How will David Beckham be remembered?

Obispo wrote:He's a centreback you dolt.

Obispo wrote:Nah, not really. I just wanted to call you a dolt

otto the humble German wrote:

he is a very German player in that his usefulness to the team exceeds his entertainment value

which is also why he gets different press in different countries

yep..i agree with that..but that applies to most of the german team..individually not great but they seemed to gell at the world cup VERY well...that doesnt mean to say that beckham couldnt also under different circumstances..


Asamoah should indeed retire from international football; Kuranyi should come back; there is no way Hanke is better

agree..hanke is rotten..asamoah is retiring i think.....kiesling should get a game...looks very good indeed

Forza Italia!Forza Milan! wrote:

110% wrote:

Forza Italia!Forza Milan! wrote:While I agree that most of the Beckham bashing on this board has been gratuitous, to say Beckham was a "great player" is stretching the truth IMO.

I find him rather one-dimensional.

"Sport is something that you have to be good at before you can get famous and then you have to maintain that high level to keep that fame (unlike music and boy bands, movies and action stars etc.)."

I would say that is generally true but that is precisely the theme of my original post. Is Beckham good because we get a healthy dose of him every day -- in tabloids, websites etc. -- or is he good because he actually is.

Let's put it this way...if Beckham woke up tomorrow and by Kafkan fate transformed into a Paul Scholes look-alike and started his career over again, do you guys think he would be as famous or widely perceived as "great"?

Also everything you said could be applied to maldini as well, if he was not the son of another famous maldini and looked like scholes, and stayed at man u all his life would maldini be as famous as he is just on his footballing ability? Obviously not.

Er...yes. Maldini has largely outshone his father and is/was probably the best at what he does/did. Still to this day he makes a lot of World XIs.

Ronaldinho, Ronaldo etc. are famous BECAUSE of their footballing ability.

merseyman wrote:Not really Beckham's fault that he's probably the most handsome bloke ever to have played the thorougly macho game. Forza, you can swoon over Paolo "goggle-eyes" Maldini all you like... but even most Italian women, my wife included, talk about Beckham in the same breath as Brad Pitt or George Clooney (Maldini's more your Dirk Bogarde!). Anyway the point is, at one time he WAS a pretty damned excellent player too.

I fully agree with whoever it was that said that Beckham's career should be analysed in two phases: 1996-2001 and 2002-2006. In fact, I'd go further than that. His downward phase started when Alex Ferguson decided that he was the greatest crosser of a ball that the world had ever seen. Because, despite the immense contribution to United's 1999 treble win, his excellence was confined to a limited area of the field.

Personally, I think Glenn Hoddle got the best out of him for England. I still remember England dominating Italy and getting a 0-0 draw in Rome in '97 (Italy didn't manage a single shot on goal), and the despondence of the Italian commentators when Beckham had the ball ("Now it's in the bank!", i.e. this guy just doesn't know how to give the ball away). I also remember the awesome 60-yard chip against Wimbledon in that first season, and the incredible range and confidence of his passing. Wonderful vision too.

Never a flash player, but very sound technically and a hard worker. For that very reason, I personally couldn't give a monkey's about his lifestyle, Posh, Brooklyn, diamond rings, advertising, the parties at Beckingham Palace, and anything else that fills the tabloids.

I even thought he improved his communication skills when he became England captain. OK, he was never going to be on a Voltaire / Dr. Johnson level, but he did at last seem to make an effort to say something sensible (and interesting), which for most footballers is a feat in itself. Can't say he ever came over as an arrogant bloke either. You can take the boy out of the East End...

But (and it's a big "but"), it has too be said that Becks didn't really fulfill the potential he showed as a young'un. And I still think Alex Ferguson must take partial blame. When Glenn Hoddle was experimenting with a 3-5-2 formation, he often used Beckham at right midfield (with either MacManaman or Anderton outside him), and I always thought Becks looked a lot happier, saw more of the ball, saw more of the goal (!), and still found plenty of opportunities to show his crossing ability.

merseyman wrote:This thread is flying along at a rare speed, so I'll just spray a few random comments:

One-footedness: Beckham's preference for his right is no secret, but every time I saw him forced on to his left during the WC... he managed to get a decent cross in. So he's obviously done some work in that area. In any case, there was a little Argentinian fellow a few years back who didn't do too badly with one good foot ;-)

Nesta: positional awareness in abundance, but I've seen nothing about his passing to say it's any better than Beckham's heading, let alone his tackling. Unless you happen to be partial to 5-yard passes to Pirlo, that is. Heck, Materazzi is an infinitely better passer (as Italian central defenders go).

Figo: wonderful player, but extremely slow (which just proves that pace isn't everything). His ability to ghost past players reminds me of Liam Brady. Again, I fail to fathom why anyone would say he's a better tackler than Beckham... I think he's considerably worse. Beckham is forever hounding opponents in midfield; Figo's contribution when his team doesn't have the ball is roughly akin to that of Ronaldinho.

Frankly, I've nothing more to say on the subject. For me, Beckham is (was?) an excellent player who didn't fully live up to expectations. Why we're "discussing" it is curious to say the least (Forza, I think if your mind had been any more made up, you'd have probably written a book on the subject!). Somehow I'm reminded of that American comedian (name escapes me) who said: "A beautiful girl with a brain is like a beautiful girl with a club foot".

Puro wrote:
"Figo extremely slow"

Where do these clowns watch their football?

merseyman wrote:

Puro wrote:
"Figo extremely slow"

Where do these clowns watch their football?

Oh no... it's Hair Bear! That'll teach me to mention Voltaire on a football message board...

Where do I watch my football? Mainly in Milan (Italy... I think there are a couple in the U.S. too). Also the UK, France and Spain.

Figo slow? That's what the great man says himself... so who are we to argue? As I mentioned before (but you were probably busy watching re-runs of last year's Rose Bowl), he's remarkably similar to Liam Brady, i.e. prefers to wrongfoot opponents rather than use speed... probably cause he's lacking therein.

A word in your fat ear: if you're going to talk crap on a public messageboard (and it appears to be your vocation in life), you can save time and space by avoiding stuff like and or even . People are going to see it anyway.

P.S: Now, can ya go eat that burger some place else, ya fat schmuck? Ya spillin' cheese everywhere...

Target Man wrote:Figo>>>>>Becks

Puro wrote:

merseyman wrote:

Puro wrote:
"Figo extremely slow"

Where do these clowns watch their football?

Oh no... it's Hair Bear! That'll teach me to mention Voltaire on a football message board...

Where do I watch my football? Mainly in Milan (Italy... I think there are a couple in the U.S. too). Also the UK, France and Spain.

Figo slow? That's what the great man says himself... so who are we to argue? As I mentioned before (but you were probably busy watching re-runs of last year's Rose Bowl), he's remarkably similar to Liam Brady, i.e. prefers to wrongfoot opponents rather than use speed... probably cause he's lacking therein.

A word in your fat ear: if you're going to talk crap on a public messageboard (and it appears to be your vocation in life), you can save time and space by avoiding stuff like and or even . People are going to see it anyway.

P.S: Now, can ya go eat that burger some place else, ya fat schmuck? Ya spillin' cheese everywhere...

Brilliant!

Well I can think of quite a number of posters who actually believe what you wrote is totally crap! Your football "knowledge" is little to nil when compared to some of the fellows here it seems. Thinking Beckham is a great player.

Go ahead, resort to name calling and all that crap because football's definitely not your forte.

Psst, I know a lot of women (Italian heritage women) who have said "what do people see in thay guy Beckham, he looks like trailer park trash".

110% wrote:

Forza Italia!Forza Milan! wrote:

110% wrote:

Forza Italia!Forza Milan! wrote:While I agree that most of the Beckham bashing on this board has been gratuitous, to say Beckham was a "great player" is stretching the truth IMO.

I find him rather one-dimensional.

"Sport is something that you have to be good at before you can get famous and then you have to maintain that high level to keep that fame (unlike music and boy bands, movies and action stars etc.)."

I would say that is generally true but that is precisely the theme of my original post. Is Beckham good because we get a healthy dose of him every day -- in tabloids, websites etc. -- or is he good because he actually is.

Let's put it this way...if Beckham woke up tomorrow and by Kafkan fate transformed into a Paul Scholes look-alike and started his career over again, do you guys think he would be as famous or widely perceived as "great"?

Also everything you said could be applied to maldini as well, if he was not the son of another famous maldini and looked like scholes, and stayed at man u all his life would maldini be as famous as he is just on his footballing ability? Obviously not.

Er...yes. Maldini has largely outshone his father and is/was probably the best at what he does/did. Still to this day he makes a lot of World XIs.

Ronaldinho, Ronaldo etc. are famous BECAUSE of their footballing ability.

Read what you wrote in bold. You said if beckham looked like scholes would he be "as famous" or "as widely perceived as great". No, but the same does apply to maldini, he was born the son of a famous player, and he is good-looking. If he hadn't he would probably still be famous like scholes for staying at the same club and being pretty decent, the extra fame came from having a famous father and being good-looking, so of he would NOT be "as famous" if he looked like scholes and didn't have a famous father. Think Jordi Cryuff, average footballer but everyone knows him.

BTW The Figo tackles better than beckham idea is just laughable. We need some madrid fans.

l r d wrote:Ah this gets more hilarious.
So Beckham is only rated highly because of his looks.....But he looks like trailor park. Strange forza and puro strange

todo_poderoso_timão wrote:I'll never forget the tackle he avoided in 2002, resulting in Rivaldo's equalizing goal against England.


"In my opinion, Figo is not the greatest tackler but he is better than Beckham, who avoids tackles (or much physical contact) like the plague."

l r d wrote:

todo_poderoso_timão wrote:I'll never forget the tackle he avoided in 2002, resulting in Rivaldo's equalizing goal against England.


"In my opinion, Figo is not the greatest tackler but he is better than Beckham, who avoids tackles (or much physical contact) like the plague."

This is true duno what he was doing, but he really wasnt like this all the time. Figo is not a better tackler than him at all. so many wingers are not good tacklers, yet forza used the fact he isnt good at tackling as a reason for him not being a good winger, just bizarre comments for me

Puro wrote:

merseyman wrote:Not really Beckham's fault that he's probably the most handsome bloke ever to have played the thorougly macho game. Forza, you can swoon over Paolo "goggle-eyes" Maldini all you like... but even most Italian women, my wife included, talk about Beckham in the same breath as Brad Pitt or George Clooney (Maldini's more your Dirk Bogarde!). Anyway the point is, at one time he WAS a pretty damned excellent player too.

I fully agree with whoever it was that said that Beckham's career should be analysed in two phases: 1996-2001 and 2002-2006. In fact, I'd go further than that. His downward phase started when Alex Ferguson decided that he was the greatest crosser of a ball that the world had ever seen. Because, despite the immense contribution to United's 1999 treble win, his excellence was confined to a limited area of the field.

Personally, I think Glenn Hoddle got the best out of him for England. I still remember England dominating Italy and getting a 0-0 draw in Rome in '97 (Italy didn't manage a single shot on goal), and the despondence of the Italian commentators when Beckham had the ball ("Now it's in the bank!", i.e. this guy just doesn't know how to give the ball away). I also remember the awesome 60-yard chip against Wimbledon in that first season, and the incredible range and confidence of his passing. Wonderful vision too.

Never a flash player, but very sound technically and a hard worker. For that very reason, I personally couldn't give a monkey's about his lifestyle, Posh, Brooklyn, diamond rings, advertising, the parties at Beckingham Palace, and anything else that fills the tabloids.

I even thought he improved his communication skills when he became England captain. OK, he was never going to be on a Voltaire / Dr. Johnson level, but he did at last seem to make an effort to say something sensible (and interesting), which for most footballers is a feat in itself. Can't say he ever came over as an arrogant bloke either. You can take the boy out of the East End...

But (and it's a big "but"), it has too be said that Becks didn't really fulfill the potential he showed as a young'un. And I still think Alex Ferguson must take partial blame. When Glenn Hoddle was experimenting with a 3-5-2 formation, he often used Beckham at right midfield (with either MacManaman or Anderton outside him), and I always thought Becks looked a lot happier, saw more of the ball, saw more of the goal (!), and still found plenty of opportunities to show his crossing ability.

Now I know why the world believes most English football "fans" don't know jack about football!!!

The Real White Pele wrote:

Puro wrote:

merseyman wrote:Not really Beckham's fault that he's probably the most handsome bloke ever to have played the thorougly macho game. Forza, you can swoon over Paolo "goggle-eyes" Maldini all you like... but even most Italian women, my wife included, talk about Beckham in the same breath as Brad Pitt or George Clooney (Maldini's more your Dirk Bogarde!). Anyway the point is, at one time he WAS a pretty damned excellent player too.

I fully agree with whoever it was that said that Beckham's career should be analysed in two phases: 1996-2001 and 2002-2006. In fact, I'd go further than that. His downward phase started when Alex Ferguson decided that he was the greatest crosser of a ball that the world had ever seen. Because, despite the immense contribution to United's 1999 treble win, his excellence was confined to a limited area of the field.

Personally, I think Glenn Hoddle got the best out of him for England. I still remember England dominating Italy and getting a 0-0 draw in Rome in '97 (Italy didn't manage a single shot on goal), and the despondence of the Italian commentators when Beckham had the ball ("Now it's in the bank!", i.e. this guy just doesn't know how to give the ball away). I also remember the awesome 60-yard chip against Wimbledon in that first season, and the incredible range and confidence of his passing. Wonderful vision too.

Never a flash player, but very sound technically and a hard worker. For that very reason, I personally couldn't give a monkey's about his lifestyle, Posh, Brooklyn, diamond rings, advertising, the parties at Beckingham Palace, and anything else that fills the tabloids.

I even thought he improved his communication skills when he became England captain. OK, he was never going to be on a Voltaire / Dr. Johnson level, but he did at last seem to make an effort to say something sensible (and interesting), which for most footballers is a feat in itself. Can't say he ever came over as an arrogant bloke either. You can take the boy out of the East End...

But (and it's a big "but"), it has too be said that Becks didn't really fulfill the potential he showed as a young'un. And I still think Alex Ferguson must take partial blame. When Glenn Hoddle was experimenting with a 3-5-2 formation, he often used Beckham at right midfield (with either MacManaman or Anderton outside him), and I always thought Becks looked a lot happier, saw more of the ball, saw more of the goal (!), and still found plenty of opportunities to show his crossing ability.

Now I know why the world believes most English football "fans" don't know jack about football!!!

Racist

Forza Italia!Forza Milan! wrote:

110% wrote:

Forza Italia!Forza Milan! wrote:

110% wrote:

Forza Italia!Forza Milan! wrote:While I agree that most of the Beckham bashing on this board has been gratuitous, to say Beckham was a "great player" is stretching the truth IMO.

I find him rather one-dimensional.

"Sport is something that you have to be good at before you can get famous and then you have to maintain that high level to keep that fame (unlike music and boy bands, movies and action stars etc.)."

I would say that is generally true but that is precisely the theme of my original post. Is Beckham good because we get a healthy dose of him every day -- in tabloids, websites etc. -- or is he good because he actually is.

Let's put it this way...if Beckham woke up tomorrow and by Kafkan fate transformed into a Paul Scholes look-alike and started his career over again, do you guys think he would be as famous or widely perceived as "great"?

Also everything you said could be applied to maldini as well, if he was not the son of another famous maldini and looked like scholes, and stayed at man u all his life would maldini be as famous as he is just on his footballing ability? Obviously not.

Er...yes. Maldini has largely outshone his father and is/was probably the best at what he does/did. Still to this day he makes a lot of World XIs.

Ronaldinho, Ronaldo etc. are famous BECAUSE of their footballing ability.

Read what you wrote in bold. You said if beckham looked like scholes would he be "as famous" or "as widely perceived as great". No, but the same does apply to maldini, he was born the son of a famous player, and he is good-looking. If he hadn't he would probably still be famous like scholes for staying at the same club and being pretty decent, the extra fame came from having a famous father and being good-looking, so of he would NOT be "as famous" if he looked like scholes and didn't have a famous father. Think Jordi Cryuff, average footballer but everyone knows him.

BTW The Figo tackles better than beckham idea is just laughable. We need some madrid fans.

I disagree. Let's take Baresi. Not the best looking dude but helluva player. A pioneer, world class, world renowned.

I believe if Maldini looked like Baresi, Paolo would still be considered great.

In my opinion, Figo is not the greatest tackler but he is better than Beckham, who avoids tackles (or much physical contact) like the plague.

Forza Italia!Forza Milan! wrote:No my reading comprehension is fine thanks.

I am saying that Maldini would still be "great" even if he was ugly. As for the fame bit that is a fair comment on your part.

But it also depends on how you define "fame." It does not necessarily mean a poster boy. For example Gattuso -- far from being a meterosexual -- is famous as well because he is good at what he does...

As for the rest of your post (Italian billboards)...I admit that football is fast becoming a business. But Beckham has taken it to a new nadir. Perhaps it is not solely his fault for doing so.

Even the England team in general is fast becoming a commercial behemoth.

More intelligent commentators from England recognize that posing for an ad or two is inevitable. It is excess they are worried about and of course the celebrity culture, the WAG culture etc. that follows the English team wherever it goes. Baden Baden was practically a fun camp according to reports. Other than England's footballing limitations that played a huge part in their last 8 finish.

110% wrote:

Forza Italia!Forza Milan! wrote:No my reading comprehension is fine thanks.

I am saying that Maldini would still be "great" even if he was ugly. As for the fame bit that is a fair comment on your part.

But it also depends on how you define "fame." It does not necessarily mean a poster boy. For example Gattuso -- far from being a meterosexual -- is famous as well because he is good at what he does...

As for the rest of your post (Italian billboards)...I admit that football is fast becoming a business. But Beckham has taken it to a new nadir. Perhaps it is not solely his fault for doing so.

Even the England team in general is fast becoming a commercial behemoth.

More intelligent commentators from England recognize that posing for an ad or two is inevitable. It is excess they are worried about and of course the celebrity culture, the WAG culture etc. that follows the English team wherever it goes. Baden Baden was practically a fun camp according to reports. Other than England's footballing limitations that played a huge part in their last 8 finish.

So you have got something against beckham then, so when you started the thread you weren't asking anything, you had made up your mind and were just having a moan?

Of course it is not his fault. Everyone, teams, players, mangers etc are all involved in promotion/marketing. Beckham is just the best at exploiting it, to make money to take care of himself and his family. If anything he should be congratulated for being the World Champion at it. Something you seem good at pointing out (something ungracious about always pointing it out all the time though). The greeks don't go on about winning the European Cup all the time.

One other thing about what beckham does: promoting football is a good thing, a sport, where kids want to play, get exercise etc. Kind of the opposite to Mcdonalds who are targetting kids and getting them fat. You're a grown man who doesn't have to buy his beauty products, so what is the problem of him promoting them. The only problem is the overexposure, that we get tired of seeing him everywhere. Live with it he's only got a couple of years left.

There's a couple of digs at the english and england team in there as well. Not being english I don't much care except to point out that football is a global business, and every club including your own, milan, is part of it. That's why you pay 70 euros for a replica shirt made in china for 5 euros. That's why all you favourite players drive ferraris etc, and live pretty much the same way as beckham.

You make another point about celebrity culture. Again you should come to Italy the country that values looks and style above everything, and see that the only place worse is hollywood itself. Every time beckham steps out he is wearing gucci, armani, prada, roberto cavali etc so do you see the hypocricy of an italian complaining about how someone uses his looks and style for an advantage?