England - four or five strikers to Euro 2016?

Tooting Gull said:

I think the make-up of the squad is one area that England have got badly wrong in some of the big international tournaments in the past 20 years or so.

Basically, strikers win you these things and we have usually taken four out of the 23. Many countries take five, and that's what I think we should be doing for France, not least because it is a strength of ours currently.

We have had various nightmares, taking four once including a teenage Walcott, not playing him, and seeing others get injured. The cupboard was bare.

My five would be Rooney, Kane, Welbeck, Sturridge and Vardy. At least a couple of those can adapt for the team anyway.

Click to expand...

Tooting Gull said:

The only person I feel a bit sorry for is Defoe, but that is because a) I rate the bloke as a finisher, even at that level and b) he has been utterly shafted in the past, notably 2006 and probably again in 2014. In 2010 he scored a vital finals group winner, in 2008 McClaren cocked up the qualification and in 2012 he didn't start a finals match.

But I just don't see how he gets in ahead of those five this time.

Click to expand...

hans kraay fan club said:

Was discussing him a couple of days ago. Can't abide the chap, but he is as good a finisher as we have. Vardy has 'his' role though.

Your five are dependant on fitness of course though, and given Rooney, and especially Wellbeck and Sturridge's previous records, it's by no means certain they'll all be available.

Andy Carroll is not out of the equation either, if an injury opens a spot up. Plan C and all that.

Click to expand...

Tooting Gull said:

I think the make-up of the squad is one area that England have got badly wrong in some of the big international tournaments in the past 20 years or so.

Basically, strikers win you these things and we have usually taken four out of the 23. Many countries take five, and that's what I think we should be doing for France, not least because it is a strength of ours currently.

We have had various nightmares, taking four once including a teenage Walcott, not playing him, and seeing others get injured. The cupboard was bare.

My five would be Rooney, Kane, Welbeck, Sturridge and Vardy. At least a couple of those can adapt for the team anyway.

Click to expand...

Tooting Gull said:

I think the make-up of the squad is one area that England have got badly wrong in some of the big international tournaments in the past 20 years or so.

Basically, strikers win you these things and we have usually taken four out of the 23. Many countries take five, and that's what I think we should be doing for France, not least because it is a strength of ours currently.

We have had various nightmares, taking four once including a teenage Walcott, not playing him, and seeing others get injured. The cupboard was bare.

My five would be Rooney, Kane, Welbeck, Sturridge and Vardy. At least a couple of those can adapt for the team anyway.

Click to expand...

hans kraay fan club said:

Agreed.

The versatility of Dier (CM, CB, RB) and Milner (LM, CM, LB) easily frees up the extra slot.

Click to expand...

Tooting Gull said:

Very much so. Carroll, Defoe, even Deeney could benefit from some injuries. And at one time Walcott would have been designated a striker. Under this scenario, he might even miss out.

Click to expand...

Black Rod said:

I'd take Carroll. The impact he makes as a sub for West Ham is superb, defenders don't like playing against him and if he they are preoccupied with dealing with the big man who isn't going to give them a minutes rest then that could free up space for our abundance of quick attackers. Peter Crouch and Jan Koller's goal records show what a massive target man can do at international level and Carroll for me has a lot more to his game than either of those two

Rooney, Welbeck, Vardy, Kane and Carroll

Click to expand...