Beckham

[Frank Reynolds]

Its amazing that these "experts" advocate the manager picking his most in form players, except when it's David Beckham.

McClaren made a mistake in thinking he could use Beckham as a scapegoat for World Cup failure, and setting his stall out to appease the media and become popular off of Beckham's back, but credit to him for picking his most in-form and best players.

[Taunton_City]

A bout time too

[Guest DanC]

I'm delighted. Can't wait to see him play for England again in the first England game at the New Wembley.

[Redhyde]

There's a few schools of thought on this.

One. It's all about form. In the world cup he was awful. Yes he set up nearly every goal but his general play was shocking and no team can afford to carry a player no matter how many "points" he earns. This isn't America, stats don't govern all. Then he was absolutely awful for Madrid for the first few weeks of the new season. He did deserve to be dropped on form. Unlike Gerrard , Lampard, et all who all performed well for their clubs at the beginning of the season. He's then been brought back, because he's been back in form. He's been very good the past few weeks.

Two. Steve McClaren wanted to use him as a signal that he was different. Perhaps Steve felt the need to differentiate between him and Sven. By removing the player who signified Sven, WAG's, Media and all the things wrong with the England team. A brave decision to remove him, a braver one to bring him back in this case.

Three. Steve is planning for the future. Will David Beckham be around and in form for 2008? You can ask that about any of the players, but at the time of his dropping David was in a rapid decline in form suggesting that he'd be finished as a player sooner than later. This was compounded by Beckham's decision to enter the semi retirement of MLS. Would you pick a player playing for a Conference/League Two side for England? No matter who they were? This may have been it, so in this case he's panicked and brought him back for completely the wrong reasons.

It's an idiotic suggestion that he did it to be popular. The amount of stick he's got from the masses completely undermines that argument. Anyone arguing that he should have been brought back because of form earlier, need only look at the appearances of David for Madrid. Awful in the start, then Injured, then he had his attitude questioned by Capello and was left out, this takes us up to about March where there is no grounds for his inclusion for England on form. Fair play to Beckham, he's made Capello change his mind through sheer determination and made himself essential to Madrid's title charge but before a month ago he didn't deserve a recall to England. He does now, on form alone.

For me there's one thing I'll never forgive though. No it's not the sending off, not at all. It's not even the pathetic performances he's churned in for England 2004 championships onwards. He was the only ever England Captain that didn't try in a game. Australia at home, He didn't try. Inexcusable.

[Guest DanC]

There's a few schools of thought on this.

One. It's all about form. In the world cup he was awful. Yes he set up nearly every goal but his general play was shocking and no team can afford to carry a player no matter how many "points" he earns. This isn't America, stats don't govern all. Then he was absolutely awful for Madrid for the first few weeks of the new season. He did deserve to be dropped on form. Unlike Gerrard , Lampard, et all who all performed well for their clubs at the beginning of the season. He's then been brought back, because he's been back in form. He's been very good the past few weeks.

Two. Steve McClaren wanted to use him as a signal that he was different. Perhaps Steve felt the need to differentiate between him and Sven. By removing the player who signified Sven, WAG's, Media and all the things wrong with the England team. A brave decision to remove him, a braver one to bring him back in this case.

Three. Steve is planning for the future. Will David Beckham be around and in form for 2008? You can ask that about any of the players, but at the time of his dropping David was in a rapid decline in form suggesting that he'd be finished as a player sooner than later. This was compounded by Beckham's decision to enter the semi retirement of MLS. Would you pick a player playing for a Conference/League Two side for England? No matter who they were? This may have been it, so in this case he's panicked and brought him back for completely the wrong reasons.

It's an idiotic suggestion that he did it to be popular. The amount of stick he's got from the masses completely undermines that argument. Anyone arguing that he should have been brought back because of form earlier, need only look at the appearances of David for Madrid. Awful in the start, then Injured, then he had his attitude questioned by Capello and was left out, this takes us up to about March where there is no grounds for his inclusion for England on form. Fair play to Beckham, he's made Capello change his mind through sheer determination and made himself essential to Madrid's title charge but before a month ago he didn't deserve a recall to England. He does now, on form alone.

For me there's one thing I'll never forgive though. No it's not the sending off, not at all. It's not even the pathetic performances he's churned in for England 2004 championships onwards. He was the only ever England Captain that didn't try in a game. Australia at home, He didn't try. Inexcusable.

Just one problem with this and that's your comment on MLS. I watch often when it is on the box and I can assure you the standard is much much higher than Conference/League two. It's at least on par with the championship with one or two clubs whom I believe could survive in the Premiership.

MLS is very under rated by some but you will be surprised how good the quality is there. Much better than the long ball game the League Two clubs like to play.

[Redhyde]

Just one problem with this and that's your comment on MLS. I watch often when it is on the box and I can assure you the standard is much much higher than Conference/League two. It's at least on par with the championship with one or two clubs whom I believe could survive in the Premiership.

MLS is very under rated by some but you will be surprised how good the quality is there. Much better than the long ball game the League Two clubs like to play.

Just one problem, i watch it too.

It's getting alot better no doubt, but the game is based on fitness, the technique is coming through but you just have to look at the quality of players who succeed over there. Paul Dalgleish, Sebastian Rosenthal, Ian Woan and the list goes on. Juan Pablo Angel scored how many goals in the premiership last season? He's already got 3 in 3 with two assists in MLS. Says it all.

In ten years perhaps, but it's kick and rush at the minute. The decent players stand out. because there's a distinct lack of technique.

But it may argue in favour of Beckham, he'll have to be fitter than ever to play there effectively.

Name which teams you think would stay up in the Premiership then?

We've seen their best players. Clint Dempsey - distinctly average for Fulham. Landon Donovan - Cowering in MLS after bombing in Europe. DaMarcus Beasley - Man City bench says it all. Oguchi Onyewu - Just a physical lump and rightly sent back by Newcastle.

The American National team would struggle in the Premiership, never mind a single MLS team.

[Meh]

I don't know anything about the MLS league, but, by what the press say, it does seem to be a home for retirement players and those who can't really cut the mustard at the highest level. That said, I do believe that Beckham being there will encourage a better quality of player and it will improve; potentailly quite rapidly.

I do find it intriging that he may come on loan to a Prem side at the end of his first MLS season; we would be able to clearly see if Becks claims, that he will be fitter and still capable at the top level come to fruition.

Certainly at the moment he HAS to be in. His form for Real Madrid is immense and he is the main catalyst for their displays which are strangely committed for a Real Madrid team.

He helped to save Capello's job. It may be two from two (in terms of Manager still in a job) by the time we've played Estonia.

[Frank Reynolds]

It's not an idiotic statment to say that McClaren dropped Beckham to be popular. McClaren thinks he knows how to manipulate the media; hence the revelations about his extra-marital affair coming out (via Max Clifford) a week or so before he became England boss.

He thought he could create a legacy by being the man who did it all without Beckham. The papers were full of how great it was that he was his own man. If David Beckham wasn't one of the 23 best English players then we must have one hell of a team. Capello could fall out with his own shadow and didn't like it that Beckham had signed for another team, but he proved him worng.

And at the World Cup Beckham was one of our best players. Admittedly that wasn't hard, only Hargreaves and the two Coles were any good. Beckham isn't the sort of player to turn a game with a mazy run and a hat-trick, but he can with a cross.

Beckham is more under-pressure than most players and I think we'd have far more points than we do now if he was in the team from the start.

[reliant_robin]

Its amazing that these "experts" advocate the manager picking his most in form players, except when it's David Beckham.

McClaren made a mistake in thinking he could use Beckham as a scapegoat for World Cup failure, and setting his stall out to appease the media and become popular off of Beckham's back, but credit to him for picking his most in-form and best players.

havent much respect for mcclaren.he obviously cant make decisions.this beckham thing has got boring