Isn't it just a horse for courses argument?
England are lucky to be in situation where they have a plethora of good right backs. Each with varying skills sets. In Southgate's set up you can see why he'd favour Walker and James. They are decent going forward but also strong defensively. Both could easily play right-sided centre back in some systems, given their defensive ability including in the air. I'm not sure why there's that much debate about TAA playing right back for England in Southgate's system. You wouldn't;t play to his strengths and you'd potentially be able to play on his weaknesses.
Equally, and this is harder to say, TAA is significantly more talented footballer on the ball than Kyle Walker. Not so much James but he is technically superior. Therefore in the RS's system TAA is a much better fit than Wlaker or James are likely to ever be. Only really Cancelo in the PL plays the full back role in a similar manner. It's not just getting forward and being a threat from out wide, it's being able to occupy that space where you'd normally find a CM/RM. Not only occupy that space but deliver an attacking threat from there. TAA is almost the perfect RB for that system.
I barely come into this thread and nevermind post in it but I know it's not necessarily for nuanced debate. However, on a serious note the above is probably more closer to the truth than either 'TAA has been done hard done by by England' or that 'he's not as good as other England RB's'. It all comes down to system and individual attributes and weaknesses.
