It would be an understatement to say that Sunderland Women have struggled this season, occasionally looking bereft of confidence and ideas, as well as struggling to find consistency each week.
However, the team has adapted and evolved throughout the campaign, and with that evolution has come a natural and thoughtful debate about how best to structure the attack. At the centre of that conversation sits Emily Scarr, a player whose performances have increasingly demanded attention and whose impact has raised
a genuine tactical question: should she be starting up front as Sunderland’s number nine?
This is not a question borne of frustration or criticism — and it isn’t a slight on Eleanor Dale, who remains Sunderland’s established striker and a player with clear strengths and enormous potential.
Instead, it’s about roles, systems and the way the team functions collectively. It’s about recognising patterns, understanding how different profiles influence the flow of a match and exploring whether a shift — whether temporary or long‑term — might unlock a more dangerous, more fluid Sunderland attack.
It’s also a conversation rooted in respect for both players and a desire to see the team reach its fullest potential.
To understand why this debate has emerged, we must begin with Scarr’s season, during which her contributions have been impossible to ignore.
She’s scored and created goals, and played a crucial part in the build‑up to many more, but beyond the measurable statistics lies something more subtle: the way Sunderland’s attack seems to breathe differently when she leads the line.
Her pace stretches defences, her movement disrupts structure and her ability to hold the ball up under pressure gives the team a focal point that’s both secure and dynamic. She isn’t simply a forward who finishes chances; instead, she shapes the entire attacking phase.
When Scarr plays centrally, Sunderland often look more unpredictable.
The ball moves more quickly, the transitions become sharper and the team presses with more cohesion. Her presence changes the geometry of the pitch, forcing defenders to drop deeper and creating pockets of space for midfielders to exploit.
She also drifts into wide areas, drops between the lines and makes runs that pull centre backs into uncomfortable positions. These movements create opportunities — not just for herself, but for the players around her, and it’s no coincidence that Sunderland’s most fluid attacking spells often come when Scarr is at the heart of the forward line.
Her ability to hold the ball up is one of the most underrated aspects of her game.
She receives under pressure with composure, protects the ball intelligently, and brings others into play. This is particularly valuable in matches where Sunderland face aggressive pressing or need an outlet to relieve pressure, as Scarr’s hold‑up play allows the team to transition from defence to attack with purpose rather than panic.
It buys time, draws fouls and forces defenders to commit in ways that open up space for teammates. It’s a skill that often goes unnoticed but is essential to the rhythm of Sunderland’s attacking play.
However, as compelling as the case for Scarr is, the conversation can’t be completed without acknowledging the role played by Dale.
Dale is Sunderland’s established number nine for a reason.
She’s a natural finisher and a penalty‑box striker with instincts that can’t be taught. She thrives on crosses, cutbacks and moments where she can attack the ball aggressively. Her presence alone occupies defenders, creating space for others. She’s strong, direct, and capable of scoring goals that few others could — and her value to the team is unquestionable.
The challenge, however, lies in the fact that Dale is a “specialist”.
She hasn’t played in other positions and nor should she be expected to. Her strengths are concentrated in the central striker’s role, and that’s where she’s most effective. On the other hand, if Scarr starts up front, Dale can’t simply be moved elsewhere. She isn’t a winger, nor a midfielder nor a second striker in the traditional sense.
Her game is built around being the focal point of the attack, and this creates a tactical dilemma: how do you accommodate two players who both excel in the same position but in very different ways?
One possible answer is to consider the value of “impact substitutes”.
Modern football has evolved to the point where the distinction between “starters” and substitutes is far less rigid than it once was. Some of the most influential players in the world are those who come off the bench and change the game, and Dale has the profile to be exactly that kind of player.
Her physicality, ability to attack crosses and instinct for goal make her a nightmare for tired defenders. Bringing her on in the final half hour could tilt matches in Sunderland’s favour, especially in games where the opposition has been worn down by Scarr’s relentless movement.
This is not a demotion — it’s a strategic reimagining and a way of using Dale’s strengths in a context where they can have maximum impact. It also gives Sunderland something they often lack: a genuine attacking threat on the bench.
Too frequently, the team’s substitutes are limited to wingers or like‑for‑like changes that don’t significantly alter the shape or momentum of the match. Having Dale as an option allows Sunderland to shift to a two‑striker system late in games, to add aerial presence or to force opponents to defend deeper. It gives the team flexibility, unpredictability and a new dimension.
However, there’s another possibility — one that doesn’t require a choice between Scarr and Dale, but instead imagines a system where both can thrive together.
This is where the idea of a 3‑5‑2 becomes intriguing, as a formation with three centre backs, two wing backs, three central midfielders and two forwards could unlock the best qualities of both players.
It would allow Scarr to roam, drift and create while Dale stays central and focuses on finishing. It would give Sunderland width through the wingbacks without relying on wingers for every attacking phase, and it would allow the midfield to operate more compactly, encouraging central combinations rather than predictable wide play.
In this system, Katie Kitching becomes essential as her technical ability, composure and vision make her the ideal player to operate centrally in a formation that prioritises combination play.
Too often this season, Sunderland have found themselves funneling the ball down the wings, only to see crosses cleared or opportunities fade. A more central approach, with Kitching orchestrating and Scarr providing movement ahead of her, could give Sunderland a new dimension — one that feels more controlled, more deliberate, and more dangerous.
The 3‑5‑2 in attack would also allow Sunderland to defend in a 5‑3‑2, giving them stability without sacrificing attacking potential. It would create natural triangles in midfield, encourage overlapping runs from wingbacks and give the forwards the freedom to interchange without leaving the team exposed. It’s a system that requires discipline, communication and trust, but one that could elevate Sunderland’s attacking identity.
Of course, tactical systems are only part of the equation.
Football is played by people, not diagrams, and the psychological dynamics of role changes must be handled with care. Scarr must feel empowered rather than burdened if she’s asked to lead the line; Dale must feel valued rather than sidelined if she’s asked to come off the bench or adapt to a new system. The coaching staff must communicate clearly, honestly and respectfully, as players thrive when they understand their role and feel trusted in it. Confusion breeds insecurity, whereas clarity breeds confidence.
This is why the framing of any decision is crucial.
If Dale is asked to be an impact substitute, the message must be that her strengths are being used in a way that benefits both her and the team. Conversely, if Scarr is asked to start up front, the message must be that her contributions have earned that opportunity.
The best teams are built on healthy competition, mutual respect and a shared understanding of the bigger picture, and the bigger picture is that Sunderland have an opportunity to evolve.
They have the players to be more fluid, more unpredictable and more dangerous. They have the chance to evolve from a team that relies heavily on wide play to one that builds attacks through intelligent movement and central combinations. They have the potential to redefine what their forward line looks like — not by criticising what came before but by recognising what could come next.
Scarr has earned the right to be part of that conversation.
Her performances this season haven’t been accidental — they’ve been the product of her pace, her intelligence, her creativity and her ability to influence games in multiple phases. When she plays up front, Sunderland often look more cohesive and more threatening. That isn’t a slight on Dale, but simply an observation of how the team functions.
At the same time, Dale remains an important figure and her finishing ability, presence and potential to grow into a dominant WSL2 striker make her someone Sunderland should continue to invest in. The question isn’t whether she should be replaced, but how she should be used in a way that benefits both her and the team.
Perhaps the answer is fluidity.
Maybe Scarr starts up front in matches where Sunderland want to press, transition quickly, and attack centrally. Perhaps Dale starts in games where Sunderland expect to dominate wide areas and deliver crosses. Perhaps the 3‑5‑2 becomes a tool rather than a default, used when both players are needed together, and perhaps the roles shift throughout the season based on form, fitness and tactical needs.
What matters most is that the conversation remains nuanced, as this isn’t about choosing favourites or criticising individuals.
Instead, it’s about recognising patterns, understanding strengths and imagining possibilities. It’s about asking whether Sunderland can be more than they currently are, and whether Scarr, in the number nine role, might be the key to unlocking it.
