Liverpool 5-1 Frankfurt: Data-Driven Dominance or Tactical Mirage?
Frankfurt’s Tactical Curveball and Why It Didn’t Work
Liverpool’s 5-1 dismantling of Eintracht Frankfurt in the Champions League was a result that asked for headlines. But behind the goals and the scoreline, it felt like something more important. This was less a eureka moment and more a glimpse of what Slot’s Liverpool might look like when it works.
We saw control. We saw tactical clarity. And for the first time in a while, we saw a game where Liverpool weren’t chasing the chaos. Slot’s men imposed their rhythm. It wasn’t flawless, but it was structured. It was deliberate.
The formation flexed between a 4-4-2 out of possession and a 2-3-5 with the ball. Curtis Jones and Dominik Szoboszlai operated as a genuine double pivot, offering stability and tempo. Florian Wirtz floated freely in the right half-space, with Jeremie Frimpong stretching wide. Hugo Ekitike and Alexander Isak formed a loose front two that still needs refining but had moments of punch.
Put simply, Liverpool played their football, not Frankfurt’s.
Why Frankfurt’s Tactical Gamble Backfired
Eintracht Frankfurt turned up with a surprise shape. They’d shown 4-2-3-1 in Europe, 4-4-2 in the Bundesliga, and had dabbled with a back five, but not like this. On the night, they set up in a reactive 5-2-3 aimed at shutting down Liverpool’s wide spaces and transition lanes.
It was the kind of setup teams are starting to throw at Liverpool, especially when there is a clear talent deficit. But here’s the thing. If you’re not organised, aggressive or brave enough to commit to the second ball, you just become easy to pass around.
Frankfurt’s defence collapsed under basic scrutiny. They lost the duel count 27 to 26, and were outmuscled in the air, winning just 4 aerial duels to Liverpool’s 7.
They made more tackles (13 to 7) and interceptions (11 to 6) as they constantly scrambled to close Liverpool’s passing lanes.
But defending volume doesn’t equal defending well. Liverpool won more duels, beat more players one-v-one (9 successful dribbles to 4), and played with far more control.
One standout stat? Frankfurt had 26 clearances to Liverpool’s 14, not because they defended better, but because they had to defend more. They were under pressure. Liverpool were not.
This isn’t just about effort. It’s structural. Frankfurt were a team playing against instinct. They don’t usually build this way and they looked like it. They pressed inconsistently and offered huge gaps between their back five and midfield two. Liverpool thrived in those pockets.