There was plenty to like about that, even if it became slightly more uncomfortable than it should have been.

What stood out most for me was the quality of Liverpool’s big moments. Alexis Mac Allister’s opener was superb, Cody Gakpo continued his excellent start to the season and Dominik Szoboszlai’s late strike was outrageous. When Tottenham threatened to make things interesting, Giorgi Mamardashvili also produced a huge save.

The biggest positive, though, was that Liverpool made 10 changes and still found a way through. This competition is not the priority, but nights like this matter because they build confidence, give young players proper minutes and keep the squad involved.

There is still work to do. Liverpool allowed Spurs back into a game that looked finished at 2-0, and that loss of control will frustrate Andoni Iraola.

But overall, this was exactly what you want from a cup night: rotation, goals, progression and a few big performances.

Post-Match Podcasts

Our post-match coverage has had a refresh, with a new line-up of shows designed to cover every angle once the final whistle goes.

First up is Full-Time Reds, our immediate reaction show breaking down the key moments, biggest talking points and the overall performance. That is followed by Rate Don’t Hate, where the team assess the Liverpool players individually, discussing and rating each performance from the game.

Then, for those who enjoy a more traditional post-match discussion, Post Match RAW remains a key part of the line-up, bringing together all the reaction, debate and talking points from the match.

You can catch all three wherever you get your podcasts.

Full-Time Reds: Gags Tandon is joined by Lola Katz Roberts for immediate reaction to Liverpool’s 3-1 Carabao Cup victory over Tottenham at Anfield. They discuss Alexis Mac Allister’s brilliant opener, Cody Gakpo’s continued good form, Dominik Szoboszlai’s stunning late strike and the performances of Liverpool’s youngsters as Andoni Iraola’s much-changed side booked their place in the fourth round. - Watch Now

Rate Don’t Hate: Gags Tandon and Lola Katz Roberts run through their Liverpool player ratings after the 3-1 Carabao Cup victory over Tottenham at Anfield. Who impressed among the much-changed side, which youngsters took their chance and who came out on top after a night that saw Mac Allister, Gakpo and Szoboszlai all find the net? - Watch Now

Post Match RAW: Guy Drinkel hosts Trev Downey and Dave Hendrick as they reflect on Liverpool’s 3-1 Carabao Cup victory over Tottenham at Anfield. The trio discuss Mac Allister’s opener, Gakpo’s continued good form, Szoboszlai’s spectacular late strike, the impact of the youngsters and the main talking points from a heavily rotated Liverpool side progressing to the fourth round. - Listen Now

Andoni Iraola Post-Match: Liverpool head coach Andoni Iraola reflects on the Reds’ 3-1 Carabao Cup victory over Tottenham at Anfield, discussing the performance of his much-changed side, the impact of the younger players and the key moments that secured Liverpool’s place in the fourth round. - Listen Now

Post-Match Articles

• Match Report

• Player Ratings by Steven Smith

• Man of the Match by Steven Smith

• David Lynch’s 5 Key Takeaways

Leave a comment

Liverpool dominated plenty of the numbers against Fulham, yet a flat 0-0 draw showed how much work remains in turning possession and territory into genuine Premier League threat.

There will not be many Liverpool games this season that disappear from the memory quite as quickly as Saturday’s 0-0 draw with Fulham.

It was flat. It was slow. At times it felt as though Liverpool were playing with heavy legs, which probably should not have come as a great surprise after the Champions League victory over Atlético Madrid only a few days earlier.

There has to be some context around that.

Andoni Iraola described the turnaround as about as difficult as it gets and Liverpool certainly looked like a team feeling it. The sharpness we saw against Atlético was missing, simple passes went astray and combinations that had looked promising in midweek suddenly looked disconnected.

The problem for Liverpool is that this schedule is now part of life.

Tonight brings Tottenham Hotspur to Anfield in the Carabao Cup, and I expect Iraola to rotate heavily, perhaps almost completely, after asking so much of the senior players over the past week. Giorgi Mamardashvili has already been confirmed to start, and this feels like the obvious opportunity to give minutes to players who need them while allowing some of Saturday’s starters to recover.

That makes the Fulham performance understandable to a point. It does not make it satisfactory.

Liverpool had enough possession, enough territory and enough chances to win. They simply never found the rhythm or quality required to turn those advantages into goals.

Liverpool Had Control Without Enough Purpose

The headline numbers look reasonably healthy.

Liverpool had 56% possession, Fulham 44%. They took 14 shots to Fulham’s 10, generated 1.28 xG compared with 0.70 and created four big chances while Fulham managed one.

On those numbers alone, you would probably expect Liverpool to win.

Dig a little deeper and the frustration becomes much easier to understand.

Liverpool completed 494 passes, with 411 finding their target at 83% accuracy. Fulham attempted 398 and completed 305 at 77%.

More importantly, Liverpool made 239 passes in the opposition half. Fulham managed only 127.

That is a sizeable territorial advantage.

Yet Liverpool had only 18 touches inside the Fulham penalty area.

Fulham had 24.

That is the statistic that jumps out at me more than almost anything else from the game.

Liverpool had substantially more possession in advanced areas, yet Fulham actually entered Liverpool’s penalty box more frequently. That tells us where the problem was. Liverpool could move the ball towards the final third, then everything became more difficult.

The attacking zones offer another clue.

Liverpool channelled 49% of their attacking play down one side, 30% down the other and only 21% through the centre.

There was very little coming through the heart of Fulham’s defence.

That allowed the visitors to defend Anfield in a way they were reasonably comfortable with. They could protect the middle, send Liverpool towards wider areas and deal with the delivery when it arrived.

Fulham deserve some credit for that. Their approach worked.

Liverpool still need a better answer.

Four Big Chances Should Have Produced Something

The strange thing about the game is that Liverpool’s attacking numbers were actually better than the performance felt.

They produced 1.28 xG compared with Fulham’s 0.70, with Liverpool generating 0.84 from open play and another 0.44 from set pieces.

The Reds also created four big chances.

All four were missed.

That matters because a performance can feel poor while still containing enough opportunities to win the game.

Liverpool had 14 shots, nine of them from inside the penalty area. Five more came from outside.

Fulham had 10 attempts, eight from inside the box, which again shows they carried more attacking threat than you might expect from a side with only 44% possession.

Liverpool only put three of their 14 efforts on target.

Fulham managed four.

That lack of accuracy summed the afternoon up.

There were still moments. Dominik Szoboszlai delivered one excellent ball towards Bradley Barcola, who struck it well before Fulham produced a very good block. Alexander Isak had opportunities too, including the late header that felt like the chance Liverpool had been waiting for.

Those moments arrived too infrequently.

Florian Wirtz is capable of producing the pass that opens these games up, and there were still flashes of his quality. He also looked tired. Liverpool need him receiving the ball around the penalty area far more often because asking him to create one or two decisive moments over 90 minutes places an enormous demand on every action.

If Wirtz gets into those positions six, seven or eight times, something will happen.

That should be one of Iraola’s priorities when he looks back at this game.

Anfield Needs Better Combinations

One of the biggest issues against Fulham was how disconnected Liverpool looked across the pitch.

The relationships were not there.

That is partly understandable because Iraola is mixing new players, different roles and new tactical ideas. It still leaves him with a problem to solve quickly.

The left side struggled to produce much fluency. The right side had similar problems. Through the middle, Liverpool never seemed capable of consistently connecting Wirtz and Isak.

Those combinations are crucial to the way Iraola wants his Liverpool team to play.

The shape can be drawn however you like on a tactics board, 2-3-2-3 or something slightly different depending on the phase, yet it only works if the players within those little units understand each other.

Liverpool looked like a team still thinking about where the next player was going to be.

That takes time.

It also explains why I am reluctant to make sweeping conclusions after four league matches under Iraola. There are too many moving pieces for that.

Saturday still gave him useful information.

He has to find a way of getting an extra player into midfield areas when opponents block Liverpool’s initial routes forward. He needs his full backs to understand when to move inside and when to provide width. He needs Szoboszlai using his running and delivery in areas where they hurt opponents.

Most importantly, Liverpool have to get better service into what I would call the second six yard area.

That is where Isak can be devastating.

When Liverpool managed to put balls across that area against Fulham, something generally happened. There simply were not enough of them.

You can have all the possession you like around a packed defence. Eventually somebody has to put a dangerous ball across the goalkeeper and somebody else has to attack it.

Liverpool need more of that at Anfield.

Schedule Explains Something, Tottenham Offers the Reset

The physical numbers make the schedule discussion interesting.

Fulham covered 115.7 kilometres compared with Liverpool’s 110.3.

They also ran 21.2 kilometres compared with Liverpool’s 19.9.

Yet Liverpool actually sprinted further, 2.3 kilometres compared with 2.0, and recorded 124 sprints to Fulham’s 102.

So the willingness to work was there.

The overall performance still lacked freshness.

Liverpool also won 38 duels to Fulham’s 35 and dominated the aerial contests by 13 to seven.

Defensively, there were things to like too.

This was another clean sheet and Fulham finished with only 0.70 xG. Liverpool made 11 interceptions and Fulham were forced into 33 clearances, another indication of where a lot of the football was being played.

The concern remains at the other end.

Liverpool have to win these games at Anfield if they want to achieve anything significant in the Premier League. You cannot allow too many home matches against teams outside the obvious title contenders to become afternoons where everybody shrugs and accepts a point.

Iraola knows that.

Tonight’s Carabao Cup game with Tottenham now gives him an interesting opportunity.

I would expect a substantially changed Liverpool team at Anfield, perhaps something approaching full rotation. Mamardashvili will start, Joe Gomez is available again, and this is exactly the sort of fixture where fringe players and younger members of the squad can take some of the workload.

The senior players who have gone from Premier League football into Atlético and then Fulham need some breathing space because the schedule will keep coming.

That is part of Iraola’s challenge now.

He has to build a Liverpool team capable of playing his football three times in little more than a week without one performance looking like the batteries have been taken out.

Fulham was a poor watch and a disappointing result.

It was also another piece of information for a new manager learning about his players, his squad and the demands of managing Liverpool.

There is plenty to improve.

There is also no need for panic.

Liverpool’s season has reached one of those early junctions where perspective matters.

There was plenty to like about the victories over Ipswich Town and Atletico Madrid. Andoni Iraola appeared to be finding solutions, confidence was growing and some of the football suggested his ideas were beginning to take hold.

Then came Fulham.

Saturday’s 0-0 draw at Anfield was flat enough to bring a few old anxieties back to the surface. Liverpool remain unbeaten through Iraola’s first five matches, which deserves recognition, but the performance was worrying. The intensity dropped, the midfield lacked control and a side that had looked increasingly purposeful suddenly appeared short of energy.

That makes Tuesday’s Carabao Cup meeting with Tottenham Hotspur more significant than a routine early round cup tie.

Rotation Can Give Liverpool Fresh Impetus

This is Iraola’s third match in a week and rotation feels inevitable. The important thing is getting the balance right.

Liverpool should make changes. They should also try to win the Carabao Cup.

Iraola has an opportunity to use this competition to learn more about his squad while pursuing his first piece of silverware at Liverpool. There are players who need minutes, youngsters who deserve opportunities and senior figures who could benefit from a different role.

Trey Nyoni falls firmly into the first category. His pre-season performances suggested he was ready for greater involvement and this feels like precisely the sort of night when Liverpool should find out how far he has progressed.

There is an interesting tactical argument for using Nyoni deeper. Liverpool’s midfield struggled against Fulham and having a player willing to hold his position, protect passing lanes and provide some structure could allow Alexis Mac Allister and Dominik Szoboszlai greater freedom ahead of him.

Mac Allister could certainly benefit. His superb strike against Atletico Madrid was a reminder of what he can offer closer to goal. With Nyoni providing some discipline behind him, Liverpool could give the Argentina international more licence to influence proceedings higher up the pitch.

My midfield would therefore contain Nyoni, Mac Allister and Szoboszlai. It provides youth, experience and enough technical quality to control possession.

Defensive Decisions Give Iraola Plenty to Consider

Joe Gomez being available again is welcome news, although Iraola has indicated that the defender is not yet ready for 90 minutes.

There is little reason to gamble with him.

Conor Bradley and Giovanni Leoni remain unavailable, so I would move Ronald Araujo into central defence alongside Virgil van Dijk and start Jeremie Frimpong at right-back.

Kostas Tsimikas should get another opportunity on the left. Saturday was difficult for him, but dropping a player immediately after a poor performance achieves little when this fixture provides the perfect chance to respond. Liverpool will need Milos Kerkez for the Premier League campaign, so giving Tsimikas the Carabao Cup minutes makes sense.

Giorgi Mamardashvili has already been confirmed as the goalkeeper for this game, and this could be an important evening for him. There remains some uncertainty among supporters about Liverpool’s number two, particularly regarding his composure in possession. A commanding performance at Anfield against Tottenham could change the mood around him considerably.

Cup competitions have traditionally provided Liverpool’s reserve goalkeepers with opportunities to build confidence. Mamardashvili needs to take his.

Federico Chiesa and Hugo Ekitike remain unavailable, so there are limitations in attack. Alexander Isak deserves a rest and Rio Ngumoha should get his opportunity.

Victor Munoz can start from the right, with Cody Gakpo leading the attack. Ngumoha’s directness could be particularly useful against a Tottenham defence containing several changes.

My predicted Liverpool XI is:

Mamardashvili, Frimpong, Araujo, Van Dijk (C), Tsimikas, Nyoni, Mac Allister, Szoboszlai, Munoz, Ngumoha, Gakpo.

There should still be strength available from the bench. That matters. Iraola can make six or seven changes without treating progression as an afterthought. If Liverpool require senior players for the final 20 minutes, they should be there.

After Fulham, a fresh-looking side might actually help.

Liverpool looked tired and predictable at the weekend. Tuesday provides an opportunity for different players to inject urgency into Iraola’s football and remind everyone why the mood had improved following Ipswich and Atletico.

Tottenham will carry a threat regardless of their selection, and a rotated Liverpool defence could give them opportunities. I can see this becoming a far less comfortable evening than some might expect.

Still, Anfield, fresh legs and a strong bench should give Liverpool enough.

Tottenham Hotspur Present an Unusual Carabao Cup Test

Tottenham arrive with problems of their own.

Their Premier League campaign has started poorly and their attacking struggles have been particularly stark. The expectation is that Spurs will make substantial changes, with their league position understandably demanding attention.

That creates an unusual situation.

Liverpool should rotate because their schedule demands it. Tottenham Hotspur may rotate because their Premier League situation demands something different. Neither side is likely to resemble its strongest XI.

That does not make this Carabao Cup tie unimportant.

For Liverpool, there is value in building momentum. Iraola has not yet lost as Liverpool manager and extending that sequence while reaching the next round would keep the early optimism around his appointment moving in the right direction.

The competition could also become increasingly attractive if Liverpool navigate this hurdle. There will still be strong opposition remaining, but cup draws have a habit of opening pathways unexpectedly.

Liverpool are in no position to dismiss that possibility.

Prediction: Liverpool 2-1 Tottenham Hotspur

There was frustration after Liverpool’s 0-0 draw with Fulham, and Andoni Iraola shared it. After victories over Ipswich Town and Atletico Madrid, Liverpool wanted a third successive win. Instead, Iraola described the performance as a “step backwards”, admitting his side were “not good enough offensively”.

I actually like that about the new head coach. There is very little waffle. He tells you what he thinks, and after Fulham there was no attempt to disguise the shortcomings.

Looking through the numbers with Michael Reid reinforced some of what I felt watching the game. There are areas that concern me, particularly Liverpool’s ability to get into dangerous positions at Anfield and the balance of the double pivot. There are also significant positives.

Jeremy Jacquet is probably the biggest one.

What matters now is improvement. Liverpool are five games into this process. Iraola is implementing a different style, several new players are learning about each other and a midfield that spent two seasons playing one way is being asked to change again.

That context matters when assessing the numbers.

Fulham Numbers Expose Liverpool’s Biggest Attacking Issue

The Fulham game was about as close to the stereotypical 0-0 as you could get. Liverpool had 56% possession, 14 shots and an expected goals figure of 1.13. Fulham managed 10 shots and 0.71 xG.

Liverpool covered 112.1km, while Fulham covered 118.4km. That difference of more than six kilometres caught my attention.

There is context. Liverpool had played Atletico Madrid three days earlier, and Iraola himself referenced the difficulty of playing three games so close together. There is also a possession factor when considering running numbers. Teams controlling the ball should not necessarily be expected to outrun their opponents.

Still, six kilometres is substantial.

Liverpool are moving from the more passive approach we saw during Arne Slot’s final period towards the pressing football Iraola wants. That transformation will take time.

Iraola’s first four Premier League matches have produced six points. Jürgen Klopp took five from his first four. What ultimately defined Klopp’s development was the improvement that followed. That is what I want to see here.

My bigger concern is what is happening at Anfield.

Liverpool had only 18 touches in Fulham’s penalty area. Across the last five seasons, that is the third fewest Liverpool have recorded in a home Premier League game. Against Nottingham Forest this season they managed only 21, which is also among the five lowest totals during that period.

Two of Liverpool’s five lowest totals have therefore arrived in Iraola’s first two home league matches.

Once can be dismissed as a bad afternoon. Twice gets my attention.

Liverpool need to find ways of stretching teams and entering the penalty area more frequently. We have seen glimpses of how it can work. Florian Wirtz has found the winger, the winger has attacked space and Alexander Isak has made the movement inside. We have also seen incisive combinations in the goals against Forest and Ipswich.

We simply need more of them.

Barcola, Isak, Wirtz and Victor Muñoz are learning relationships. That cannot happen instantly. Iraola needs time on the training pitch, but the direction of travel needs to become visible.

If we are still talking about 18 or 21 opposition box touches regularly later in the season, we will be having a very different conversation.

Jeremy Jacquet Looks Like a Liverpool Star in the Making

If there was one Liverpool player who emerged from Saturday with his reputation enhanced, it was Jeremy Jacquet.

He was outstanding.

Jacquet played 90 minutes and recorded 96 touches, the most of anyone on the pitch. His 87 passes and 75 successful passes were also game highs. More impressively, 18 were line breaking passes, again the highest figure.

Then look at his defending.

Eight duels won, first in the match. An 88.9% duel success rate, also first among players contesting at least two. Five aerial duels won from five, giving him a 100%t aerial success rate. He also regained possession five times.

At 21, that is some performance.

His importance extends beyond defending. Iraola has previously had centre backs capable of progressing possession, and Liverpool have had that quality for years with Virgil van Dijk. Jacquet showed against Fulham that he can contribute in that area too.

There was also his clearance off the line, which showed excellent defensive awareness.

He will make mistakes. We saw moments against Ipswich where his age was perhaps more apparent. That has to be accepted with a 21 year old centre back. Against Fulham, though, I cannot remember him doing much wrong.

Having Van Dijk alongside him should be hugely beneficial. Ronald Araujo brings considerable experience too.

Jacquet’s emergence also gives Iraola flexibility. Araujo and Joe Gomez can provide options at right back while Conor Bradley is unavailable, while Giovanni Leoni will eventually return to the centre back picture.

There are plenty of questions still to answer, but Jacquet has given Liverpool an unexpected early boost.

Double Pivot Debate Needs More Context

This is probably the area generating the most debate.

Iraola made an important point after Fulham. The problems cannot simply be pinned on the midfielders. He views pressing and ball recovery collectively.

He also said Liverpool were recovering possession too deep. That creates another problem because, once you regain the ball in those areas, you are attacking against 11 opponents. Iraola wants Liverpool recovering possession much higher.

That requires a major adjustment.

Ryan Gravenberch, Alexis Mac Allister and Dominik Szoboszlai spent two seasons being asked to operate differently. They are now learning Iraola’s approach while playing alongside new team-mates and within new structures.

The Bournemouth numbers provide an interesting reference.

Alex Scott averaged 11.66km per game last season and produced 343 sprints. Tyler Adams averaged 11.2km and managed 218 sprints in only 1,778 minutes. Mac Allister averaged 11.4km with 234 sprints, while Gravenberch averaged 10.4km and recorded 230.

Bournemouth also had considerably less possession, which naturally affects those figures.

Still, they illustrate the physical demands associated with Iraola’s football.

Against Fulham, Liverpool’s ground duel numbers in midfield were poor. Gravenberch won two of five, while Szoboszlai won only one of nine. Together, that is three victories from 14 ground duels.

There is no point dressing that up.

Liverpool actually had the superior overall duel success rate, largely because Jacquet and Van Dijk were so strong aerially. In central areas, there was a problem.

Szoboszlai is particularly interesting because his role involves a trade off. He has played every minute so far, including some time at right back, which tells us plenty about how important Iraola considers him.

His attacking contribution also matters. Since the beginning of last season he has 15 goals and 12 assists. Among Liverpool’s midfield options this season he leads for shots per 90 at 2.4 and chances created at 3.2. He also leads for touches, passes, pass accuracy and carry distance in the relevant midfield comparisons.

Mac Allister and Gravenberch appear more prominently across the defensive metrics.

That helps explain the balance Iraola is trying to create.

Verticality Must Become Liverpool’s Next Step

One word kept coming back to me during this discussion, more.

More verticality. More forward passes. More possession recoveries higher up the pitch. More touches in the opposition box.

Iraola repeatedly talks about verticality. Against Fulham there were situations where Liverpool had opportunities to make the more aggressive pass and instead went sideways or backwards.

Again, I think there is an element of relearning involved.

For two seasons these players have often been encouraged to protect possession and control matches. Now they have to assess whether the vertical pass is available and take greater responsibility for playing it.

That carries risk. Lose the ball with an aggressive pass and Liverpool can be exposed in transition. Players therefore have to assess the situation in real time, decide whether the pass is on and understand the positioning behind them if possession is lost.

That level of understanding takes time.

I am encouraged that Iraola appears to recognise exactly where the issues are. I am encouraged by the clean sheets. I am hugely encouraged by Jacquet. I am also intrigued by what Trey Nyoni might eventually add to the midfield discussion, particularly with his passing ability.

There are genuine problems to solve.

Eighteen opposition box touches against Fulham is not enough. Three ground duels won from 14 between the starting pivot is not good enough. Liverpool need to recover possession higher and progress the ball more aggressively when opportunities appear.

None of that means the system cannot work.

Five games represents an extremely small sample. New players are adapting, established players are relearning and Iraola is attempting to introduce a pressing structure that cannot be perfected overnight.

For me, that is how Liverpool’s early numbers should be viewed.

There are warnings in them, especially at Anfield, but there are signs too. Jacquet already looks capable of becoming a major player. Szoboszlai’s physical and attacking output explains why Iraola trusts him. Liverpool have recorded consecutive clean sheets. The attacking combinations have appeared in flashes.

Now I want more of them.

More aggression with the ball, more intensity without it, more entries into dangerous areas and, most importantly, evidence that the numbers are moving in the right direction as Iraola’s Liverpool begins to take shape.

Leave a comment

Liverpool kept a clean sheet. That was the consolation. The frustration was everything that happened ahead of the defenders.

Reflecting on the goalless draw with Fulham on Anfield Index’s Full Time Reds, Gags Tandon and Sam Quaye returned to a connected set of problems: tired legs, an unbalanced midfield and attacking players working too hard to compensate for what was happening behind them.

There was criticism, sometimes fierce, but also a distinction between Liverpool’s potential under Andoni Iraola and their ability to deliver his football consistently. This performance exposed the distance between those two things.

Liverpool’s Intensity Came in Short Bursts

Gags placed the afternoon within the demands of the schedule.

“My main reason I think is going to be that it’s the third game of the week,” he said.

His concern was whether Liverpool possessed enough depth to rotate while maintaining the physical demands of Iraola’s approach. Players could produce the required intensity, but sustaining it was another matter.

Sam recognised the same pattern.

“It just seems like they can only do it for, like, five or ten minutes at a time,” he said.

Those bursts brought better pressing, sharper counter-pressing and more convincing build-up. Then Liverpool became passive, allowing Fulham to grow comfortable.

That distinction matters. Liverpool showed glimpses of the football they wanted to play. The problem was their inability to keep playing it.

Wirtz Debate Needs Midfield Context

Florian Wirtz’s performance brought a measured discussion. Neither presenter argued that he had been particularly good, but both questioned whether criticism was properly accounting for his workload.

“The amount of running the man is doing to cover for his midfielders is insane,” Gags said.

That was the central argument: Liverpool’s creative player was repeatedly being drawn towards problems elsewhere.

Sam separated Wirtz’s ability from the environment around him.

“Do we have the structure and the team around him to allow him to do that? No.”

He also demanded greater consistency. An encouraging performance cannot be followed by another afternoon in which influence disappears.

However, Liverpool cannot expect their number ten to provide decisive attacking quality while continually repairing the midfield. Getting Wirtz into better positions requires more reliable work behind him.

Gravenberch and Szoboszlai Raise Questions

Ryan Gravenberch attracted some of the strongest criticism. Gags questioned his passing, tracking and contribution after returning to the starting side.

Sam’s analysis focused on how opponents could limit a midfielder whose outstanding physical qualities were not always supported by sufficiently quick distribution.

“The ball moves quicker than the man,” he said.

Liverpool, in his assessment, needed straightforward progressive passes rather than another carry before releasing possession. Moving the ball earlier could help the team advance before opponents recovered their shape.

The partnership with Dominik Szoboszlai created another concern.

“There’s too much overlap,” Sam said of their strengths.

That diagnosis extended beyond an individual bad afternoon. Two gifted players can still leave a midfield short of complementary qualities, particularly when both are inclined to move towards the action rather than protect the space behind it.

Subscribe now

Running Must Serve Liverpool’s Structure

Gags’s disappointment with Szoboszlai came from high expectations. He valued the player’s ability but questioned the defensive effectiveness of his positioning and interventions.

Sam challenged the assumption that visible effort automatically meant useful work.

“You’re actually hurting the team because you’re not keeping the structure,” he said, discussing the danger of pressing alone.

That was one of the discussion’s clearest tactical points. A midfielder charging forward can appear proactive while making life easier for the opposition.

If a simple exchange removes that player from the move, the remaining midfield becomes exposed. Liverpool then depend on recovery running and defensive interventions.

Both presenters discussed alternative roles for Szoboszlai. Their broader point was that Liverpool need clarity about responsibilities before they can achieve balance.

Jacquet Provides a Reason for Optimism

The tone changed when the conversation reached Jérémy Jacquet.

“He was the best player on the pitch for me,” Gags said.

Sam was equally impressed by how comfortable the defender appeared.

“It feels like he’s been there for years.”

That praise offered a contrast to the uncertainty further forward. The presenters saw assurance in Jacquet’s work and encouragement in his developing relationship with Virgil van Dijk.

Ronald Araujo also received praise for his positioning and aerial contribution. Gags valued the security he provided on the right.

The clean sheet therefore had substance within their analysis. Liverpool’s defenders were handling situations that the players ahead of them were not always preventing.

Full-Back Problems Restrict the Attack

Kostas Tsimikas’s display prompted another blunt assessment from Gags.

“He couldn’t get a cross right. He couldn’t get a pass right. He couldn’t get a touch right.”

The concern was how those difficulties affected Liverpool’s attacking connections, particularly the service reaching Bradley Barcola.

Sam broadened the issue to the squad’s options. In his view, Iraola’s system would remain restricted until the full-back and midfield positions offered the required qualities.

Both discussed younger alternatives and the value of genuine competition.

That matters during a demanding schedule. Rotation only helps if the replacement can perform the job. Otherwise, the manager faces a choice between overworking trusted players and accepting a drop in quality.

Isak Offers Initiative, but Bigger Work Remains

Alexander Isak supplied a more encouraging attacking note. Sam felt he grew into the game by seeking involvement rather than waiting for chances.

“In the second half, he took it upon himself,” he said.

That initiative was welcome, but it also reflected Liverpool’s service problem. Attackers were having to find their own route into the contest.

The discussion ultimately pointed towards a collective challenge for Iraola. Liverpool need enough fitness to sustain their pressing, enough discipline to protect the midfield and enough quality in reserve to rotate effectively.

A goalless draw does not erase progress. It does reveal where progress remains fragile.

For Gags and Sam, this was an afternoon when effort, talent and intention failed to become a convincing team performance. Liverpool’s next step is making those qualities work together.

Liverpool have had a good week. Now they need to make it count.

That sounds simplistic, perhaps even harsh after Andoni Iraola secured his first Premier League victory as Liverpool head coach at Ipswich Town and followed it with a 2-1 Champions League win over Atletico Madrid.

Yet this is how serious teams operate. They turn promising weeks into runs. They take confidence earned in difficult matches and cash it in against opponents they are expected to beat.

Fulham arrive at Anfield with no Premier League points under Alvaro Arbeloa. Liverpool have five from their opening three games. Victory would make it eight from four and suddenly Iraola’s start begins to look very healthy indeed.

There should be no complacency. Fulham have enough attacking quality to cause Liverpool problems and their adventurous approach could create an awkward afternoon if the hosts become careless.

Liverpool should still win this game.

More importantly, they should be reaching the stage where winning these games feels normal again.

Iraola Has Liverpool Moving Forward

Context matters.

Liverpool started the campaign with consecutive draws. Questions quickly followed because plenty of them had carried over from the wreckage of last season.

Iraola now has an opportunity to change the conversation.

His Premier League unbeaten sequence stretches to 21 games across Bournemouth and Liverpool, 18 with his former club and three with his current one.

Ipswich provided his first league victory. Atletico provided his first European one.

Fulham represents another kind of test.

This is the match where Liverpool have to impose themselves. At home, against a side who have lost all three Premier League matches under Arbeloa, the responsibility belongs to Iraola’s team.

Fulham have shown flashes going forward. Their attacking play has been aggressive, their pressing can cause difficulties and they have created chances. The problem has been what happens behind it. They have looked open, with significant spaces appearing between the lines.

Liverpool have the players to exploit that.

Araújo Gives Liverpool Greater Balance

Ronald Araújo has quickly become one of the more intriguing elements of Iraola’s Liverpool.

Using him from right back changes the structure of the side.

When Liverpool attack, Araújo can remain deeper and effectively form a back three. That allows Milos Kerkez greater licence to advance from the opposite flank without leaving Liverpool hopelessly exposed in transition.

It sounds simple because it is simple. Sometimes football benefits from that.

Araújo brings size, aggression and aerial dominance. He defends like someone who enjoys defending, which feels almost unfashionable in an era when full backs are routinely judged by assists and progressive carries.

Liverpool already have enough footballers wanting to influence attacks. Araújo offers security.

His commitment has also been obvious. His celebration after creating Liverpool’s equaliser against Atletico captured somebody who looks invested in what he is doing. His performances have followed the same pattern.

Fulham Could Give Wirtz His Opportunity

Florian Wirtz needs numbers.

There is no great scandal in saying it.

His performance against Atletico was really encouraging. He covered enormous ground, pressed aggressively, competed physically and looked considerably stronger than during some of his early appearances.

Those qualities matter.

For a player of Wirtz’s calibre, goals and assists have to follow.

Liverpool signed one of Europe’s outstanding creative footballers. The standards surrounding him should therefore be high. He has already demonstrated the work rate required to survive in Iraola’s midfield. Fulham offers the opportunity to show considerably more with the ball.

The spaces Fulham leave are precisely where Wirtz should thrive.

There should be opportunities between midfield and defence. There should be chances to receive possession on the turn. Alexander Isak will threaten the space behind them and Bradley Barcola has already shown that he wants to run beyond defenders.

Wirtz has the passing range to punish that movement.

This needs to become the afternoon when Liverpool’s number seven starts dictating an attacking game rather than participating in one.

His pressing was valuable against Atletico. Fulham should demand creativity.

That is the next step.

Liverpool Have Chance to Build Real Momentum

Liverpool’s attacking selection is complicated slightly by injuries.

Hugo Ekitike and Federico Chiesa remain unavailable, while Cody Gakpo is a significant doubt despite his problem not being considered serious. Joe Gomez returning to contention strengthens the defensive options, although Giovanni Leoni and Conor Bradley remain sidelined.

Barcola should be fine. His withdrawal after 70 minutes against Atletico was caused by cramp and Iraola expects him to be available.

I would start him.

Barcola, Isak and Victor Muñoz offer pace and movement across the front line. Behind them, Wirtz should have the freedom to find those runners, with Alexis Mac Allister and Dominik Szoboszlai providing the platform.

Fulham may decide that damage limitation is preferable and drop deeper. Arbeloa is already under pressure after three league defeats and another loss would leave his side in a dreadful position entering the next stage of the season.

Their performances so far suggest they will try to play.

Liverpool should welcome that.

Predicted Liverpool XI: Alisson, Araújo, Jacquet, Van Dijk, Kerkez, Mac Allister, Szoboszlai, Wirtz, Muñoz, Barcola, Isak.

Score Prediction: Liverpool 2-0 Fulham

It went a little bit under the radar in the final few days of the window, but Liverpool signed a really exciting attacker.

No, it wasn’t Ismaila Sarr nor Yankuba Minteh. While all the conversation was surrounding the duo, Liverpool went and brought Djylian N’Guessan from Saint Etienne.

The transfer won’t be completed until January. For now, he is on loan at Brest in Ligue 1, where he will get the opportunity to play first-team football.

In January, Liverpool will have the option to extend his loan or to bring him to the club if he meets the work-permit requirements.

Either way, this is a smart signing. The kind of signing you’d expect Brighton or Bournemouth to make. Recently, though thanks to Pedro Marques Liverpool are also making a habit of finding these gems.

Read more

Hi all,

We wanted to provide a quick update on Under Pressure following some understandable confusion around the start of the new season.

As we communicated on 28 April, the Under Pressure team had decided to bring the show’s long running weekly format on Anfield Index to an end at the conclusion of last season. At that stage, the intention was for Under Pressure to continue on Anfield Index, but on a less frequent basis, potentially monthly.

Further discussions took place over the summer about how the show could continue, and some of those plans subsequently changed. Unfortunately, that resulted in conflicting information being communicated on Discord about what AI Pro subscribers would receive this season, and we apologise for the confusion.

The Under Pressure team have now launched their own independent Patreon, where they are producing regular analysis content.

For clarity, the Under Pressure Patreon is independently operated and is separate from Anfield Index and AI Pro. Its pricing, subscriptions, content, creative control and distribution are managed by the UP team, not Anfield Index.

Anyone wishing to access their additional Patreon content can find it here:

https://www.patreon.com/cw/UnderPressurePodcastLFC

We are currently finalising our ongoing arrangement with the UP team. The current plan is for AI Pro subscribers to receive one dedicated and exclusive to Anfield Index Under Pressure show each month, alongside selected content from the team’s weekly Patreon shows being made available through our various platforms.

Thank you, as always, for your continued support.

Eddie, Gags, Greig and the Anfield Index team

Spending around €35million on an 18-year-old goalkeeper sounds ridiculous. There is no point pretending otherwise.

Goalkeepers mature late. Their mistakes are brutally visible. The position is packed with psychological demands that cannot be measured by looking at wingspan, save percentage or a collection of clips. Liverpool have committed a substantial amount of money to Lucca Brughmans before discovering how he will respond to most of the challenges that define an elite goalkeeper.

Yet watch Brughmans closely and the thinking becomes considerably easier to understand.

Read more

Liverpool had to work this one out.

For the opening part of Wednesday night at Anfield, Atlético Madrid gave Andoni Iraola a problem Liverpool had not prepared for. The visitors changed their structure, created different passing angles through midfield and used Marcos Llorente aggressively on their right. Liverpool’s press did not initially have the right answers, and after 17 minutes they were behind.

What followed was the most encouraging part of the night for me. Liverpool changed the way they pressed, became more secure in their match ups and gradually turned the game in their favour. Dominik Szoboszlai equalised before half time, Alexis Mac Allister put Liverpool ahead five minutes after the break, and from there they managed the match well enough to begin their Champions League campaign with three points.

The numbers show Liverpool created enough to deserve the win. They had 45% possession, yet produced 14 shots, four big chances and 33 touches in the Atlético penalty area.

Atlético’s shape forced Liverpool to think

Iraola accepted afterwards that Atlético used a structure Liverpool had not seen from them this season. Llorente pushed high, Julián Álvarez and other attacking players dropped into pockets, and Liverpool found themselves caught between jumping onto the ball and protecting the space behind the press.

Read more

That felt much more like a proper European night at Anfield. It was not perfect, and once again Liverpool gave themselves work to do by conceding first, but I thought the response was really encouraging. Atletico are exactly the sort of side who can make a game horrible once they get their noses in front, so getting level before half-time felt hugely important.

Szoboszlai took his goal really well, and from there Liverpool looked like the side more likely to go on and win it. Mac Allister then produced the moment of real quality. Given everything that had been said before the game about his contract situation, there was something almost inevitable about him being the man to decide it.

I also thought Barcola showed some promising flashes on his first start. He should probably have scored, but his pace and movement gave Atletico problems, and thankfully Iraola’s comments afterwards suggest the issue that forced him off was nothing more than cramp.

There are still things to tidy up, especially these slow starts, but Liverpool remain unbeaten and now have a Champions League win on the board. For a side still adapting under a new manager, that is a very solid place to be.

Post-Match Podcasts

Our post-match coverage has had a bit of a refresh, with a new line-up of shows taking you through everything that matters after the final whistle.

First up is Full-Time Reds, our immediate match review covering the key moments, major talking points and reaction to the result. That will be followed shortly afterwards by Rate Don’t Hate, where the team go through the Liverpool players one by one, rating and discussing their performances.

And for those who prefer the traditional post-match discussion, Post Match RAW remains part of the line-up and will follow wherever you get your podcasts.

Full-Time Reds: Gags Tandon is joined by Lola Katz Roberts for immediate reaction to Liverpool’s 2-1 Champions League victory over Atlético Madrid at Anfield. They discuss the key moments, Mac Allister’s match-winning strike, Liverpool’s response after going behind and the major talking points from another dramatic European night under the lights. - Watch Now

Rate Don’t Hate: Gags Tandon and Lola Katz Roberts run through their Liverpool player ratings after the 2-1 Champions League win over Atlético Madrid at Anfield. Who impressed, who struggled and who came out on top after another comeback victory? - Watch Now

Post Match RAW: Trev Downey is joined by Dave Hendrick and Jim Boardman to look back at Liverpool’s 2-1 Champions League victory over Atlético Madrid at Anfield. The trio discuss the key moments, Mac Allister’s winner, Liverpool’s comeback and the main talking points from another eventful European night - Listen Now

Andoni Iraola Post-Match: Liverpool head coach Andoni Iraola reflects on his first Champions League match at Anfield following the Reds’ 2-1 victory over Atlético Madrid, discussing the performance, the comeback and the key moments from the night. - Listen Now

Post-Match Articles

• Match Report

• Player Ratings by Steven Smith

• Man of the Match by Steven Smith

• David Lynch’s 5 Key Takeaways

Leave a comment

Liverpool begin another Champions League campaign at Anfield with Atletico Madrid providing precisely the sort of examination Andoni Iraola needs at this stage of his rebuild.

There are easier opponents Liverpool could have drawn. There are certainly more accommodating ones. Yet after Friday night’s 2-0 victory over Ipswich Town finally gave Iraola his first win as Liverpool head coach, this feels like an ideal moment to discover exactly where his team stands.

Atletico remain one of European football’s most experienced operators. This will be their 14th consecutive Champions League campaign, and whatever changes Diego Simeone has made stylistically, certain characteristics remain embedded in the club. They are aggressive, organised, streetwise and perfectly comfortable making matches unpleasant.

Liverpool need to embrace that challenge.

Anfield must become Liverpool’s weapon again

What encouraged me most about Liverpool against Ipswich was the beginning. They played quickly, imposed themselves and looked determined to dictate the match.

That approach is essential against Atletico.

Liverpool cannot spend the opening 15 minutes cautiously passing the ball around while Atletico settle into their defensive structure. Anfield will be ready for a Champions League night. Liverpool’s responsibility is to give the crowd something to feed upon.

Start quickly. Win tackles. Attack space. Make Atletico defend facing their own goal.

An early Liverpool goal would completely alter the contest because Simeone’s side would eventually have to take greater risks. Allow Atletico to settle at 0-0 and Liverpool could find themselves dragged into exactly the sort of match the Spaniards enjoy.

There has been a feeling that this Liverpool side can occasionally be too accommodating. Atletico will test that theory. This could become a physical, niggly Champions League game in which challenges, second balls and reactions to refereeing decisions become almost as important as possession. The discussion around this match correctly identified Liverpool’s need for greater grit and suggested Victor Munoz might provide some of it.

That is where Liverpool need to show another side of themselves.

Isak gives Liverpool a genuine focal point

Alexander Isak’s brace at Ipswich could hardly have arrived at a better time.

Liverpool’s record signing now enters the Champions League campaign with confidence flowing. More importantly, there were encouraging signs of Liverpool beginning to understand how to use him.

Against Atletico, he will start again.

There will be opportunities to manage his workload later. This is Liverpool’s most difficult home fixture of the league phase, and winning it immediately changes the complexion of the European campaign. Three points here would provide Iraola with greater freedom to rotate during more manageable fixtures later in the competition. That was also one of the strongest conclusions from the preview discussion, start the strongest side and attack Atletico for the opening hour.

Bradley Barcola creates another fascinating decision. He looked exciting during his cameo at Ipswich, although Iraola has understandably been careful about managing a player who arrived without significant recent match minutes.

Cody Gakpo’s minor muscle issue could accelerate Barcola’s introduction. If Gakpo fails to make it, I would start Barcola alongside Isak and Munoz.

Anfield under the lights would be quite an introduction.

Midfield battle could decide Champions League opener

Atletico will try to disrupt Liverpool’s rhythm and turn midfield into a physical contest. Gravenberch provides athleticism and ball carrying ability alongside Szoboszlai, while Wirtz should be given licence to operate higher.

Liverpool spent enormous money acquiring players capable of deciding matches like this. Wirtz was recruited to unlock stubborn opponents. Isak was signed to finish chances. Barcola provides acceleration against defensive structures and Munoz offers relentless running.

This is the night to use them.

Araujo also deserves another opportunity at right back following his impressive performance at Ipswich. Atletico possess enough attacking quality to punish defensive uncertainty, particularly if Julian Alvarez returns to prominence. His situation in Madrid may be complicated, but his ability certainly is not. The preview rightly identified him as Atletico’s biggest individual threat, describing a forward comfortable dropping deep or leading the attack alone.

Liverpool cannot allow his circumstances at Atletico to distract them from what he can do.

Predicted Liverpool XI: Alisson, Araujo, Jacquet, Van Dijk (C), Kerkez, Gravenberch, Szoboszlai, Wirtz, Munoz, Barcola, Isak.

Liverpool can make opening night count

There is something appropriate about Iraola beginning his Champions League managerial career against Simeone.

He knows Atletico well and his record against them provides another challenge to overcome. Iraola is winless across his previous four managerial meetings with Simeone, losing three and drawing one.

Anfield changes the equation.

Liverpool have spent heavily, reshaped their attack and entrusted Iraola with beginning another cycle. Friday offered the first meaningful glimpse of what this team could become. Wednesday needs to move that process forward.

Atletico deserve respect. They have the experience, organisation and quality to cause Liverpool serious problems, and their ability to manipulate the tempo makes them dangerous opponents. They will probably regard a point at Anfield as an excellent result.

Liverpool should demand more.

I expect difficult periods and I would be surprised if Atletico failed to score. Yet Liverpool have greater attacking quality, home advantage and, following Ipswich, finally some momentum.

This Champions League campaign should begin with Liverpool imposing themselves rather than waiting to discover what Atletico have planned.

Get Anfield involved. Get Isak involved. Play quickly, compete aggressively and force Simeone’s team backwards.

Prediction: Liverpool 2-1 Atletico Madrid.

Since the end of the transfer window the name Lamine Camara has been whispered around in the circles of Liverpool and the corridors of Anfield quiet frequently.

Liverpool did not interfere in the collapse of the Senegalese midfielder’s transfer to Chelsea. But they have always made it clear the Camara was highly appreciated by the club’s recruitment team.

Camara, who followed a similar path to Sadio Mane, joining Generation Foot before moving to Europe via FC Metz, is also very open to follow in the footsteps of his country’s footballing idol.

It all feels like a move that is being geared up for the January window. Of course a lot can happen until then, and Liverpool will have to sell before they can buy. However, Camara is clearly very much at the top of the club’s thinking when it comes to their next signing.

And just why that might be the case? Well let’s take a look.

Camara’s outstanding strengths

When you watch him play what immediately stands out about Camara is that he covers a lot of ground.

He is an extremely energetic player who is capable of covering a lot of ground. Camara is ideal for a team who consistently press and want to play on the front foot.

As per Scoutlabs, you can see that he ranks in the upper 90^th percentile for recoveries per 90 minutes.

In fast, last season no one won possession (8.19 per 90 minutes) than Camara in the entirety of Ligue 1.

This is all the more impressive considering Monaco’s possession is above the average when it comes to Ligue 1 teams.

So, it isn’t necessarily like Camara’s numbers are benefitting from his team sitting deep and not holding onto the ball.

He is already used to being defensively very astute in a team that expects to hold the ball for the majority of the game – like Liverpool.

So why is he so good at defending?

Well, he reads the game well. He is very good at intercepting passes and knowing where the ball is going to be.

Secondly, what helps him massively is that he is quick over short distances and he has quick reaction times.

Just take a look at this pressing sequence and goal that he scored in Monaco’s final game of last season.

Camara here anticipates that the goalkeeper is going to play out from the back. He is immediately on the front foot and closes down the player who the ball is going to go to.

Camars is so quick that within a millisecond he puts himself ahead of his opponent. He slides in, and he makes really good contact with the ball.

It’s such a strong contact that it actually ends up in the back of the net.

Read more

Im sure there will be more spectacular Liverpool victories this season. There will be afternoons when the football flows more freely, when chances arrive in waves and when the final scoreline provides a more obvious reflection of territorial dominance.

I am not sure there will be many away wins that tell us quite as much about where Andoni Iraola is trying to take this Liverpool side.

Liverpool’s 2-0 Premier League victory at Ipswich was built on something we have not seen often enough in recent times: control of the game through the scoreboard. Alexander Isak struck twice early, Liverpool established their position, and from there the requirements of the match changed completely.

That matters when looking at the statistics, because a superficial reading produces a slightly peculiar conclusion. Ipswich finished with more shots and even edged the expected goals count, 0.75 to Liverpool’s 0.69.

Watch the match, examine where those attempts came from and consider what Liverpool were being asked to do after taking the lead, and a rather different picture emerges. The performance was one of efficiency, tactical discipline and, most encouragingly, an understanding of how to manage a Premier League away game once Liverpool had earned the advantage.

Isak Changes Liverpool’s Relationship With Chances

Isak’s influence stretches considerably further than the two goals, although those two goals remain the obvious starting point.

Liverpool produced only 10 shots compared with Ipswich’s 14. Yet seven of Liverpool’s efforts hit the target, compared with five from Ipswich. That means 70% of Liverpool’s attempts were on target, while Ipswich managed roughly 36%.

That is a huge difference in shot execution.

More revealingly, FotMob recorded Liverpool’s expected goals on target at 1.94, compared with just 0.76 for Ipswich.

Liverpool’s ordinary xG was only 0.69.

That gap between xG and xGOT is fascinating. Expected goals measures the likelihood of a chance being scored before considering the eventual placement of the shot. Expected goals on target evaluates what happens once the player has actually struck it.

Isak elevated Liverpool’s chances through the quality of his finishing.

Neither side registered a FotMob “big chance”. Liverpool still scored twice.

That is precisely why an elite finisher can change the mathematics of a football match. A striker who repeatedly requires a goalkeeper to deal with well placed, powerful attempts can turn apparently modest opportunities into goals.

Read more

For 45 minutes at Portman Road, I remembered what it was like to watch Liverpool and properly enjoy it.

I said before the game that the first goal was crucial. Alexander Isak decided two would be even better, scoring them in quick succession and effectively taking the contest away from Ipswich.

The goalkeeper should do better with the first, although Isak still had to make the run and finish it. The second was different. Movement, composure, quality. That was the player you pay the big bucks for, a striker capable of making the decisive moment look wonderfully straightforward.

Cody Gakpo was my man of the match. He looks liberated. Two assists, strength, imagination and a willingness to take responsibility whenever Liverpool went forward. His pass for Isak’s second was magnificent. Bradley Barcola’s arrival gives Liverpool serious competition on that side, and Gakpo appears ready to embrace it.

There was plenty else to like. Ronald Araujo gave Liverpool greater security at right-back, the shape looked more balanced and, after conceding four goals in the opening two games, a clean sheet was very welcome.

Liverpool controlled the game rather than allowing it to become another chaotic afternoon.

There remains plenty of work for Andoni Iraola. Nobody should pretend otherwise after three league games.

But a win is a win, Isak has his goals, Liverpool have their clean sheet and, for that first half especially, watching them felt familiar again.

I’ve missed that feeling.

Post-Match Podcasts

Guy Drinkel is joined by Jim Boardman and Lewis Aspinall on Post-Match RAW with fan reaction to Liverpool’s 2-0 Premier League win at Portman Road over Ipswich Town this evening - Watch Now

Gags Tandon and Tadiwa Chanakira share their player ratings on Rate Don’t Hate after Liverpool’s 2-0 win over Ipswich Town - Watch Now

Liverpool Head Coach Andoni Iraola gave his thoughts on Liverpool’s win at Ipswich. - Listen Now

Post-Match Articles

• Match Report

• Player Ratings by Steven Smith

• Man of the Match by Steven Smith

• David Lynch’s Key Takeaways

Leave a comment

Liverpool travel to Ipswich Town on Friday night with the Premier League table still waiting for Andoni Iraola’s first victory as head coach. Two games, two 2-2 draws, four goals scored, four conceded. There have been flashes of quality, plenty of warning signs and rather too much chaos.

Portman Road does not immediately feel like the ideal location for restoring order.

Ipswich Town will sense an opportunity. Liverpool have conceded first against both Newcastle United and Nottingham Forest, they have allowed opponents too much space in transition and their midfield structure remains a work in progress.

This is where Iraola needs to see progress.

Liverpool’s biggest problem so far has been relatively straightforward. They have made matches unnecessarily difficult.

Falling behind repeatedly forces the game into increasingly frantic territory. Liverpool possess enough attacking quality to recover from difficult situations, but relying on individual talent to repair structural problems is hardly sustainable.

Ipswich Town will know that.

The hosts have already demonstrated a willingness to attack Premier League opponents rather than retreat into their penalty area. That could actually suit Liverpool, providing Iraola’s side deal properly with the opening exchanges.

Liverpool need aggression, energy and composure from the first whistle. There can be no assumption that superior individuals will eventually decide matters.

Ipswich will have the crowd behind them and will surely look towards the spaces Liverpool have surrendered during their opening two league matches. Those gaps have been particularly noticeable through midfield.

Ryan Gravenberch and Alexis Mac Allister therefore have enormous responsibility. Florian Wirtz should operate ahead of them, where his creativity can influence proceedings around the Ipswich penalty area.

Wirtz drifting too deep creates another problem. Alexander Isak can become isolated and Liverpool lose one of their most dangerous players from the areas where he can cause maximum damage.

Getting that balance right feels central to this game.

Bradley Barcola Decision Gives Iraola a Dilemma

Then comes the exciting question.

Does Bradley Barcola start?

Liverpool’s £123 million signing from Paris Saint-Germain has reportedly travelled with the squad and could make his debut at Portman Road. His lack of substantial pre-season minutes provides Iraola with a legitimate reason for caution.

Still, there is something hugely tempting about unleashing him immediately.

Liverpool have spent extraordinary money on Barcola because he offers precisely the qualities this attack needs. Pace, direct running and the ability to attack defenders one against one can change the geometry of a match.

Ipswich would rather see him sitting on the bench when the teams emerge.

There is also an argument that his introduction after an hour could prove devastating. Tired defenders facing a fresh Barcola is hardly an appealing prospect.

My preference would be patience.

Cody Gakpo has started the season positively and deserves his place. Victor Munoz offers directness from the opposite flank, while Isak needs another opportunity through the middle. That gives Liverpool a powerful attacking trio and leaves Barcola available to transform the game later.

There will be plenty of opportunities for the Frenchman. Liverpool do not need to force the first one.

Defensive Vulnerability Remains Iraola’s Biggest Concern

Liverpool’s defensive situation makes controlling possession even more important.

Joe Gomez is approaching his return but this game arrives too soon. Giovanni Leoni and Conor Bradley remain unavailable, while Hugo Ekitike is another long-term absentee. Their inclusion in Liverpool’s Champions League squad at least suggests the club expects them to contribute during the coming months.

For now, Iraola has limited room for manoeuvre.

Jeremy Jacquet should continue alongside Virgil van Dijk. Jacquet has shown enough already to justify Iraola maintaining that partnership, particularly while Ronald Araujo continues building towards full match sharpness.

Dominik Szoboszlai at right-back remains an unconventional solution, although his athleticism and technical ability make the experiment understandable. Milos Kerkez should continue on the opposite side.

The absence of Wataru Endo and Federico Chiesa from Liverpool’s Champions League squad also provides a fairly clear indication of their current standing. Neither appears central to Iraola’s plans.

Squad depth could become an increasingly uncomfortable subject once the European schedule begins. For Friday night, Liverpool still have considerably more talent available than Ipswich Town.

They need to demonstrate it.

Predicted Liverpool XI: Alisson, Szoboszlai, Jacquet, Van Dijk (C), Kerkez, Gravenberch, Mac Allister, Wirtz, Gakpo, Munoz, Isak.

Final Thoughts

There are reasons to be wary about this trip.

Liverpool supporters will remember Portman Road fondly from the 2-0 victory that opened the 2024/25 campaign. That afternoon became the first chapter of a journey which ended with Liverpool lifting their 20th league title under Arne Slot.

Circumstances are very different now.

Iraola is trying to construct his own Liverpool. His football demands intensity, courage and aggression, and the early stages of that transition were always likely to produce awkward moments. There are players still learning their responsibilities and a squad that does not look perfectly balanced.

That cannot become an excuse for failing to beat Ipswich.

Liverpool need their first Premier League victory of the season. More importantly, they need to produce a performance that feels less dependent upon rescuing themselves from problems of their own creation.

Control midfield, start aggressively, keep Wirtz close enough to Isak and make Ipswich defend towards their own goal.

Then, if the match needs something extra, Iraola can look towards his bench and introduce a £123 million French winger with a point to prove.

That sounds like a rather useful option.

Prediction: Ipswich Town 1-2 Liverpool

Imagine buying a house and deciding to renovate it properly.

You spend heavily. The kitchen is magnificent, the flooring is expensive, the furniture looks immaculate and every visible detail suggests serious investment. Friends walk through the door and immediately see where the money has gone.

Then it rains.

Water starts coming through the ceiling because nobody fixed the roof.

That feels uncomfortably close to Liverpool Football Club in September 2026.

There is plenty of talent in this squad. Some of it is exceptional. Bradley Barcola could become one of Europe’s outstanding attackers. Victor Muñoz has already offered glimpses of why Liverpool were so keen on him. Jeremy Jacquet looks an excellent defensive prospect. Ronald Araújo is a sensible loan addition. The work Liverpool have done around academy and development recruitment also deserves praise.

Nobody looking seriously at Liverpool’s transfer activity can claim the club has simply refused to spend money.

The question is what that spending has produced.

Liverpool have entered a new managerial era with glaring uncertainty at right-back, an unresolved midfield, inadequate senior depth in several areas and too many players being asked to perform jobs they were never recruited to do.

Andoni Iraola has inherited expensive furniture and a leaking roof.

That distinction matters because the easiest argument after a poor transfer window is usually about money. Spend more, buy another player, pay whatever the selling club demands.

That is not my argument.

Liverpool’s failure this summer was one of construction.

It was a failure to identify priorities, sequence decisions properly, protect squad depth, manage departures and build around the requirements of the manager they had chosen.

Responsibility for that begins with Richard Hughes.

Richard Hughes and the Anatomy of a Failed Plan

I have been scathing about Hughes for months, which means there is little satisfaction in reaching this point.

I would much rather have been wrong.

There were moments when I wondered whether I had gone too early. Liverpool kept signing high-level footballers and Hughes could reasonably point to an impressive body of individual recruitment.

That deserves acknowledgement.

Hughes was not incapable of buying good players.

His failure was building a coherent squad.

That distinction matters because a sporting director is not employed to collect the most impressive names available. The job is broader and far less glamorous. It involves balance, contracts, succession planning, age profile, positional requirements, squad depth and understanding how one decision creates consequences elsewhere.

Liverpool increasingly look like a club paying today for what they failed to solve yesterday.

That is the real problem with Hughes’ tenure.

The current squad contains enough talent to produce a very good season, perhaps even a better one than many of us currently expect, but it also depends on a remarkable number of things going right at the same time. Barcola needs to adapt quickly. Muñoz needs to maintain his early momentum. Younger players need to develop faster than would normally be expected. Injured players need to return without setbacks. Iraola needs to find midfield combinations that give Liverpool control without exposing the defence, while also solving a right-back problem that recruitment left unresolved.

One or two gambles are normal in football.

When a squad requires this many simultaneously, the issue is no longer bad luck. It becomes the product of planning.

Right-back is the clearest example.

Conor Bradley’s serious knee injury was known long before the window reached its final week. Jeremie Frimpong began the season looking uncomfortable defensively. Dominik Szoboszlai ended up filling the position. Joe Gomez’s availability could never sensibly be treated as guaranteed.

None of this arrived as a surprise on deadline day.

Yet Liverpool still reached the final hours exploring a move for Malo Gusto.

Chelsea’s demands made that deal unattractive. Paying around £75 million for a player Liverpool appeared to view as a solution to an immediate structural weakness would have been reckless. Liverpool were right to walk away.

The failure was not refusing the fee.

The failure was reaching deadline day with that sort of deal as one of the remaining answers.

Exactly the same applies to the late attacking business.

Liverpool were right not to pay any price Brighton demanded for Yankuba Minteh. They were right to question the wisdom of spending enormous money on Ismaïla Sarr at 28. They were right not to allow desperation to produce long contracts for players they did not fully believe in.

Those decisions can all be defended individually.

Taken together, they expose the weakness in the process.

A well-run recruitment operation should arrive in August with multiple alternatives that have been assessed over months. It should know which players fit the manager, which fees are acceptable and which compromises preserve the balance of the squad.

Liverpool appeared instead to be waiting for the market to bend.

Brighton did not lower their valuation. Crystal Palace did not become more accommodating. Chelsea did not agree to a loan on Liverpool’s preferred terms. Selling clubs behaved exactly as selling clubs usually behave.

Liverpool seemed surprised by it.

Midfield leaves a similar impression.

Curtis Jones departed and was not replaced. Harvey Elliott went on loan. Liverpool had spent long periods examining midfielders over more than one window, while the need for greater control, defensive security and athleticism through the centre of the pitch had hardly been hidden.

The consequence is that Iraola now has to manufacture solutions from the players already there.

Move Szoboszlai to right-back and midfield becomes thinner. Keep him in midfield and right-back remains exposed. Give Trey Nyoni a major role and an enormously talented teenager is suddenly carrying responsibility created by the absence of senior recruitment.

There is nothing wrong with giving young players opportunities. There is something wrong when opportunity becomes necessity.

That is what proper squad planning protects against.

It is the part of recruitment that rarely generates viral announcement videos or social-media excitement. It is also the part that decides whether a team survives February when three players are injured, another is suspended and the manager needs reliable options from the bench.

Liverpool once appeared exceptionally good at understanding that.

Under Hughes, they increasingly looked comfortable leaving too much to chance.

There is another factor that makes the whole episode harder to accept.

Hughes’ period of greatest difficulty broadly coincided with Michael Edwards moving towards his own exit. Liverpool’s executive structure began to feel temporary at exactly the moment the squad required stability.

That matters because sporting directors are supposed to provide continuity when managers change. Coaches live with the pressure of results and can disappear quickly. Sporting leadership should operate on a longer cycle, protecting the club from short-term reactions and ensuring that recruitment, contracts and succession are connected.

Liverpool have instead experienced repeated turnover in the very positions designed to provide that continuity.

The sporting-director role should belong to a genuine long-term strategist, someone prepared to spend years shaping the football operation rather than becoming another short chapter in it.

That feels especially relevant now.

Once it became clear that Hughes was moving towards Saudi Arabia, Liverpool should have placed him on gardening leave.

That is not punishment. It is governance.

Senior executives in other industries are routinely removed from sensitive decision-making when they are preparing to join another organisation. It protects commercial information, relationships and strategic clarity. Football should not pretend those principles stop mattering because the transactions involve players instead of contracts in a boardroom.

Liverpool themselves benefited from Bournemouth taking a firm line when Hughes agreed to move to Anfield.

Liverpool then chose not to apply the same standard.

They allowed a sporting director with one foot towards the exit to oversee one of the most important transfer windows in the club’s recent history.

That summer involved a new manager, major departures, positional weaknesses, contract issues and a squad that already required careful rebalancing. It demanded somebody thinking not only about September 2026, but about 2027, 2028 and 2029.

Instead, the man directing much of the operation was preparing for his own next job.

Perhaps Hughes remained completely professional throughout. I have no reason to suggest otherwise.

Professionalism does not remove the underlying problem, nor does it erase the outcome.

Liverpool finished the summer with several strong individual signings and several obvious structural weaknesses. That was the recurring theme throughout the window. The club has spent vast sums across successive summers while still relying on a chain of favourable outcomes to make the squad function properly.

The contrast with Liverpool’s youth recruitment makes it even more striking. The work below first-team level has often appeared proactive, forward-looking and intelligent, while the senior squad has become increasingly reactive and dependent on improvisation.

That is why Hughes’ legacy cannot be assessed simply by listing the players he signed.

A sporting director is ultimately judged by the condition of the squad he leaves behind.

Liverpool will remember the major arrivals, and some may become outstanding footballers. What matters more is whether the team became healthier, more balanced and easier to manage over time.

On that measure, the picture is far less flattering.

Contracts have been allowed to drift into dangerous territory. Major departures have created urgent replacement needs. Problems in midfield and at right-back have been carried across windows. The squad now requires too much improvisation from the manager and too much luck with injuries.

That is the part that can set a club back for years.

Leave midfield short now and next summer’s midfielder becomes essential rather than optional. Fail to solve right-back and another budget has to revisit the same position. Allow senior players to approach the end of contracts and money that could have improved the team elsewhere is spent replacing assets who left for little or nothing.

Poor planning compounds. Problems that could once have been solved calmly become emergencies, and every emergency removes flexibility from the next decision.

That is the danger Hughes leaves behind.

Liverpool may still have an excellent season. Barcola may be brilliant immediately. Bradley may return strongly. Iraola may discover a midfield combination that changes the whole picture. Szoboszlai may even make right-back look natural.

Football allows for all of that.

A club of Liverpool’s size cannot build its strategy around the hope that wonderful things rescue incomplete planning.

Hughes was hired to reduce uncertainty. By the end of his tenure, Liverpool were carrying more of it than they should.

There is no need to erase the good work to reach that conclusion. He signed some excellent players and was part of a period in which Liverpool recruited serious talent.

History will remember those footballers individually.

It will remember Hughes for the condition of the squad he left behind.

FSG, Power and a Liverpool Machine Losing Its Way

Richard Hughes deserves criticism for the squad he leaves behind, but Liverpool cannot conveniently pack every failure into his suitcase and wave goodbye.

Hughes did not appoint himself. He did not design Liverpool’s executive structure, decide who held authority or determine that a sporting director seemingly heading for Saudi Arabia should remain responsible for a transfer window of enormous importance. Those decisions belong higher up the chain, which is why my frustration with this summer ultimately leads back to Fenway Sports Group.

That is a significant change for me.

I have never been instinctively FSG-out. There were too many obvious reasons to resist that position and, for most of their ownership, too few convincing answers to the question that matters most when demanding somebody sells a football club: who comes next?

Liverpool have achieved extraordinary things under FSG. They returned to the summit of English football, won the Champions League and became one of the most powerful commercial institutions in the game. Anfield has been expanded, the training infrastructure transformed and the value of the club has multiplied spectacularly.

Those things happened on their watch and they deserve credit for them.

Gratitude, however, cannot become permanent immunity from scrutiny.

Football clubs change. Owners change. Circumstances change. The qualities required to rescue Liverpool from the state FSG inherited are not necessarily the qualities required to keep Liverpool ahead of Manchester City, Arsenal, Chelsea and Europe’s wealthiest clubs more than 15 years later.

My view now is straightforward. FSG have reached their sell-by date at Liverpool.

For years, the absence of an attractive alternative made me reluctant to say that. That position has changed. There is now the prospect of serious new investment and potentially a different ownership future. For the first time, I can look beyond FSG without feeling that Liverpool would necessarily be exchanging stability for roulette.

I want owners who desperately want Liverpool to win and demonstrate that ambition through their actions. I want an ownership group obsessed with appointing the best football executives available, retaining them, challenging them and ensuring the football operation has a clear direction from one season to the next.

That does not mean demanding a billionaire behaves like somebody playing Football Manager with the financial restrictions switched off. Liverpool do not need owners who simply throw money at every problem.

This summer should have taught us that money without coherent planning solves remarkably little.

Liverpool need leadership.

Executive Churn Has Become Impossible to Ignore

The sporting-director model is supposed to protect a football club from short-term thinking.

Managers live from Saturday to Saturday. A bad month can alter their future. Four defeats can turn a long-term project into a crisis. Sporting executives are supposed to operate on a different clock, thinking about the centre-back required in two years, the midfielder whose contract needs resolving now, the academy player who might save £50 million later and the age profile of a squad before it becomes a problem.

Liverpool have increasingly struggled to maintain that continuity.

Michael Edwards left, returned in a broader position and has now decided to leave again. Julian Ward had his period of responsibility. Jörg Schmadtke came and went. Hughes arrived with the expectation that he would provide the stability and strategic direction associated with the modern sporting-director model, and now he too is heading towards the exit.

At some point, turnover stops looking unfortunate and starts looking structural.

One of the discussions I reviewed while putting this piece together made the point that Liverpool need a sporting director prepared to become the long-term strategist of the football club. That should be an obvious requirement. The person responsible for designing the squad cannot constantly be somebody who might not be around to see the design completed.

It cannot be easy operating at executive level under FSG. Too many capable people have occupied important positions without staying long enough to provide the continuity the model supposedly prizes. That does not absolve Hughes of his mistakes, but it does force the question of why Liverpool repeatedly find themselves replacing people whose job is supposed to provide stability.

The next appointment therefore matters enormously.

I do not want Liverpool merely rearranging the existing hierarchy and announcing continuity as though continuity itself is virtuous. Sometimes an organisation reaches the point where continuity means preserving the problem.

Liverpool need someone with authority, imagination and enough security to tell ownership uncomfortable truths. They need somebody capable of looking three years ahead while still understanding that September 2026 matters. The club’s youth recruitment has been praised throughout the summer for appearing proactive and forward-looking, which makes the contrast with the first-team operation even harder to accept.

That competence needs to exist at the top of the football pyramid.

FSG’s responsibility is to make sure it does.

Fan Media Must Serve Supporters, Not the Club

There is another part of this summer that has bothered me, and it reaches beyond transfers.

It has been fascinating watching criticism of Hughes become considerably more fashionable as his departure approaches.

Where was some of this scrutiny when it could actually have mattered?

I understand how football media works. Access matters. Relationships matter. Information has value, particularly in an industry where one reliable piece of transfer news can produce enormous traffic. Journalists need sources and clubs need journalists. There has always been a degree of mutual dependency.

That relationship becomes uncomfortable when scrutiny starts disappearing.

A Liverpool patch journalist once told me something that has stayed with me. He said Tony Barrett, Liverpool’s press officer, would generally only contact them over something they had written or said if it was unequivocally false or potentially defamatory.

I cannot independently establish whether that approach applies universally, my own experiences with Tony are very different, so I can only relate what I was told.

If it’s accurate, however, I find the implications more troubling rather than reassuring.

If journalists covering Liverpool are genuinely able to express critical opinions without fearing that every uncomfortable sentence will cost them access, why does so much coverage still seem to land remarkably close to the interpretation most favourable to the club?

This summer has produced endless variations of familiar arguments. Liverpool are calm. Liverpool will only move for the right player. Liverpool are comfortable with their options. Liverpool will not be drawn into paying inflated prices. Liverpool trust their young players. Liverpool are prepared to wait.

Individually, any of those positions can be perfectly reasonable.

Repeated often enough while obvious weaknesses remain unresolved, they begin to feel less like analysis and more like insulation.

The problem becomes even greater when fan media behaves similarly.

I work in fan media. I understand the pressures involved and I certainly do not believe our job is to tell supporters what they want to hear. That would be every bit as dishonest as parroting the club. Sometimes the most useful thing a fan outlet can do is tell its audience that the club is right and the prevailing supporter anger is misplaced.

Independence works both ways.

But fan media has no meaningful purpose if proximity to Liverpool becomes more important than telling Liverpool supporters what we genuinely think.

A relationship with the club would be welcome, but only if it still allowed the outlet to remain honest with supporters.

That should be the minimum standard.

Liverpool already have a communications department. They do not need fan channels volunteering for another shift.

Nor do supporters need to be repeatedly persuaded that concerns they can see with their own eyes are somehow imaginary. Szoboszlai playing at right-back happened. Liverpool exploring another right-back happened. Jones leaving without a midfield replacement happened. Iraola publicly describing the squad as thin happened. The late attempts to reshape the attack happened.

Supporters noticing the implications of those things were not being hysterical.

Too often this summer, legitimate concern was treated as impatience from people who supposedly did not understand Liverpool’s sophisticated way of operating. Then, as the deadline approached and the promised bigger picture failed to materialise, some of the tone suddenly changed.

That is precisely why independent voices matter.

The job is not to be permanently angry. It is not to declare every transfer failure catastrophic or treat every owner as an enemy. It is to examine what is happening, apply the same standards regardless of who provides access and be prepared to reach an unfashionable conclusion before that conclusion becomes safe.

I went early on Hughes and took criticism for it.

I wish events had made me look foolish.

Liverpool Need New Energy Above Iraola

My concern with FSG therefore goes much deeper than whether another £50 million could have been spent this summer.

I no longer trust the structure to maximise Liverpool’s position.

That is the issue.

This is one of the biggest football clubs on the planet, generating enormous revenues and carrying extraordinary commercial power. Liverpool should be capable of combining financial discipline with sporting ambition. They should be able to plan beyond one window without leaving the current manager short. They should be capable of retaining outstanding executives or replacing them without repeatedly creating periods of uncertainty.

Most importantly, success should create momentum.

Winning should make Liverpool hungrier.

There was a time under FSG when Liverpool appeared to have discovered something close to the ideal formula. Smart recruitment, elite coaching, improving revenues and a clear football identity combined to produce one of the finest teams in the club’s history.

That achievement will always belong partly to the ownership.

So will what followed.

The standards cannot be frozen at the moment Liverpool finally climbed back onto the perch. Great institutions become vulnerable when yesterday’s achievement is allowed to justify tomorrow’s caution.

I want Liverpool behaving like a club that regards winning as the beginning of another challenge rather than the completion of one.

For the first time during FSG’s ownership, I believe the best route towards that future is for somebody else to take responsibility for it.

That does not make FSG terrible owners. It does not erase the trophies, the rebuilt stands, the training ground or the years when their model worked brilliantly.

It means their Liverpool story feels finished.

Every ownership eventually reaches the point where the question changes from what it has achieved to whether it remains capable of taking the club somewhere new.

I think Liverpool have reached it.

The next ownership must bring more than money. It needs football expertise, ambition, accountability and a willingness to build an executive structure populated by people who actually intend to remain long enough to execute a strategy.

Because the most expensive footballers in the world cannot compensate indefinitely for uncertainty above them.

And that brings us to the person who should carry the least responsibility for any of this.

Andoni Iraola.

Iraola Deserves Patience, Liverpool Still Deserve Our Support

Andoni Iraola cannot spend the next nine months answering for the summer Liverpool have just endured.

There will be plenty he should answer for himself. Managers make mistakes. They select the wrong team, persist with combinations that are not working and occasionally make substitutions that leave thousands of people wondering whether they have been watching the same match. Iraola should receive no exemption from normal football criticism simply because Liverpool’s recruitment has been poor.

He should receive time.

That distinction will become important if this season develops as I suspect it might.

Liverpool are going to be volatile.

There is enough attacking quality in this team to destroy opponents. There are also enough structural weaknesses to make Liverpool vulnerable against sides capable of finding them. Some weekends may provide both experiences within the same 90 minutes.

That is why the opening two 2-2 draws have felt almost like trailers for the season ahead.

There will be big wins. There will probably be some heavy defeats. I expect Liverpool to draw far too many matches because the attack will rescue games the rest of the team has allowed to drift away, while defensive vulnerabilities will squander advantages the forwards have created.

At times it could be exhilarating.

At others it will be maddening.

Iraola has been given one of the best collections of attacking footballers in Europe and a squad behind them requiring considerable improvisation. The resources I reviewed repeatedly returned to the number of favourable outcomes Liverpool now need, from Barcola adapting immediately and young players developing quickly to injuries clearing up and the manager somehow discovering a midfield balance capable of protecting the defence without suffocating the attack.

That reliance on fortune should influence how we judge the manager.

Iraola did not arrive at Liverpool believing the squad was complete. His comments on August 21 were unusually revealing. He spoke about Liverpool still being “quite thin”, referred to signing players in the plural and emphasised the importance of what the squad would look like once the window had closed.

Bradley Barcola subsequently arrived.

The other reinforcements did not.

It therefore seems absurd to spend the coming months pretending Iraola received everything he expected and judging him accordingly.

He was appointed because Liverpool wanted his football. That football demands energy. It requires intensity, aggression and players capable of repeatedly performing high-output actions. It also creates a requirement for rotation because human beings cannot perform like machines three times a week from August until May.

If the squad begins to look tired, remember the summer.

If Szoboszlai is required at right-back while midfield looks short, remember the summer.

If a teenager is asked to play more football than would ordinarily be sensible, remember the summer.

If injuries leave Liverpool’s bench looking painfully light during a Champions League week, remember the summer.

Those are not excuses prepared in advance for Iraola. They are context.

The manager’s responsibility is to extract as much as possible from what he has been given. Our responsibility as observers is to judge him against reality rather than the imaginary squad Liverpool might have assembled.

Fourth Place Feels Like Both Ceiling and Floor

So what does that reality mean for Liverpool’s season?

My expectation is fourth.

Strangely, fourth currently feels close to both the ceiling and the floor.

Football can always make a fool of anyone confident enough to predict it in September, so I am not suggesting Liverpool are somehow guaranteed Champions League qualification. Injuries in the wrong positions could turn the season into something much uglier.

I simply look around the Premier League and struggle to find four teams that should finish above Liverpool.

Arsenal, Manchester City and Chelsea are different.

Squad for squad, I think all three are substantially better equipped for a league campaign than Liverpool. They have greater balance, more solutions across positions and fewer areas where a single injury could cause the structure to wobble.

Liverpool’s advantage is at the sharp end.

There is a serious argument that Iraola has the best strike force in the Premier League.

Barcola, Alexander Isak, Florian Wirtz, Cody Gakpo and Victor Muñoz give Liverpool a concentration of attacking talent that could make a mockery of pessimism on any given afternoon. Add the younger options and the eventual return of Hugo Ekitike, and there will be games when Liverpool simply possess too much quality for opponents to contain.

Keeping Gakpo was therefore essential.

I understood the temptation when an offer of around £85 million was being discussed. If Iraola genuinely believed Barcola plus a more natural right-sided attacker would improve his team, selling Gakpo at that valuation could have been defended as part of a deliberate reconstruction.

That depended upon the reconstruction actually happening.

Once the alternatives became enormous fees for players Liverpool were apparently unconvinced by, retaining Gakpo became the only sensible decision. He has started the season well, provides goals and can operate across the attack. More importantly, his departure would have removed another proven senior footballer from a squad already struggling for depth.

The episode encapsulated the window. A potentially clever decision became dangerous because the supporting work had not been completed.

Liverpool should still have too much for Manchester United, Tottenham Hotspur, Aston Villa and Newcastle United over 38 matches.

That is not arrogance. All four can beat Liverpool. Some may do so this season. They all possess enough quality to have periods when they look capable of pushing higher.

My judgement is simply that Liverpool’s attacking ceiling should eventually separate them.

Fourth place and a decent Champions League run are therefore realistic. With some luck, Liverpool might do better. A favourable draw in Europe, returning players, Barcola settling immediately and Iraola finding the right formula could transform the mood quickly.

There is something desperately underwhelming about writing those words on September 2.

Liverpool should not have entered this season hoping to secure fourth.

A club with these revenues, this recent expenditure, this stadium, this support and this collection of elite attackers should have been preparing to challenge for the Premier League.

Instead, two matches into a new managerial era, I find myself looking at fourth place as a sensible outcome.

That feels pathetic.

It also feels realistic.

Perhaps Iraola will make that assessment look embarrassingly conservative. I hope he does.

There is certainly enough talent to imagine periods of spectacular football. When Wirtz, Barcola and Isak begin to understand one another, Liverpool could become devastating. Muñoz has already supplied energy and directness. Gakpo looks rejuvenated. Szoboszlai has the athletic capacity to become hugely important wherever Iraola eventually settles him.

There will be nights at Anfield when all of it catches fire.

My concern is everything that happens between them.

League titles are built as much on mundane Saturdays as spectacular Sundays. They are won when a tired team gets through an away match after travelling in Europe, when the first-choice right-back is unavailable, when a midfielder needs resting and when the manager can change three players without changing the quality of the team.

That is where Liverpool’s summer may extract its price.

The season consequently feels destined to become a rollercoaster, with enough brilliance to keep dragging us upwards and enough imbalance to send us hurtling back down.

I am not particularly looking forward to that uncertainty.

I am determined to enjoy Liverpool anyway.

Anger Must Stop at the Touchline

This is where supporters have a choice.

For months, transfers have dominated almost every conversation surrounding Liverpool. Sporting directors, owners, net spend, contracts, valuations, deadlines and recruitment strategy have become the language through which we discuss the club.

Some of that is unavoidable. I have contributed plenty of it myself.

The window is closed now.

Richard Hughes cannot sign a midfielder on Friday morning. FSG cannot manufacture a right-back halfway through the second half against Ipswich. Complaining about the construction of the squad will remain legitimate, particularly when the consequences become visible, but the people capable of changing it have temporarily left the stage.

What remains is Liverpool.

I want Iraola to succeed.

I want Barcola to become one of the best attackers in Europe.

I want Isak scoring relentlessly. I want Wirtz producing the football that made Liverpool believe he was worth building around. I want Muñoz terrifying full-backs. I want Gakpo’s revival to continue. I want Nyoni to receive opportunities because his talent demands them, rather than because the club left the manager without another choice.

And if Szoboszlai really is going to play right-back, I will happily discover that we have accidentally found the Hungarian Cafu.

There is no contradiction in any of that.

Supporting Liverpool does not require approving of the people running Liverpool.

Wanting FSG gone does not mean wanting FSG’s team to lose.

Believing Hughes has performed badly does not require hoping his signings fail so that an old opinion looks clever.

Football becomes miserable when every match is reduced to evidence in an argument.

A player you dislike misplaces a pass and you feel vindicated. A signing you opposed misses a chance and your first instinct is to revisit the transfer fee. A manager you doubted loses a game and suddenly being right becomes more satisfying than Liverpool winning would have been.

I have no interest in spending a season like that.

One of the strongest themes running through the supporter discussions after the window closed was that, however badly people felt Liverpool had handled the summer, there was still a world in which this team could succeed. Once the transfer noise stops, the manager, players and supporters have to get on with the season together.

That is where I am.

I have spent months criticising Hughes. I have reached the point where I want FSG to sell. I think Liverpool have badly mishandled a crucial period and unnecessarily restricted what their new manager can achieve.

I also cannot wait to see Barcola in red.

Both things can be true without weakening either conviction.

Patience with Iraola will be particularly important because the temptation to transfer our anger towards him will arrive quickly if results wobble. Liverpool supporters have spent the summer being promised a finished picture. If the picture now looks incomplete on the pitch, the easiest person to blame will be the man standing beside it every weekend.

We should resist that.

Judge his tactics. Question his selections. Debate his substitutions. If he repeatedly makes the same mistake, say so.

Give him the opportunity to build something first.

Liverpool knew what sort of coach they were appointing. They knew the physical demands of his football and they knew the squad he inherited. If they failed to provide all the tools required to implement that football, the manager cannot be expected to manufacture them from thin air.

Anfield can at least provide something recruitment failed to deliver.

Support.

There will be enough pressure outside the stadium. Iraola does not need the first months of his Liverpool career conducted against a soundtrack of resentment aimed at people sitting several floors above him.

For 90 minutes, forget them.

This season now belongs to those wearing the shirt, the man coaching them and the people willing them forward.

Perhaps fourth really is the ceiling.

Perhaps Liverpool will draw far too many games, suffer a couple of horrible defeats and spend the spring protecting Champions League qualification.

Perhaps the attack will become so good that all my concerns look absurd.

I would love that.

Because after months spent discussing sporting directors, ownership structures, contracts and transfer strategy, I would quite like to get back to the reason any of this mattered in the first place.

I want to enjoy Liverpool again.

Liverpool Have to Play Through the Rain

So we return to that house.

The kitchen is beautiful. The furniture is expensive. There are rooms capable of taking your breath away.

The roof still leaks.

You can argue with the builder about how it happened. You can question why problems identified months ago were never repaired. You can decide that the people who own the property have had their time and somebody else should eventually be trusted with the keys.

You still have to live there.

That is where Liverpool supporters find themselves now.

For the next nine months, Richard Hughes matters considerably less than Bradley Barcola. Ownership structures matter less on a Friday night at Anfield than whether Alexander Isak puts the ball in the net. Transfer strategy cannot help when Iraola needs a goal with 20 minutes remaining.

There will be another time for all of that. January will arrive. Another summer will follow. Hughes will leave, Liverpool’s executive structure will change and questions surrounding FSG’s future will become impossible to avoid.

Until then, anger at how Liverpool have been run cannot become indifference towards Liverpool itself.

I have no intention of spending this season hoping to be proved right.

I want to be spectacularly wrong.

I want fourth place to look laughably pessimistic by Christmas. I want Barcola, Isak and Wirtz to terrorise the Premier League. I want Iraola to find solutions I cannot currently see. I want Champions League nights at Anfield when nobody is thinking about sporting directors, net spend or contracts because Liverpool are too busy reminding Europe what the place can become.

That possibility remains.

Football has never respected spreadsheets, predictions or September certainty. Great teams have emerged from imperfect circumstances before. Managers have solved problems recruitment departments could not. Young players have developed faster than anyone expected. Supporters have helped ordinary nights become extraordinary ones.

Liverpool will need plenty of that this season.

They will need luck with injuries, patience with a new manager and resilience when the weaknesses left by this summer inevitably surface. Above all, they will need Anfield to recognise where responsibility belongs.

I can want new ownership and still desperately want Liverpool to win.

I can believe Richard Hughes failed at his job and still celebrate every goal scored by the players he signed.

I can fear what this squad lacks while being excited by everything it possesses.

That is football. Supporting a club was never supposed to be an exercise in intellectual consistency. It is emotional, irrational and occasionally ridiculous. It is walking towards the ground convinced there are problems everywhere and, by kick-off, believing your team can beat anyone.

That is the Liverpool I want back.

FSG must answer for the direction of the club. Whoever succeeds Hughes must repair the planning that has left Iraola unnecessarily exposed. Liverpool’s next football operation needs to be bolder, smarter and considerably more stable.

Those arguments can wait until the final whistle.

For now, the builders have gone.

We are still living in the house.

And until somebody finally fixes the roof, Liverpool are going to have to play through the rain.

Leave a comment

Liverpool are in a scramble for the last few days of the transfer window. Cody Gakpo is seemingly one step away from joining Manchester City.

Richard Hughes and his recruitment team are now left searching for replacements. We say replacements in plural because there is an understanding that if Gakpo were to leave, Liverpool would probably need not one but two more additions in the forward line, and that’s before we mention all the other reinforcements that are needed in other areas of the pitch.

So far there’s a lot of speculation about Ismaila Sarr and Yankuba Minteh. But lots of journalists including Fabrizio Romano have hinted at Liverpool looking at a ‘mystery’ attacker.

So just who could this mystery attacker be?

Let’s have a look at some of the alternative options.

William Gomes

The Porto winger has been spoken about quite a lot without there being any concrete links. Gomes fits the profile. He is young, left-footed and he is very quick.

He is a decent one vs one wing, but he is more of a young Mo Salah profile in the sense that rather than facilitating attackers and looking to create chances, a lot of times he is looking to create a chance for himself to shoot.

Gomes will look to cut onto his left foot and unleash a shot most of the time.

This is his action map from Scoutlabs. As you can see there are a lot of runs, some passes across the box. But very few crosses. And most of his runs end with him cutting into the middle.

Hit shooting map is a demonstration of that. Gomes takes a lot of shots from areas where you’d expect Mo Salah to shoot from. But his shot selection when you watch him in action can still be poor, he doesn’t always find the separation from the defender and while he does have a good left foot, it is inconsistent.

He has outperformed his xG by 0.12 per 90 minutes, which is quite unsustainable.

Read more

Liverpool’s 2-2 draw with Nottingham Forest is the sort of Premier League game that becomes more interesting the longer you spend looking at the numbers.

At first glance, Liverpool controlled it. They had 69% possession, attempted 631 passes and completed 562 at an impressive 89%. Nottingham Forest attempted only 288 passes, completing 193 at 67%.

Liverpool also had 13 shots to Forest’s 12 and four efforts on target to three.

Yet Forest produced 2.30 expected goals to Liverpool’s 1.75, recorded five big chances to Liverpool’s one and actually had more touches inside the opposition penalty area, 23 to 21.

That is an extraordinary collection of numbers for a team with only 31% of the ball.

For me, this is where the early challenge facing Andoni Iraola becomes clear. Liverpool are beginning to resemble the side he wants them to become, particularly in their willingness to stretch the pitch and attack with numbers. Their control of possession currently offers too little protection when moves break down.

Forest understood that vulnerability extremely well.

Read more

£85m for Cody Gakpo is a serious offer. If Andoni Iraola genuinely believes Bradley Barcola plus a different profile on the right, whether that is Sarr, Minteh, Fernandez-Pardo (yet another left-sided player) or somebody else, gives Liverpool the attack he wants, then the manager deserves our backing.

The problem is Richard Hughes has done almost nothing this summer to earn the benefit of the doubt.

Liverpool have 3 days to replace Gakpo when it’s taken most of the window to address an attack already lacking depth. Szoboszlai finished our first home game at right-back (it may actually be his position, gulp). Ekitike is unavailable. Isak cannot be expected to carry the centre-forward position alone. There are holes everywhere, square pegs filling them, and around ten senior players heading towards the final year of their contracts.

That’s incompetence. That’s neglect.

I went early on Hughes after the Diomande debacle and took plenty of criticism for it. I wish I had been wrong. Instead, every week seems to bring another example of a sporting director operating without a convincing plan, reacting late, shopping beneath the required level, and leaving the manager to make sense of a squad assembled without proper balance.

If Hughes were not seemingly edging towards Saudi Arabia, the calls for his dismissal would already be deafening.

FSG deserve their share of this too. They appointed him, empowered him, and have allowed Liverpool to drift through a summer where the manager appears to be accepting whatever is available from a late trolley dash.

None of this is the players’ fault. I also struggle to believe this is the happy transition some keep portraying. How could it be with this much uncertainty?

I want to enjoy Liverpool. I want Iraola to succeed. I want to be proved spectacularly wrong.

Yet Champions League qualification currently feels like the ceiling, two games into a new era.

Liverpool are too big for Richard Hughes, too big for second and third choices, and increasingly too big for an ownership model whose sell by date has passed.

I hope this time next year serious people are running the football operation.

Leave a comment