The accessible material provides no confirmed account of the accessory:
That leaves the central question unanswered. It is not possible to say whether Spence wore protective equipment, covered a minor issue, used a temporary adaptation or simply chose an accessory unrelated to injury.
Footballers regularly use facial protection for different reasons, including previous injuries, training preferences or comfort. But those possibilities cannot be attached to Spence without confirmation. A visible mask, covering or dressing may invite speculation, yet the available information contains no diagnosis and no indication that the England defender was restricted.
That distinction matters for England. Spence’s role as an attack-minded full-back depends on his ability to defend wide areas, carry the ball and support the team’s build-up. Any genuine physical concern could affect his availability or minutes, but there is currently no verified evidence that such a concern exists.
The first useful evidence would be a statement from Spence, an official England squad update or his selection in the team’s next fixture. A normal appearance without the accessory could offer context, but it still would not establish why he wore it previously.
Until then, the responsible conclusion is narrow: Spence was seen with an unexplained accessory, and the available report does not provide a medical or tactical explanation. Anything more would turn an unanswered visual detail into an unsupported claim.