that United just hoovered up trophies in that era. A modern iteration of that team would likely have Keane, Scholes and Beckham as the midfield three, with Giggs on the right, Cole up front, and I’d venture a different signing to Yorke to play off the left. If not the man himself.

I think I already answered this thread, but Beckham was bloody brilliant. One of England and United’s best ever players. He had everything you’d want in a midfielder, and added to that a dead ball delivery that is amongst the best I’ve seen in the game. His ability to hit a cross from a moving ball, is also something that he did better than anyone else I’ve seen. What escapes most people about Beckham is how hard he worked, on and off the field. His celebrity nature created a false impression of a player who was a tireless worker and perfectionist. If he came into our team now, he’d instantly be our best player and by some distance, he’d also be one of the top 3-5 players in the league, easily.

Football changes over time, which is why it is so hard to compare players across eras. 4-4-2, or variations of it (4-4-1-1 etc.) were really the dominant tactical approach throughout Beckham’s time at United, which naturally placed him at RW, but he was more of a wide midfielder. He overlapped a lot, but he also underlapped equally so, with Neville proving the perfect foil going outside of him. With Giggs so often running from deep, and wide, it was not unusual for Beckham to tuck in on that side to provide a more compact midfield, especially as and when Scholes broke forwards to join the attack. Our shape was never so prosaic as to be a traditional 4-4-2, but its foundations were certainly in that shape.

Football has become so structured and positional, that a lot of players from that era would’ve struggled to reach the heights they did in their era, if translated to the modern game. But Beckham wasn’t one of them. In fact, most players from the great United teams would’ve thrived in this era of positional play. The question marks come against the more maverick talents. The Cantona’s of this world. Where would he fit in a modern system? As a midfielder? As a ten? I doubt he had the work rate or mentality for such a dogmatic interpretation of the game. The only role I could see him excelling at in the modern era would be that of a false 9. You wouldn’t get a ton of energetic pressing from him, but you would get a player that could link up play and find space like few others.

Beckham brought industry, delivery, discipline and accuracy. He’d thrive more than ever today. It’s the artists of previous eras, the Cantona’s and Bergkamps that would have to be different.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.