Why is David Beckham notably absent from the Beckhams Vogue cover?

In June this year, a rumour about the Beckhams seemingly came out of nowhere.

Well, not nowhere.

It was started by a tweet from British radio and TV presenter Jonny Gould, who said the couple would be trending later.

Replies to the tweet focused on three rumours:

  1. The teacher of Harper, the couple’s six-year-old daughter, had been fired for being pregnant with David’s baby.
  2. Alternatively, the couple were getting a divorce, and the school teacher had already HAD the baby, and Victoria would be discussing the split in an upcoming edition of Vogue.
  3. Victoria Beckham was about to drop this info. Imminently.

So, the third prediction definitely didn’t come true, with the couple firmly denying the claims at the time. BUT the October edition of British Vogue featuring Victoria Beckham is set to be released on Friday, and obviously we’re hunting for clues.


It didn’t take long to spot something suspicious, with Victoria and her four children appearing on the cover – while David Beckham is noticeably absent.

While the former professional soccer player is photographed with his family in photos inside the magazine, his absence on the cover is conspicuous.


Of course, the cover has people speculating the break up rumours are true.

But in her Vogue interview, Victoria staunchly denies them. “People have been making things up about our relationship for 20 years,” she says, adding that as a couple, they’ve had to learn to “[ignore] the nonsense”. The 44-year-old acknowledges, however, that “these things have a wider effect on the people around us, and that’s unfair”.


“We both realise that we are stronger together than we are as individuals,” she says. “Would either of us be in the position that we are in now had we not met and been together all those years ago?”

It’s a curious line – considering the previous criticism both David and Victoria have received for reportedly staying together purely for ‘Brand Beckham’.

“It’s all about the family unit. We are much stronger, the six of us, than we would be if we were individuals,” she says. “We respect that family bond and that is key.”

Despite the slightly suspicious language Victoria uses about her relationship in the Vogue interview, there’s another compelling theory about why David didn’t feature on the cover.

Last month, it was reported that David had decided not to appear in the photoshoot, because he didn’t want to take away from what the story was actually about – 10 years of success of Victoria’s fashion label.


“David wanted to leave it to Victoria – he didn’t want to be her appendage,” a source told the Daily Mail. “Their businesses are run separately, so given that the whole interview and photoshoot was to mark the anniversary of her company, David felt he should leave it to her.”

The Daily Mail also claimed it was the photo of Victoria and her four children that initially sparked the rumours in June – with many believing the cover was about her being a single mother.

So are they happily married? Or staying together for show?

It’s clear what Vogue wants us to believe – even if their cover is a red herring.