Defoe in England squad: right decision or ridiculous?

[talkshowhost86]

I can't really see any issue with having Defoe in the squad or the team with our current dearth of strikers.

It's all very well talking about playing someone like Rashford, but he is a similar player to Defoe at the moment and not actually playing as well so where's the justification in picking him instead? He gave Rashford and Vardy chances in the friendly, and then opted to go for the more experienced campaigner in a game where we just needed a win.

I'm all for bringing the youth through and trying to play a particular type of football, but there isn't any top quality young strikers available at the moment, and Southgate simply needs some wins under his belt so playing the players in form is not a bad idea.

I think it's quite a sad indictment on English football that we're having to resort to playing Defoe...but that isn't Southgate's fault (unless we are blaming him entirely for the declining ability of young English players generally).

 

[Bus-Conductor]

He put the ball in the net though didn't he?

As did Vardy. It was Lithuania ffs, England might have scored more and played better with Someone less one dimensional up front

 

[Charly***]

As did Vardy. It was Lithuania ffs, England might have scored more and played better with Someone less one dimensional up front

Vardy scored once the game had opened up. Both the pacey forwards came on once the game had opened up. When it was tight, with a bus parked in front of the goal Defoe wasn't involved in overall play but he was once it mattered to decisive effect. & that's what counts at the end of the day. Without the Defoe goal would the game have opened up? I don't know, that's ifs, buts and maybes, a bit like your post. But probably not, they would've most likely sat in until we scored.

Loads of great teams have had a "one dimensional" player up front over the years that hasn't done a lot apart from bang the goals in, especially at international level. Muller, Romario, Papin etc (I'm not comparing Defoes level to these players, just vaguely the type of striker he is.) JD is in the twilight of his career but he's always done well in the national shirt and, i.m.o. deserved more chances over the years. It may have been Lithuania but you can only score against whats in front of you. He was picked on merit & he delivered. Can't ask for much more.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I think one of the reasons Southgate went for him is the toxic atmosphere and pressure around England that is crushing the younger players' spirits. Defoe's so self assured and confident these days, a bad game, or some criticism won't bother him in the least bit, in essence he's just grateful for this Indian summer.

It's all very well saying play Rashford or bring in Abraham, but Southgate's got a big job trying to tackle this atmosphere and he needs to protect some of the youngsters while he's attempting to turn the ship around.

It's picking players like Defoe (or even better players based on their individual merits rather than picking players that fit and balance each other and/or a system) to please the media is one of things that perpetuates this continual incoherent mundanity.

 

[danielneeds]

It's picking players like Defoe (or even better players based on their individual merits rather than picking players that fit and balance each other and/or a system) to please the media is one of things that perpetuates this continual incoherent mundanity.

Listen, I'm more than aware of Defoe's limitations but the suggestion of a player that's hardly played centre forward for United this season or someone yet to play in the Premier League is hardly convincing.

 

[Rout-Ledge]

Listen, I'm more than aware of Defoe's limitations but the suggestion of a player that's hardly played centre forward for United this season or someone yet to play in the Premier League is hardly convincing.

Particularly when Defoe actually scored an important goal. Some people are just impervious to the blatantly obvious.

 

[chinaman]

He's in on merit and he justified his selection with a goal.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Vardy scored once the game had opened up. Both the pacey forwards came on once the game had opened up. When it was tight, with a bus parked in front of the goal Defoe wasn't involved in overall play but he was once it mattered to decisive effect. & that's what counts at the end of the day. Without the Defoe goal would the game have opened up? I don't know, that's ifs, buts and maybes, a bit like your post. But probably not, they would've most likely sat in until we scored.

Loads of great teams have had a "one dimensional" player up front over the years that hasn't done a lot apart from bang the goals in, especially at international level. Muller, Romario, Papin etc (I'm not comparing Defoes level to these players, just vaguely the type of striker he is.) JD is in the twilight of his career but he's always done well in the national shirt and, i.m.o. deserved more chances over the years. It may have been Lithuania but you can only score against whats in front of you. He was picked on merit & he delivered. Can't ask for much more.

But that's the whole point, Defoe is not even as good at the one dimension as the players you are comparing him to.

Even his one dimension is limited which is why he's rarely scored more than a dozen goals a season (three times in fact 14,15, 18).

Always done well in a national shirt ? But has England - or the teams he's played for - done well for him being there? Not in my opinion.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Listen, I'm more than aware of Defoe's limitations but the suggestion of a player that's hardly played centre forward for United this season or someone yet to play in the Premier League is hardly convincing.

And you're convinced by a 34yo who's averaged about 12 goals a season, despite his only point of existing being to score goals because he does absolutely nothing else.

 

[danielneeds]

And you're convinced by a 34yo who's averaged about 12 goals a season, despite his only point of existing being to score goals because he does absolutely nothing else.

I'm suggesting the other younger players aren't ready yet - and could easily be crushed by the Team England machine as so many others have. Defoe is a safe but uninspired pair of hands at the moment.

 

[Wellspurs]

And you're convinced by a 34yo who's averaged about 12 goals a season, despite his only point of existing being to score goals because he does absolutely nothing else.

Come on be fair.. he must have of pissed himself taking Walnut's place!!

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I'm suggesting the other younger players aren't ready yet - and could easily be crushed by the Team England machine as so many others have. Defoe is a safe but uninspired pair of hands at the moment.

Safe pair of hands....pfftt...That's the spirit. Or it would be if it was even true. He's an insipid pair of hands who will go missing for 98% of games.

 

[nailsy]

He rarely scored more than 12/13 goals a season. And touched the ball about the same. His being picked is all about "fashionable" and nothing to do with developing a style of play or players who can play it.

Aren't the fashionable players the ones that are in form though? And for years the fans have been saying that players should be selected on form, not who they play for. And those stats you've quoted don't take into account the number of appearances, or the number of times he's come off the bench. And if you include cup and European fixtures he's scored over 15 goals a season ten times in his career.

Do I think Defoe deserved picking ? No, why not just play Rashford? Or be tactically creative and play a false 9 (like Alli or Barclay) or promote Abrahams up from the U21's. Anything but play a mediocre 34yo who even in his prime was a very insipid footballer who brings very little to the collective.

Promote Abraham's? Seriously? A guy with 2 u21 caps and no premier league goals rather than someone that's hit 29 PL goals in two seasons? Defoe isn't the greatest player, but he knows where the net is. He's also the top scoring substitute in premier league history so if we do need a goal from the bench he's probably not a bad guy to bring on at the moment.

 

[danielneeds]

Safe pair of hands....pfftt...That's the spirit. Or it would be if it was even true. He's an insipid pair of hands who will go missing for 98% of games.

Just a shame that Rebic is not English eh? Kind of amusing how you prefer players who score 1 goal a season to 12-15...

 

[Charly***]

But that's the whole point, Defoe is not even as good at the one dimension as the players you are comparing him to.

Even his one dimension is limited which is why he's rarely scored more than a dozen goals a season (three times in fact 14,15, 18).

Always done well in a national shirt ? But has England - or the teams he's played for - done well for him being there? Not in my opinion.

He doesn't have to be as good as the players I quoted to play for England. For one they're all foreign, secondly they're all retired. You were initially asked whether Defoe deserved to be picked, you opined that he didn't. & that was with the benefit of hindsight i.e. after the match where he'd scored the winner. This is a classic example of preconceived ideas & confirmation bias. Obviously he did deserve it as he clearly demonstrated.

 

[Ribble]

His form this season shows he deserves to be there - even if it is through injury to others - but it does also show a lack of depth in this area.

Without Kane, England has Vardy, Rashford and Defoe. I'm not counting Rooney as a forward and Sturridge is unreliable. Rashford and Defoe are at opposite ends of their career and Vardy hasn't been in great form. It's thin

There's also Welbeck, Carroll, Wilson and Berahino. Of course none of them was an option for this match either...

 

[Gbspurs]

It's somewhat reassuring in this rapidly changing world to see a thread with BC moaning about Defoe. Feels natural somehow.

 

[Danners9]

There's also Welbeck, Carroll, Wilson and Berahino. Of course none of them was an option for this match either...

Wonder if they ever will be called up. Injuries and constant fitness issues follow all four around.

 

[WalkerboyUK]

It's picking players like Defoe (or even better players based on their individual merits rather than picking players that fit and balance each other and/or a system) to please the media is one of things that perpetuates this continual incoherent mundanity.

What utter tripe...
Defoe wasn't picked to please media - they weren't clamouring for him to be included.
In fact the English media has a top 4 cartel mentality and believes that only players from the top 4 sides should be in the England squad!
Defoe was picked because there were few options due to injuries etc. and because it's better to have a variation in type of striker rather than 4 strikers that play in exactly the same way.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

He doesn't have to be as good as the players I quoted to play for England. For one they're all foreign, secondly they're all retired. You were initially asked whether Defoe deserved to be picked, you opined that he didn't. & that was with the benefit of hindsight i.e. after the match where he'd scored the winner. This is a classic example of preconceived ideas & confirmation bias. Obviously he did deserve it as he clearly demonstrated.

So I'm applying preconceived ideas and hindsight? That's good right?

Him scoring confirms your bias not mine? It enables you to say "look, he scored, I'm right, he is great and should have played".

My ideas on Defoe were unchanged by the outcome, they are the same now as they were before the game and that would have been the same if he'd scored a hatrick against the mighty Lithuania.