Liverpool’s start to the season has been a good one, objectively. 4 wins 1 draw, this includes an admirable draw away at Stamford Bridge against a re-emerging Chelsea team, a 2–1 win against Eddie Howe’s Newcastle after being down to 10 men for the majority of the game and comprehensively subduing Emery’s Aston Villa with a 3–0 whitewash. Things are good, however the purpose of this excerpt isn’t to explain our results but to attempt to comment and explore Liverpool’s tactical journey in these first 5 games (may include a reference of our pre-season games), the reason for this is because it is clear Liverpool are in the earlier stages of their development in regards to how Jurgen Klopp would like to setup the team and I would like to attempt to offer a consistent commentary on this journey, this will by no means be comprehensive or detailed (I will not be using any video, photo, data analysis) , I am, for the most part treating this as an exercise, my aim is to briefly conceptualise a selection of theories I have surrounding the team, post it, to hopefully spark a discussion and then, most importantly be able to look back upon this piece and investigate the instances where my thinking failed me and where it did not. It is important to note that it has only been 5 games, small sample size, as they say (who cares).
Liverpool’s bread and butter thus far has been their attacking play. More specifically, the individuals who are pulling their weight the most seem to be the attackers, one could argue Liverpool’s functionality hasn’t been as smooth as they would like it to be, clear issues in regards to the pressing scheme, build-up and defensive stability will need to be answered as time goes on but for now Liverpool’s attackers are being decisive in the key moments, Nunez vs Newcastle, Salah and Trent’s creativity, Diaz’ gravity and (somewhat) unpredictability, Szoboszlai’s unrelenting engine are all examples of the ‘individual’ spurring the ‘collective’ forward, rather than it being the other way round. This obviously isn’t a coincidence, Liverpool have been down to 10 men twice this season and both times individual players have risen to the occasion, one would argue this: the game-states Liverpool have found themselves in this season form the conditions for the possibilities of their individual players to shine in the way they have. My rebuttal would be this, why did Liverpool start so badly vs Newcastle? Why did Liverpool struggle to control the game after Chelsea equalised? These questions are awkward, but it is undoubtedly a significant positive to see Liverpool still have remnants of the mental strength that has been associated with Klopp teams of the past, comebacks like the one vs Newcastle can only be achieved if squad morale is high and there is a togetherness and belief within the squad. Liverpool are clearly doing better than most teams in this regard.
More needs to be seen of Liverpool when the game-state is even, the first encounter of the season at Stamford Bridge presented these conditions and Liverpool struggled, after Chelsea equalised Liverpool look ill-equipped in regards to slowing the game down to generate dominance of their own, a lack of a defensive powerhouse who can break up attacks while also modelling calmness and pausa to control and direct games in the manner that is needed Liverpool is something that should be noted and bared in mind for the rest of the season, it is something that will constantly come back to haunt Klopp again and again as the season goes on. It must also be mentioned that Liverpool have shown they have they have the ability to play in the manner listed above when the game-state is even, Aston Villa is a solid example and Liverpool will do well to take a lot of positives from this game however to me it seems like there is more proof that Liverpool are struggling to control games in the manner mentioned above, Arsenal, West Ham, Spurs are games from last season that come to mind. It has also occurred to me how suited Liverpool’s style of play is to chasing games. High intensity pressing/counter-pressing & and having a somewhat direct approach on the ball (Trent) are psychologically easier to do when you need to chase the game, when the game state is even or when Liverpool are ahead, there is less of psychological urge or incentive to really get into the groove and play this type of football, i suspect this is apart of the set of reasons why Liverpool struggle in the game-states mentioned above.
Liverpool’s buildup has been inventive and creative, it seems to be built around the idea of generating positional superiority, using rotations and combinations to allow Trent to receive the ball (in central areas, generally) facing forwards with time and space to find players between the lines, play passes to either winger to generate 1v1s or passes in behind for the striker. Liverpool are more comfortable and able at keeping the ball in the buildup third, MacAllister, Jones, Szoboszlai are all capable of receiving the ball under pressure and playing. In regards to medium-long term tactical development, Liverpool’s buildup has improved somewhat due to the individual qualities of said players and a somewhat clear tactical plan to progress the ball through the thirds through the use of various tactics to generate specific situations (usually Trent, facing forwards with options between the lines, out wide or in-behind), some of the tactics listed here: third man combinations, overload to isolate, positionally rotations, pinning etc are used with this intent in mind. However it is clear that Liverpool’s buildup isn’t as stable as one would like it to be, the first 20 minutes vs Newcastle comes to mind; Liverpool seemed to sink back into old habits (building down the sides rather than going through the centre, ill timing of vertical passes to progress the ball, supporting ball carrier with options around the ball, staggering and so forth), it is clear that a high-press is something that can cause Liverpool problems and it is something that will need to be addressed as the season goes on.
It should also be noted that this improvement in buildup can be traced back to Trent’s inversion against Arsenal last season, when Liverpool changed to the new system, 3–2–2–3, which brings me on to my next point.
I have been careful to not call the new system the ‘box midfield’ this is because I do not believe we are deploying this tactic (obviously), the sole purpose of a box midfield is to generate superiority through the occupation of the central zones to either play through the centre or through occupying the centre to generate space elsewhere, in my opinion you hardly see Liverpool’s ‘box’ occupy the centre in the manner I’ve explained above, Jones who has played most of his minutes in the left 8 position often drifts to the wide zones to allow Diaz to invert further infield, Szoboszlai on the other side seems to be functioning in a similar fashion whilst being more positionally free. Though Liverpool have deployed such tactics during pre-season, the game vs Leicester comes to mind. All in all, Liverpool’s midfield is too fluid and positionally free to be called a ‘box’ midfield, nor does Klopp care for generating central superiority exclusively in the manner City do.
I also noticed earlier in the season the nature of Liverpool’s press, I would describe it as timid, cautious and laidback (vs Chelsea, Bournemouth and Newcastle), our number 9 was largely tasked with cover-shadowing the oppositions double pivot/6 whilst our wingers pressed from out to in (blocking passing lane into fullback whilst attempting to press outside centre-backs), with our midfield trio, blocking (central) space whilst being ready to jump if the ball was played into the centre, however it seemed to me that this pressing scheme often afforded at least one of the opposition centre-backs too much time on the ball (usually the CCB), with Liverpool’s pressing cohort more concerned with blocking (central) space rather than also limiting the amount of time the ball-carrier had on the ball, it was beginning to be a problem, against Chelsea I recall Thiago Silva constantly having the luxury of finding Reece James and Sterling, which generated 2v1 situations against our backline, Klopp even goes on to mention this in his press conference after the game. So in short Liverpool’s passive approach in their pressing scheme posed some questions that needed to be answered, however against Aston Villa this was rectified, with Liverpool’s press being much more aggressive and front-footed, one of the tweaks being the reluctance to give Villa’s back 3 time on the ball (Pau Torres) and the aggressiveness of the full-backs backing up the press (Trent x Robbo would both press Villa’s full-backs in the event that the distance was too far for our #8’s), after the game I reviewed our PPDA stats and compared to previous games and the difference was light and day.
Attacking transitions and counterattacks still seem to be potent weapons for Liverpool, when defending in a low block Liverpool’s rest attackers’ positioning, socio-affection and speed during counterattacks and transitions make it very difficult for opponents to sustain pressure against Liverpool, coupled with Trent and Alisson’s ability to find runners from deep positions, teams will continuously be punished this season in the manner mentioned above. Nunez’s impact on the team in particular will increase exponentially if the team is able to generate even more attacking transitions and counter-attacks, Nunez no doubt thrives in situations where he is receiving the ball whilst ‘on the go’, arriving onto a pass is better than receiving the ball statically in his case, attacking transitions and counter-attacks naturally offer these situations more organically, hence my claim for him to be utilised in this manner. Salah, Jota, Diaz, Gakpo, Elliott, Szoboszlai are players I also want to give honourable mentions to for their transition threat.
