Ifs, buts, maybes - but why did we let Defoe go?

[Sandbear]

The same Defoe that retired prematurely because he couldn't get on the bench for League One Sunderland? Will these threads ever stop?

Obviously not as some folk have a need to find something to moan about the manager.
Two minutes research would have given the OP the answer he was looking for, he was done, past it , retired from a ten minute cameo role at Sunderland because his legs had gone.

 

[Xtal]

In an ideal world you move someone like Davis on after 4 years? Because of his age or just that type of player?

Just his age, don’t think anyone would question his ability as a player since he signed or his character.

Brilliant signing at the time but expecting quite a few to play well until nearly 40 at a pretty high level has made us a weaker team now.

We really miss what McGregor, Davis and Defoe were able to offer consistently and I think you avoid that kind of situation as much as possible by getting in ahead of it and being harsh/realistic beforehand instead of watching it play out then reacting to it in the next window.

 

[NDC bear forever]

Hopefully he will return one day to us as you say

Friendly vs Tottenham would be a good time for a send off imo

 

[Gizmo]

Was best finisher at the club by an absolute distance.

 

[vinnie]

We didn’t let Defoe go, he wanted out.

 

[subversive_bear]

If the five subs rule had been in place at the start of the season then things may have been different as he would have received game time and kept his sharpness up.

 

[Cavin]

Because he's an O.A.P.

 

[Haining84]

The same Defoe that retired prematurely because he couldn't get on the bench for League One Sunderland? Will these threads ever stop?

This^^^

 

[Loyal72]

He wasn't even good enough for one last hurrah at Sunderland, let's be honest.

Defoe wanted to keep playing one more season, but I think quickly found out both in his final year here and his final brief spell at Sunderland for a couple of weeks, he's not got it anymore.

No use speculating over ifs buts and maybes, the only absolute is that he's not fit enough anymore and is more comfortable as a pundit

 

[bkerr72]

Should have been kept to be used as a sub if we’re struggling.
Or when he did go should have been replaced.

Why when he never once turned a game round in our favour when brought on as a sub? 12 games we were behind or drawing in and he never once changed the result. He barely played last season as it was and the fact he was given a new playing contract sums up Gerrards wasting of resources in the summer.

 

[SuperGers07]

Fully prepared to be slaughtered for this. And I fully acknowledge that I hadn't seen Defoe in training (Gio has) But for the life of me - I still cannot see why we let Defoe (effectively) retire in January while he was still contracted to us.

A 10 minute cameo here and there couldnt have hurt surely?
Am I looking back through rose tinted specs or is this one of those curious moments of Gio logic that stops you in your tracks?

He was finished. His spell at Sunderland and subsequent retirement proved it.

No real debate

 

[Resident_hammy_bear]

Defoe retired because he couldn't get a game for a league 1 side, he was clearly finsihed as a player, I would have had him around as a coach until the end of the season as he is clearly a big influence in the squad but as for why we never kept him, he was finished plain and simple.

 

[Cucumbear]

As others have said, I think he just was past his best. He desperately wanted to keep going but his body had given up. Sad but it happens to all footballers eventually.

 

[Treble Kings]

He was certainly was good enough for the SPFL, and definitely had the legs for games against shite like Dundee United and Motherwell where he could almost certainly have nicked something and turned defeats and draws into wins. He would've been a valuable asset.

 

[BlueSevenTwo]

Needed to free up his wages to pay for the UEFA fines for our Pyromaniacs.

Or to pay for Aaron Ramsey to hog the treatment table.