In the aftermath of Liverpool’s humbling 3-0 defeat to Manchester City, it appears Virgil van Dijk has chosen to candidly appraise his teammates’ performances. While lauded by pundit Gary Neville for sidestepping the customary post-match moaning, the Dutchman may have nonetheless levelled a veiled critique at Mohamed Salah, or perhaps more directly, at emerging talent Conor Bradley.
Van Dijk, embroiled in what many have termed a miscarriage of justice regarding his disallowed goal, maintained decorum in both his and manager Arne Slot’s post-match reflections. Both conceded that their contention with the ruling wasn’t the crux of Liverpool’s loss, as the Reds were tactically outclassed by Pep Guardiola’s men.
Liverpool were left grumbling after Andy Robertson was judged offside during Van Dijk’s headed effort, inputting queries to PGMOL and questioning the disallowed goal’s rationale in communication with referees’ chief Howard Webb.
Post-match, Van Dijk curtly commented, “I think the goal should have stood, that is all I will say. But I am not the one who is making the decisions.” His restraint here earned him accolades from Neville, who noted on his podcast, “That’s the right approach. When you’ve lost 3-0 and you’ve been well beaten, don’t whinge about a refereeing decision.”
Neville, however, wasn’t uncritical, pointing to Van Dijk’s involvement in Nico Gonzalez’s goal. Observing the Dutchman, Neville remarked, “He was just standing there and lets it hit him,” noting a peculiar movement from Van Dijk, which “kills his goalkeeper.”
In his post-match address, Van Dijk refrained from internal self-blame despite urging from critics like Roy Keane, instead highlighting the difficulties faced by Conor Bradley against City dynamo Jeremy Doku. “The first half was difficult,” Van Dijk noted. “[Doku] had a good game and it was difficult for Conor in the one on one at times.”
Alluding to Bradley’s struggles might not outright blame the young defender, but it begs the question: was there a point to pinpointing his performance? Is this omission a veiled swipe at Salah, oft criticised for his lack of defensive exertion?
Salah’s role in Liverpool’s unpressured flop has been a topic of conversation this season. The Egyptian, while devastating in attack, has attracted scrutiny for apparent defensive neglect, a liability for the young right-back covering his flank. Van Dijk’s nuanced language might suggest a growing impatience or a subtle call-to-action for more diligence from the Reds’ talisman.