Football is complex. Football teams are also built from intricate, interdependent systems.
It means that when a team loses a player like Virgil van Dijk,
the resulting effect isn’t localised or confined to the centre of defence.
First and foremost, Van Dijk is a world-class
defender. His aerial ability, positioning and recovery speed not only protects Liverpool’s goal,
but also allows them to play a high defensive line. It means that they can defend forwards,
pushing up to win the ball, rather than defending backwards by retreating towards their own goal.
This is easier when Van Dijk is in the team.
It also has a knock-on effect: Liverpool’s overall high line
means that they can press closer to the opposition goal – another crucial element of their game.
But what about Van Dijk’s influence
on transitional phases and attacking play?
Firstly – his passing.
Liverpool play a lot of long balls and a lot of these come from Van Dijk.
It makes sense. Mohanmed Salah and Sadio Mane are wide attackers
who thrive on running into space and onto balls played into the channels.
These can come from higher up the pitch – a Roberto Firmino through pass or a switch of
play from a full-back – but many come directly from Van Dijk. They may not lead directly to a
goalscoring opportunity, but they transition Liverpool high up the pitch and sometimes
create either one-on-situations with isolated defenders or, if possession is turned over,
a chance for a counter-press.
Another part of Van Dijk’s role is to provide cover for his outside full-back,
usually Trent Alexander-Arnold, who is able to push higher. The loss of Van Dijk has not
only reduced that security – it has also forced the displacement of other players.
When Jordan Henderson or Fabinho are needed
to play at centre-back, one of the two midfielders adept at providing further cover is also missing.
Henderson especially creates a clever shield on the right, as well as pushing up to offer an
inside passing option for Alexander-Arnold. If Henderson is playing in defence,
or the centre-back behind Henderson is less reliable, Liverpool are without that facility.
If Henderson and
Fabinho are playing at centre-back, Liverpool need to rethink their defensive structure in midfield,
and this can limit the ability of the full-backs to push forward.
As a pair, Alexander-Arnold and Robertson are very aggressive but they also work in
harmony with one another, and in a rhythm that has been developed over several years.
Any change to the defensive or midfield chemistry disrupts that, causing hesitations, changes in
position and – ultimately – less efficiency.
Looking at Liverpool’s average positions, we can see how this effect manifests.
Against Arsenal, before the Van Dijk injury in a 3-1 win, the average set-up was exactly
as expected – a high line, full-backs pushing up quite a bit, wingers tucking inside, and a
tight midfield screen, with Henderson slightly more advanced to support Alexander-Arnold.
Against Newcastle, Burnley, and Manchester United in recent league fixtures, though, the shape of
the team has been dramatically different.
It’s less compact, less structured, and there are gaps - especially in central midfield. Liverpool
are trying to force transitions through the middle of the pitch rather than going
wide or over the top. Thiago wants to play these passes from higher positions than Van Dijk would,
and more centrally than Alexander-Arnold.
Players are therefore pushed forwards, creating less space and meaning that
Salah and Mane can’t as easily run onto long balls or angled crosses from deeper positions.
As a result, Firmino has become the dominant shooter by volume and is less able to drop off
to link play as well.
It creates twin problems, each of which is a major factor in Liverpool’s low scoring:
Firmino is a less adept finisher but his ability to create chances for Mane and Salah
has also been inhibited.
It shows the ripple effect and how an absence at one end of the pitch can cause symptoms at
the other.
In a more literal way, that can also be seen at set pieces, at which van Dijk is both a scoring
threat and a disruptive influence on marking systems. Last season, he scored five league goals.
The season before that, four. He also caused teams difficulties, opening space
for other players at set pieces. This is another factor in the blunting of Liverpool’s attack.
So Van Dijk’s absence has changed how Liverpool play and how well they function in attack,
defence, and transition. In other words: it’s a loss felt in every department of the game.
Which is to say nothing of his intangible
qualities, such as familiarity and leadership, or his capacity to organise the defence.
Yes, Liverpool are still an excellent
team and this period may help Jurgen Klopp find solutions to how his side can play facing
different challenges but there’s no doubt that Van Dijk’s injury has had a huge knock-on effect.
It might be hard to quantify but it’s easy to see.