When is a striker not a striker?

Steve Bruce listed his "strikers" the other day, ticking them off mentally as he rolled out their names; "Wilson, Gayle... Joelinton, Miggy, ASM, Fraser..." ... erm... hang on a minute... STRIKERS?!

Now, call me old fashioned (most do), but a striker is a centre-forward - the team's scorer of goals, the one player you want that ball to fall to when it breaks loose in a dangerous area, that guy with an instinct, a knack, a magic left or right foot that will convert a chance - any chance - into a goal, most of the time. He may not be the most agile or creative player (he might even spend 80% of the game huffing and puffing around the final third being caught on camera more times than not with his hands on his hips looking utterly frustrated at the lack of service... certainly Toon strikers anyway) but when that ball is lofted in from a set piece or beautiful curling cross or a sublime through ball you just know he will latch on to it with his head, his right foot, his left foot, his chest even his bloody arse... but you know he will get something on it and steer it towards the net, the crowd are on their feet and ready for that net to bulge and their big ol' centre forward to wheel away with a hand in the air (insert your own hero striker... obviously most of us evoked a mental image of Shearer there, I certainly did...) that to me is a "striker", a number 9, a centre-forward, the big lad up front, the one man in the team whose job it is to score the goals needed to win games. Anyone else in the team who plays alongside him is, for me, still an attacking or forward player... they just aren't strikers.

They are very important, of course, and support attacking play. They support the striker and they chip in with goals; number 10's, wingers, attacking midfielders... they generally supply the bullets for the main man. They sometimes are much better than average at grabbing goals; Gary Speed springs to mind from years past and Joe Willock showed his prowess more recently, but they aren't strikers, they aren't played as strikers, and they wouldn't call themselves strikers. Maybe they would call themselves attacking midfielders, they have goals in their locker and by god do we need those goals... every team does... from other areas of the pitch, but nobody in their right mind expects 20-plus goals from anyone bar maybe the "striker" and this for me is where Joelinton, Miggy, ASM and Fraser all fit in. They aren't strikers, not by any stretch of the imagination... even Gayle, as far as I am concerned, is not an out-and-out striker. He just isn't built for it; he is more of a supporting player for a big-lad-small-lad combo pairing that you used to see at most grounds certainly in the 70's.

Steve Bruce is hoodwinking the fans, then, surely? Well, yes he is, in my opinion... from my definitions above, the club has one striker on the books and that is Wilson. If he gets injured, there is not a single player who brings the same game to the table in the names above. You see, a striker is a package of skills, holding the ball up, muscling defenders off the ball, bringing other players into the game further up the pitch, taking half chances, etc. That is why they play there, that is their job, and what the manager wants from them, most importantly, is the goal tally they bring.

If Wilson gets injured or suspended who gets the goals? Who holds up the ball until play catches up? Who, out of the above names, steps up and starts putting the ball in the net on a regular basis? That, my friends, is the six-million dollar question. The manager has listed those lads as strikers! It puts far too much pressure on them and it's unfair on the fans too... I appreciate the manager has been firmly put between a rock and a hard place, funds-wise, and if Willock does not end up at St. James', bringing goals from midfield but then again... in fact, even if he does... we MUST get a proper striker in as cover for Wilson because not enough goals means relegation, of that I am certain.

To put the fear of god into me and make my blood run colder, if that's even possible, Bruce deploys Hendrick as an "emergency striker" recently in pre season. Now, don't get me wrong, I think that's not as daft as it sounds. Hendrick knows where the goal is and is good at huffing and puffing with his hands on his hips for the camera, he's canny big at 6'2"... but I cant see him holding up play or muscling defenders off the ball. Now I am normally a pretty positive, glass-half-full kinda guy, but (and it's a big but) if we don't bring a striker in, and soon, we are as good as doomed... unless, of course, Wilson stays fit and Hendrick catches a touch of the Cristiano Ronaldos. Fingers crossed, eh?