Unless Harry Kane’s role changes England cannot win Euro 2024

Of all Gareth Southgate’s strategies for winning the Euros, few anticipated Harry Kane being reinvented as Erling Haaland.

On the surface that sounds like a great plan for the country and for any striker. The role is specific and in some respects old-school; to play as much as possible on the shoulder of the last defender, stay on the fringe of the action as the midfielders assume all the creative responsibilities, patiently awaiting one moment to strike.

The problem with a player of Kane’s many abilities is that it reduces his effectiveness by 50 per cent. Kane is a multi-tasking, modern centre-forward who was reduced to one-dimension during the 1-0 win over Serbia.

If Southgate persists with the same system for the rest of the tournament, his No 9 will be heavily compromised. Possibly too much. Having come into the Euros with a Phil Foden conundrum, after one game Southgate has a Kane one.

In the first half, Kane registered just two touches of the ball. For a player of his class, that is deeply worrying.

By full time that had risen to 24, showing that he was more involved in the second half – ironic given that England were less dominant in possession. There is a tactical curiosity that when England played well, Kane was not involved at all. When they didn’t, he nearly scored and had more possession.

I have always distinguished the best centre-forwards between great players and great goalscorers. Haaland is a great scorer. Kane is a great player who scores lots of goals.

The reason he is world class is because he does not need to score to have an impact on a game.

At his best, he is a goalscoring No 9, a false 9 and a creative No 10.

Redefining him as a poacher to accommodate so many team-mates who want to occupy the deep, No 10 position will be the most contentious decision Southgate makes if England are unsuccessful.

Kane is at his best when he is surrounded by pace. At the last three international tournaments, he liked to drop deep and supply passes to rapid wide strikers like Bukayo Saka and Raheem Sterling, or (when selected) Marcus Rashford.

Even when England were in control during the first 30 minutes against Serbia, Saka was the only attacker running beyond the defence. He was brilliant, but there was too much responsibility on him to make those runs. The lack of pace hurt England the longer the game progressed, so it was surprising Anthony Gordon was not introduced. There is also an argument that Ollie Watkins should have replaced Kane for the last 20 minutes because he is quicker and could have freshened it up physically.

True, Kane nearly had his reward when he forced an impressive save on 77 minutes. Like Haaland, interpretations of whether he played well or not become defined by such opportunities.

Score and it’s job done. Fail to do so and questions start to be asked about whether the broader contribution is enough. But whereas Haaland strikes me as a striker who measures himself solely on the goal return, Kane does not. I’m not convinced playing as the old-fashioned battering ram against a physical centre-half is a role he enjoys or wants. He was not playing that way in the Euros opener because of selflessness. It was a compulsion, not a choice. The line-up demanded it from him.

The England captain suggested in his post-match interview the set-up was designed specifically for the opening game. We will have to see what tweaks, if any, are made against Denmark and Slovenia.

Southgate’s match-plan proves that you can never have what everyone wants as the international manager. In the build-up to the tournament there has been a clamour for both Jude Bellingham and Foden to play as the No 10, and against Serbia they did. They were always central. With Trent Alexander-Arnold in there as well, it was too congested for Kane to occupy those spaces.

Southgate’s situation with this profile of the England squad reminds me of the decisions facing Vicente Del Bosque with the legendary Spanish side which followed its World Cup success by defending the Euros in 2012.

Del Bosque had several players who all occupied the same position, and somehow had to accommodate Xavi, Sergio Busquets, Andrés Iniesta, Xabi Alonso, David Silva and Cesc Fàbregas. His solution was to pick them all, Spain winning the final without any recognised striker. Great players made it work.

England have a long way to go to warrant comparisons with one of the greatest international sides ever, but it is an example of how managers will ultimately be lured to ensuring they get all their best players on the pitch at the same time.

The conundrum is whether what is gained with so many high-class personnel in the line-up is lost with the set-up.

The question for Southgate is this: what serves the side better? Maximise the full capacities of Kane or continue to flood the space “between the lines” where he operates at his best?

Short-term, I would expect Southgate to persist with Sunday night’s plan. But going forward, getting the most from Kane is the only way in which England can win the competition.