As if he was not getting enough “stick” already, Steve McClaren yesterday made
a rod for his own back by recalling David Beckham to the England squad for
next Friday’s friendly international against Brazil at Wembley and the
crucial European Championship qualifying tie away to Estonia in 10 days’
time, which could decide the coach’s fate.
The decision was taken against the advice of McClaren’s staff, including his
tactical guru, Terry Venables, for whom it could be the last straw.
Increasingly marginalised since advocating the switch to 3-5-2 for the
debacle in Zagreb last October, Venables is known to be unhappy and
considering his position.
McClaren himself is under pressure after the poor performances against
Macedonia, Croatia, Israel and Andorra, and faces the sack if the result is
disappointing in Tallinn on June 6. It is against this background that his
judgment appears to be unsound again. There is no other logical
interpretation of Beckham’s return, nearly a year after he was discarded as
yesterday’s man. The erstwhile captain is not restored after a glorious
Indian summer in Spain, as some would have us believe.
Far from being the architect of Real Madrid’s late challenge for the La Liga
title, he has started just three of Real’s past 11 matches, and the obvious
conclusion is that the England coach has bowed to a tabloid campaign on
behalf of the icon of their fashion and celebrity pages.
Lest we forget, it was McClaren who opted to dump Beckham in the wake of
England’s poor showing at the 2006 World Cup.
The man himself did the decent thing and resigned the captaincy straight after
elimination in the quarter-finals, but he wanted to prolong his
international career, only for McClaren to call time upon it by excluding
Beckham from the start of the Euro 2008 qualifying series. When he took
charge, last August, the new head coach was at pains to distance himself
from the Sven-Göran Eriksson regime – a process which had started even
earlier, with some unattributed briefings through third parties towards the
end of the World Cup.
McClaren was going to be his own man, we were assured. He had not agreed with
some of Eriksson’s decisions, notably taking Theo Walcott to Germany, and
everybody was going to see a big difference.
The early indications were promising. Out went Beckham and other remnants of
the old guard, such as David James and Sol Campbell, and McClaren got off to
a flying start, with three straight wins against Greece, Andorra and
Macedonia. Then the wheels started to come loose with a goalless draw in the
return fixture at home to Macedonia, a couple flew off spectacularly with
the 2-0 defeat in Zagreb, and suddenly the new boss was looking very much
like the old boss. Cue Beckham.
Was McClaren admitting he had been wrong to exclude him in the first place?
“No, I wouldn’t go back on that decision”, he said. “But as I told you at
the time, and I know nobody believed me, you should never close the door on
anybody, and I included people like David James, Sol Campbell and Nicky Butt
in that as well.”
Welcoming Beckham back into the fold, three weeks after his 32nd birthday,
McClaren admitted he had not been to Spain to watch him play live this
season. He said: “David is in the squad because his form is good and he can
help us to win in Estonia. Brazil on Friday is just preparation for that
match, which is the one we need to go and win to set us up for qualifying.”
So what is the message here? That England’s finest cannot overcome little
Estonia without the serial underachiever of successive international
championships? Beckham failed to play to his overhyped potential at the past
two World Cup finals and at Euro 2004, and his diminishing but still voluble
fan club has to go all the way back to the qualifying tie against Greece at
Old Trafford in October 2001 to laud him as an international match-winner
with any justification. He was lambasted in Germany last summer by some of
the same critics advocating his return now, and the faults for which he was
criticised then are clearly still present.
Beckham possesses neither the tricks nor the pace to go past his full-back and
get to the byline to supply the most damaging cross of all, and has a
tendency not to pass and move, but to stand and admire his long deliveries
from deep, which are more showy than effective. He looked like a spent force
at the World Cup, and if that was not the case would he really be heading
for the elephants’ graveyard that is North American “soccer”? Out there in
the galaxy of mediocrity that is the rough equivalent of our Nationwide
Conference, he cannot hope to be fit enough, or sharp enough, to complete
the European qualifying series with England next season. His selection at
this stage represents a gamble that smacks of desperation by the manager.
McClaren refused to accept it as such.
“It is certainly not a panic measure,” he said. “Our situation changes every
time we play. After the Spain game [in February] we looked at the situation
and reassessed where we were because that was a big disappointment and we
felt things needed changing.
“David came under consideration for Israel and Andorra, but unfortunately he
got injured at the time. I always like to plan long term, but there is a
pressing short-term need to win in Estonia, and I think David can help us to
do that.
“It’s all about winning games for England. I met David 10 days ago for a chat.
We talked about the possibility of him coming back, and I was impressed by
the passion he had about playing for his country. That passion is what I
felt we needed after the Spain game.
“He’s fit and strong and playing well. He has got his appetite back since the
New Year, and I believe he’ll strengthen our team.”
Denying the suggestion that Beckham was back to save McClaren’s job, the coach
added: “It’s to help me win the game in Estonia. End of story. His
experience, passing and crossing ability are going to be an asset to us.”
Others, Venables foremost among them, advocated a more clear-sighted,
forward-looking strategy and argued for the inclusion of young Aaron Lennon
in the role envisaged for Beckham, on the right.
Others who had a mention were Jermaine Pennant, after his eye-catching
contribution for Liverpool in the European Cup final, and Blackburn’s player
of the year, David Bentley, who forced his way into the squad with his
man-of-the-match performance for the B team against Albania on Friday night.
In going for the retread option, sources close to the England coach say he
believes his way is a win-win situation. If Beckham plays well, McClaren
bathes in the glory of being man enough, and astute enough, to change his
mind. On the other hand, if Beckham is a flop, McClaren will shrug and say:
“There you are, I was right about him all along. Now you’ve seen he can’t do
it any more.” Having brought him back, McClaren clearly intends to play him.
It would make no sense to turn the England camp into a media feeding frenzy
just to have him on the bench.
So if Beckham is to start, who makes way? Recent form points to Frank Lampard,
who has not played well for England for a long time, but McClaren is more
likely to choose a softer target and omit either Joe Cole, or possibly
Michael Carrick, who is otherwise in line for the vacancy created by Owen
Hargreaves’s absence, injured. Even against such limited opponents as
Estonia, who have yet to register a win in the group, the Beckham gambit is
a dangerous one in that it presupposes McClaren can afford another failure.
He cannot.
Of much greater significance, long term, than the return of “Goldenballs” is
that of Michael Owen, who demonstrated his complete recovery from the knee
injury that kept him out for so long with a full 90 minutes in the B game at
Turf Moor on Friday. Having managed only three appearances for Newcastle all
season, England’s principal striker was obviously in need of the run out,
and he emerged all the better for it, even if his finishing skills were a
little rusty.
At 27, Owen, unlike Beckham, has time on his side.
Beckham is back, but what do the experts think?
AUGUST 2006
Steve McClaren I told David I was planning for the future and he wasn’t
included. His reaction was the one I wanted, that he would continue to f ght
for his place, and I will never close the door on that
Glenn Hoddle Steve is correct in saying the door is not shut. If we
found ourselves on a sticky wicket I think David would be brought back
straight away and rightly so
Jamie Redknapp Does Beckham deserve to be dropped and told his England
career is over? Surely, he could still do a job for England. What happens
if, in six months’ time, Ruud van Nistelrooy is top scorer in Spain with
Beckham as his chief supplier and top of the assists?
Jimmy Greaves McClaren needs to show the public that there is a bright
future. A new-look England will do that. Sadly for David Beckham, it needs
to be one without him
Sir Bobby Robson You need a balance between players with pace and
players who control the tempo of a game. David can certainly do the latter,
so to discard him forever would be foolish
MAY 2007
Steve McClaren, yesterday All I’m thinking about is the next two games
and we’re not looking beyond that. The priority is the next 10 days.
Obviously, his form has been excellent at Real Madrid and he can help us win
in Estonia. Beyond that, we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it
Terry Butcher It’s a backward and unnecessary step. His days on the
international stage have gone. There is no way a player in MLS can be
considered for England, so they would be effectively recalling him for a
friendly and a qualifier in Estonia that they should not need Beckham to win
Sam Allardyce Steve McClaren is a mate of mine and I will back him all
the way, but I don’t think Beckham should have been left out in the first
place. I would welcome his return – however long it’s for
Jamie Redknapp Three months ago, it wasn’t right, he wasn’t needed, but
now is he one of the best 22 players? Yes he is
Andy Townsend McClaren was strong when he decided to leave him out, so
what does this say about him now? Beckham was peripheral in the World Cup
and I don’t see what has changed
