David Beckham confessed yesterday that he sought a booking in Saturday’s win over Wales when he knew that a rib injury would rule him out of today’s game in Azerbaijan. Apparently, knowing the public thinks him dim, Beckham told the Daily Telegraph he wanted to demonstrate that he does have “the brains to be that clever”. I am reminded of the man who was asked why he rarely spoke. He replied that when he was silent people thought he was an idiot. When he spoke people knew he was. The same goes for Beckham. Like his manager (who has the excuse he is talking in a foreign language), Beckham never says anything of interest before or after England internationals.

The choice of Beckham as captain was always a strange one. You don’t have to be intelligent to be a good footballer. However, as captain of the national team you should be expected to express your thoughts in a clear and cogent way. Now the issue goes further than that. Should an admitted cheat be captain of the national team? We know that Eriksson cheats on those close to him, does his silence mean that he approves of his captain cheating as well?

Sir Geoff Hurst, England’s guest of honour in Azerbaijan for today’s match, claims that Beckham had brought the “entire country into disrepute”. He claims that Alf Ramsay would have immediately sacked Bobby Moore as captain if he had said something similar to Beckham. He added: “We played in a different era but it can’t be right whether it’s today, last week, a month ago or 15, 20, 40 years ago.”

Of course Bobby Moore and Geoff Hurst learnt their trade at West Ham. Although Beckham was another East End lad, he made the mistake of signing for Manchester United instead. Maybe Beckham should be replaced as captain by Rio Ferdinand or Frank Lampard (two others who were brought up at the West Ham Academy.

I think the idea that some footballer brought "the country" into disrepute when the Prime Minister can act with such disingenuous mendacity is the ravings of a man who cannot see beyond football. Beckham is not half as important as he thinks he is and his delusions of grandeur should not be encouraged.

Most people in this country (and you would never pick this fact up from the media coverage!) are not interested in football and do not hang on the results of games. Beckham's motivation in this "professional foul" are actually typical and his only pecularity consists in saying them out loud. The difference between him and an out-and-out thug like Vinnie Jones is only one of degree.

Incidentally I think Sven's private life is not relevant to his job in any way...but at least it seems more interesting than football.

I think you do have to be intelligent to be a good footballer - just not the sort of linguistic or mathematical intelligence that is still apparently valued to the exclusion of all other types by teachers and educationalists.

If only Becks had had the misfortune to be snapped up by West Ham then I am sure John would have had a good word to say about him - especially if he had been born 40 years earlier