Why is it so many premier league teams only have one top striker?

[Scum-Triumphant]

What’s happened to the art of the partnership?
Liverpool do it and they are running away with what has been a fairly mediocre league for me.
But spurs are ****e and toothless if Kane doesn’t play. Man Utd have finally got martial ticking after looking so dearth of goals without Rashford.
Leicester went through a bad patch when vardy was injured and Man City rely heavily on aguero’s goals still as Jesus has never really looked prolific.

Is it because managers feel they get goals from all over the midfield or (my theory) no one wants to come in and play second fiddle?

I’m watching Tottenham getting torn apart while Alli is their furthest forward player. Instead of a false number 9, what happened to sticking a centre half up there during an injury crisis?

[Lolmorgan]

It could be that clubs have priced very good strikers out of the market.

[Scum-Triumphant]

It could be that clubs have priced very good strikers out of the market.

There is that. Wolves have a great pairing in Raul and Jota. I enjoy seeing those 2 link up. But top clubs other than Liverpool seem content to keep one top striker in the team.

[mikemiller]

Probably due to FA coaching courses, which were influenced by Spanish World cup / Euro success? Thankfully, that seems to be changing bit now. Unless you have some natural goalscorers in midfield (which Spain did), it is usually quite boring to watch.

Spurs are a bit of a special case at the moment , because their main strikers are out injured, and Jose is a natural "bus-parker" anyway, who will often deliberately try to bore the opposition into submission.