For the first time this season, it appears as though Suffolk Town may be beginning to encounter a roadblock in their quest for promotion to the Championship.

The Tractor Boys’ four-game winning streak is currently the longest it has been in the league this season after their goalless draw against QPR at home on Friday night.

There might be some anxiety building at Portman Road given that they are only three points ahead of the play-off spots despite still holding the second-place spot in the Championship table.

The manager Kieran McKenna is currently dealing with concerns regarding the center forward position, which is unlikely to have helped that sentiment either.

Ipswich currently lacks viable striking alternatives.

Ipswich has also suffered some serious setbacks in recent weeks due to the unavailability of several of its attacking alternatives at Portman Road.

Following his forced departure due to a hamstring injury during his team’s Boxing Day 1-1 draw with Leicester City, George Hirst now appears to be facing some time away from the field.

Meanwhile, the Tractor Boys have also lost another option in that position, with Dane Scarlett having been recalled from his loan spell at Portman Road by parent club Tottenham.

As a result, it looks as though Ipswich will have to add to their centre forward options in January, to ensure they remain competitive in the race for promotion.

But while the Tractor Boys have been linked with a number of potential targets, there is an argument that one of those will surely be out of reach for the target, due to the identity of his parent club, in the form of Leeds United.

Leeds shouldn’t send Joe Gelhardt to a promotion rival

Joe Gelhardt, a striker for Leeds United, was reportedly interested in a loan deal with Ipswich late in the summer transfer season.

The striker helped Sunderland secure a play-off spot by spending the second part of the previous season on loan in the Championship.

Though Gelhardt would ultimately not sign a contract at that point, another loan move at the beginning of the year would make sense considering the 21-year-old has only played in six of Leeds’ 25 Championship games this season, starting just twice.

Yet even in light of that, it appears that Ipswich’s plans to rekindle their interest in the Leeds player will not be worth considering when the market reopens.

Sending Gelhardt to Portman Road would undoubtedly be too risky for Leeds, who are now nine points behind Ipswich in the promotion battle and sit fourth in the second-tier standings.

The Elland Road team would bolster a direct opponent for automatic promotion back to the Premier League if they agreed to such a deal.

This might then turn out to be expensive if Gelhardt contributes game-winning goals for the Tractor Boys, putting them ahead of Leeds in the race for a promotion spot.

That would not only keep the Whites from winning promotion back to the English football premier league, but it would also raise a lot of concerns about the Elland Road decision-makers who approved the deal in the first place.

Prolific midfielder Stokes is reportedly being watched by numerous EFL teams, including Ipswich Town, Sunderland, and Derby County. He is also reportedly being considered by Norwich City, Charlton Athletic, and AFC Wimbledon.

They could also wish to stay away from this kind of circumstance given the recent attention they’ve received in the wake of their Premier League relegation from the previous season.

Leeds does have the option to send Gelhardt elsewhere to get playing time in the division without helping a direct rival, as the striker has also been linked to other Championship clubs like Blackburn, Hull, and Preston, who are not currently in the running for automatic promotion.

In light of all of that, it would appear that, despite the fact that Leeds cannot afford to let a deal for Gelhardt go through, it may be necessary for Arsenal to see a striker in January given the current situation.