England’s national team manager, Thomas Tuchel, has made it clear that he does not intend to play Harry Kane, Jude Bellingham, and Phil Foden on the field simultaneously. This decision marks a significant shift from just a year ago when interim coach Lee Carsley successfully included the trio, alongside Cole Palmer, in a match against Greece at Wembley.

Tuchel has highlighted that the evolution of his team strategy has reached a stage where even established stars like Kane, Bellingham, and Foden are not guaranteed a spot in the squad for next summer’s World Cup. This development underscores the dynamic nature of team selection as the manager adapts to emerging talents and tactical necessities.

Both Bellingham and Foden have been recalled to the England squad for the upcoming qualifiers, starting with a home game against Serbia on Thursday, followed by a match in Albania on Sunday. These recalls come after their absence from the October lineup, indicating their continued importance to the team.

In an interview with talkSPORT, Tuchel explained, “At the moment, if we maintain the current structure, they cannot all play together. It’s about the balance and structure we’ve developed, which includes specialists in winger positions. We currently operate with a formation that features a six, an eight, a 10, and a nine.”

He further elaborated on the tactical considerations, saying, “Particularly in the number 10 role, if you consider Phil Foden, Jude Bellingham, or even Morgan Rogers, who has performed excellently for us in this position, our approach requires careful selection to ensure the best team balance.”

Thomas Tuchel says he will not play Kane (left), Foden (right) and Belllingham (second right) in the same England team

‘Especially in the number 10 position if you think about Phil who could play there, if you think about Jude, you think about Morgan Rogers, who played fantastic for us in this position.

‘You have Cole Palmer, you have Morgan Gibbs-White, so there’s a lot, a lot of players, and there’s the chance that we will not take everyone.

‘This is not because we don’t like it, not because they don’t individually deserve it, but because we will always do what’s best for the team. We will always do what’s best for winning.

‘We will always do what’s best for balance and we will try to keep the clarity, even if means that we have to take tough decisions.

‘We take tough decisions in any camp, and this will not change when we go to a tournament.’

Tuchel’s statement would appear to be bad news for Foden in particular. The former Chelsea manager said last week that he sees the Manchester City star as a central player, rather than a winger. This means he is effectively behind Bellingham and Rogers for the number ten spot behind Kane.

Tuchel has previously floated the idea of Foden as a false nine but that is only likely to happen in certain game situations.

‘If you’re a unique player, you can play both positions, Tuchel added.

Tuchel insists he will make decisions that give England the best chance of winning games

The England boss admitted he faces ‘tough decisions’ when it comes to selection next summer

‘I think he can play the nine, he can play the 10. It gives him, first of all, an advantage to compete for both positions.

‘For Man City, he plays almost like an eight-ten, so maybe during the next months we consider him as an eight.

‘But, like again, I see a very, very low percentage that we take five number 10s in the number 10 position into a tournament. I don’t see how this will help us.’

Villa star Rogers has risen to prominence in recent weeks and months and if the World Cup started tomorrow the number ten shirt would be his.

‘At the moment the competition is between Jude and Morgan,’ said Tuchel.

‘They’re friends, so this can also be a friendly competition. Don’t have to be enemies and you don’t have to hate each other.

‘They are respectful, they are friends with each other, and they fight at the moment for the same position.

‘Can they play together? Yes, but in a different structure than maybe, and at the moment is not the moment to change our structure.’