In related news, I hear that Seb Coe won't be running the 100m for Team GB.
Why? Because he's too old and there are better people to do it, despite him being really good in the past.
Same rule applies with Beckham, what's the difference? Surely we'd rather put out a good team with a chance of winning than allow someone who's no longer good enough to represent our country to take part.
Beckham started almost twice the games Giggs did last year, Beckham was good for his team, Giggs was NOT good for his, Giggs is older, therefore your argument holds no weight.
The BEST players were caught up in the Euro's, Beckham is one of the better older players left over, and better than a lot of the rest of players available for England.
Financially, he's a MUCH bigger shirt seller, much bigger fan base and much more worldwide appeal than Giggs, and he's better on the pitch. For every reason you might pick Giggs, Beckham is better, for every other reason, Beckham is better, yet Gigg's is going.
You can be 100% certain that if Gigg's had gone to the US and Beckham was at Utd, Beckham would be going.
If its the FA, Pearce sucking up, or a mixture of both, he's picking a player from, Liverpool, Utd, City and Chelsea....pandering is one of the reasons England suck so badly in international football and the reason Great Britain will also suck.
.
