Was Beckham played out of position?

MOST of the time he was played out on the right wing/right midfield. Was he wasted out there? Considering he had no pace and couldn't get past a man. Would he have been even more effective in the centre of midfield, he knows what he is doing with the ball and he was/is? a committed hard worker (not seen him play in Yankland)

I do realise he has played in the middle before, but no where near as much as he could or maybe should have.

No need for a poll before anyone mentions it.

He was fantastically effective on the wing for both England and United. Arguably the best player in Europe in 1999. He was good in CM, true, but when he was at his best he was competing with Scholes and Keane at club level, and even if he was better in CM, Scholes or Keane would have been a far greater loss to CM.

He did not need to always beat a man with pace on the wing, he could still whip in some world class crossing. He could have played in central midfield but with crossing like he had it would have taken the best part of his game away playing him in central midfield.

Thought I was on ignore Al? I'm sure Xabi Alonso can put in a wicked cross as well but that doesn't mean he should be played on the wing.

Had no pace? Beckham wasn't a slow player through his 20's by any means.

His crossing was too good to play him anywhere else although he was and still is a very hard worker and a world class passer.

James wrote:Thought I was on ignore Al? I'm sure Xabi Alonso can put in a wicked cross as well but that doesn't mean he should be played on the wing.

I would miss you james, and i think the fact that Beckham did play on the wing and did put in some great performances and did play in succesful teams proves the point, that he was not wasted on the wing. And Alonso and Beckham are also different types of players, i would say Beckham had more pace than Alonso and other attributes that meant he would be better playing on the wing in what Alonso would have been.But i think a people who knew a thing or two about football would have realised this.

I think he was more useful on the wing than in the middle. Its not that he wasn't good in the middle, but during his peak he was one of the best wingers in the world at the time.

a club like man u cant attend to the needs of just 1 player except maybe ronaldo but what i mean is that even if beckham has qualities to play in central there was no need for this because already there was ready players to play there

plus also, u can extract the most of his qualities of early diagonals from wider areas and man u benefit from this all the time and usually england also

Nah that crossing had to be out wide, provided sooo many goals, especially with Keane and Scholes holding down CM spots.

If he was at his peak now he'd be playing in the centre. I guess at the time of rigid 4-4-2's in England he was great on the wing.



And my point about Alonso wasn't comparing them (although I think Beckham could have played a similar role even if he's a little more mobile that Alonso) it was just in reply to Al focusing on crossing only.

in the late 90s he did sometimes play that xabi alonso role, getting the ball in CM and spreading it all over the pitch, but yeah as others mentioned, he was way more effective on the right.

He had pace, that's like saying Figo didn't

AM

The guy Rangers have on trial, Holy Fuck!

10/10 for relevance there Jela.

Beckham wasnt slow and he could beat players if he wanted to, he showed that you could a few times, he just wasnt that kind of player.

Jela

SuperManUtd wrote:Beckham wasnt slow and he could beat players if he wanted to, he showed that you could a few times, he just wasnt that kind of player.

This.



also alonso is a much better passer than david.

He is a CM for LA Glaxay I think. He is effective there when I have seen him.

I don't think he was played out of position, he had Keane and Scholes to compete with there. He was one of the best right sided midfielders in the world when he was at Manchester United.