View Full Version : Beckham quits as Captain after World Cup Exit
littlelostboy
07-02-2006, 17:34
http://msn.foxsports.com/soccer/story/5749556]Beckham quits as Captain afte World Cup Exit
Just thinking, as a captain, has Beckham really contribute to the England team in International matches other then the World Cup besides his free kicks?
Does Beckham has talent and does he deserve the captaincy in the first place?
doc_bean
07-02-2006, 17:57
Yes.
UltraWar
07-02-2006, 18:14
It's a shame that he isn't captain anymore [sarcasm]
The page is actually http://msn.foxsports.com/soccer/story/5749556/Beckham%20quits%20as%20Captain%20afte%20World%20Cup%20Exit
You made a typo in the link...
edyzmedieval
07-02-2006, 19:48
Beckham only knows free kicks, penalties, shooting near the goal...
That's all.
He sucks at dribbling, defending...
Oh, he's the best player for commercials.
I think it is good for the team and country, we can now let lennon roam wild on the right wing with Wright Phillips in support, for good measure.
And we can have a stronger more respected English Captain, called John Terry - please let us not select Gerrard.
Beckham did an alright job though, but his time is up as Captain and right winger.
scotchedpommes
07-02-2006, 19:57
Beckham only knows free kicks, penalties, ...
Really? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30ZOFqVFm-w)
I wouldn't count it as one of his strengths.
And not just based on that particular kick.
Red Peasant
07-02-2006, 20:04
At least he has had the foresight and courage to make the decision himself, most would have hung on to it to the bitter end. Good luck to him, and well done.
As for the captaincy, I agree that it should be Terry, not just because he is a driving personality, but because he is a centre-half, a position that rarely ever needs to be changed for tactical reasons. The problem of having a star striker or midfielder as captain is that it inhibits (especially weak coaches) from making necessary tactical changes, either before or during the game.
I think Beckham was a great player in his day, but seems to have lost the plot a bit of late. I suppose his "celebrity" status provides quite a lot of a distraction. I believe it's better for footballers to keep a lower profile and concentrate on what they do best. :2cents:
At least he has had the foresight and courage to make the decision himself, most would have hung on to it to the bitter end. Good luck to him, and well done.
As for the captaincy, I agree that it should be Terry, not just because he is a driving personality, but because he is a centre-half, a position that rarely ever needs to be changed for tactical reasons. The problem of having a star striker or midfielder as captain is that it inhibits (especially weak coaches) from making necessary tactical changes, either before or during the game.
Exactly.
littlelostboy
07-03-2006, 03:03
It's a shame that he isn't captain anymore [sarcasm]
The page is actually http://msn.foxsports.com/soccer/story/5749556/Beckham%20quits%20as%20Captain%20afte%20World%20Cup%20Exit
You made a typo in the link...
Oops, my bad. Thanks for correcting me.
And we can have a stronger more respected English Captain, called John Terry - please let us not select Gerrard.
What's wrong with Gerrad? He was pretty good this year. One of the best strikers out there.
What's wrong with Gerrard? He was pretty good this year. One of the best strikers out there.
Gerrard, is not a striker for one he's a midfielder. And there's nothing wrong with him, but the team becomes a whole lot more flexible if Terry was captain. This is because if Gerrard was captain, the coach's decisions will be hampered by the fact he cannot sub Gerrard (as he is the captain) eventhough a change maybe warranted, this is not the case with Terry as he will never substitute a central defender.
In my modest opinion, Terry is your choice for a number of reasons. Many of which have already been mentioned. Rarely susbstituted, natural leader, experience etc. England would do well with him. Plus a coach that teaches those lads to play attacking football. I believe that is what England is good at. Not this defensive rubbush we have been seeing. Work on their fitness too...
Quid
Ignoramus
07-03-2006, 09:13
As an Australian, I couldn't care less about him. Of more concern is the condition of the referees~:)
As an Australian, I couldn't care less about him. Of more concern is the condition of the referees~:)
You're just being bitter! ~;)
Red Peasant
07-03-2006, 13:52
As an Australian, I couldn't care less about him. Of more concern is the condition of the referees~:)
Well Ignoramus, start your own thread on that pressing topic. :laugh4:
English assassin
07-03-2006, 14:47
As an Australian, I couldn't care less about him. Of more concern is the condition of the referees~:)
Graham was just getting his revenge in for the ashes tour coming up...what a shocker though.
IMHO Beckham has been a good captain. All right, with the wisdom of hindsight it might have been better if he had gone a little sooner, IF you think Sven would have used the flexibility that gave him in midfield selections. Which I doubt.
As for the original qu, "has Beckham really contributed to the England team in International matches other then the World Cup besides his free kicks?", lets be honest, its been a few years since Becks was any more than an average (international) midfielder. He never was fast, and he's certainly not now, his skills on the ball are only OK, his passing (and of course the dead ball) are where he stands out, if anywhere. But he is solid and he REALLY works hard, the sort of player who'll still be trying 100% at 2-1 down in the 89th minute.
That's quite a good mindset for a captain.
Its good to see that he hasn't quit the squad altogether, for the reasons English assassin mentioned!
This is because if Gerrard was captain, the coach's decisions will be hampered by the fact he cannot sub Gerrard (as he is the captain) eventhough a change maybe warranted, this is not the case with Terry as he will never substitute a central defender.
Why would you want to sub Gerrard? He's a very flexible player who can be moved around easily to suit tactics, and he's the sort of player that can make the difference even when losing. His antics in the FA Cup final this year showed that, and even in the friendly international against Argentina in November last year, it was his brilliant pass from the right back position that set up Owen's late equaliser.
Honestly, I don't mind which is made Captain, as long as its one of either Terry or Gerrard (I really wouldn't want it to be Neville).
Dutch_guy
07-03-2006, 18:17
Why would you want to sub Gerrard?
Well every sportsman how good he might be has his moments of weakness, for example take Riquelme; he didn't play to well, even though he was the driving force behind the Argentineans, and thus got subbed.
If a player isn't playing up to his level, and you have players on the bench who can do the job better, then you go for a sub. Even if his name is Gerrard.
Other than that, I do think Gerrard or Terry would make a good captain, but honestly as it is not my country, and a potential rival, I don't really care!:laugh4:
:balloon2:
Why would you want to sub Gerrard? He's a very flexible player who can be moved around easily to suit tactics, and he's the sort of player that can make the difference even when losing. His antics in the FA Cup final this year showed that, and even in the friendly international against Argentina in November last year, it was his brilliant pass from the right back position that set up Owen's late equaliser.
Honestly, I don't mind which is made Captain, as long as its one of either Terry or Gerrard (I really wouldn't want it to be Neville).
You're basing that on reputations, not form.
You're basing that on reputations, not form.
Well, Gerrard has arguably been in form all season, and he has been one of the better players in our team this World Cup too (top scorer anyone?), so I'm not only basing it on reputation. Of course, every sportman has an off-day occasionally, but that would be the same with Terry, so you can't really use that as an reason for making him captain over Gerrard. My original point was that Gerrard is very flexible so could be easily accomodated in tactical changes whilst staying on the pitch if he was captain. So I suppose I disagree with you in that I think Terry could be substituted if he was having a bad game, even though he is a central defender and captain. If your back four aren't perfoming and Terry is the cause, it would be folly to keep him on just because he is captain, as that's exactly the mistake that Sven made with Beckham in the midfield.
But as I said, I'm not really bothered which of them is made it as they'll both make fantastic captains.
Sven made Becks "The man" so it's only logical that Becks leaves when Sven goes.I only hope that your new manager teaches your players how to score from 11 meters under pressure.
Unfortunately, I think this cannot be taught. To be under so much pressure at that very moment...either you have it in you, or you don't.
Quid
Sven made Becks "The man" so it's only logical that Becks leaves when Sven goes.I only hope that your new manager teaches your players how to score from 11 meters under pressure.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.