Taking sport too seriously

Well, obviously not by some people. Not by the people that voted him, without fail, week on week, Sky's Man of the Match in every Man Utd game, however well he'd played. Not by the people for whom he was pretty much the only footballer they'd heard of. But by some people, yes, I rather think so. By those "in the know". Journalists, wizened and know-all, pundits, people down the pub who really think they know their football. The narrative grew after he left the Premier League in 2003 - Beckham, he's only good for free-kicks and corners. He's more of a celebrity than a footballer. People just forgot how good he actually was (and, to a large extent, remained). I'll try to be as lean as possible, just give a few bullet points - he was twice runner up for FIFA World Player of the Year - he had, essentially, eight full seasons at Man Utd. They won the title six times and finished second twice. They failed to win the title the season before he was a ...

At the moment, the main interest in British football does seem to be with the managers. I don't think it's a golden era on the pitch - there are a lot of pretty nondescript teams in transition. I do think there's a fair bit to be said about various managers though. Managers I don't really have a big opinion on, besides them being obviously varying degrees of good at their job - Antonio Conte, Mauricio Pochettino, Tony Pulis, Mark Hughes - I mean, when I say I don't have an opinion on Pocchetino ... I love Pocchetino, that's my opinion on him. Firstly, Sam Allardyce. Allardyce does what he does. But he doesn't do more than that. He was the wrong choice for the England job on every level and what's happened is for the best. Initially, when he went to Palace it seemed possible he'd even lost the ability to do what he does. But, of course, that was the point. If he was going to turn up and get Palace to start winning every game instantly, he'd be...