Carragher’s Tactical Breakdown: Why Liverpool’s Defending is “Absolutely Shocking”
Jamie Carragher has delivered a scathing assessment of Liverpool’s defensive setup under Arne Slot, warning that their current tactical approach could derail a title challenge despite the attacking flair on display.
Vulnerable in Transition
Carragher’s biggest concern is Liverpool’s openness to counter-attacks. He highlighted Antoine Semenyo’s second goal against Bournemouth, where the forward “ran nearly the length of the pitch” unchallenged, describing it as “absolutely shocking.”
For Carragher, this wasn’t an isolated error but evidence of a structural flaw: too many players committed forward, leaving acres of space for opponents to exploit.
Poor Defensive Shape
The Sky Sports pundit was particularly critical of Liverpool’s shape when leading 2-1. He noted that “maybe eight players” were caught ahead of the ball, calling this “unacceptable at the highest level.” This, he argued, reflected a lack of positional discipline and game management.
Individual Errors Compound Problems
While Carragher pointed to systemic flaws, he also singled out Ibrahima Konaté for having “a really, really poor night.” The French defender’s positioning was questioned for both of Semenyo’s goals, suggesting that lapses in individual concentration are worsening an already fragile system.
A Tactical Issue, Not a Transfer One
Carragher dismissed the idea that buying another centre-back would solve the problem:
“A centre-back doesn’t fix that. He just takes Konaté’s place.”
For him, Liverpool’s defensive weakness is rooted in tactics, not personnel.
Structural Weaknesses Identified
Carragher outlined several recurring issues in Slot’s setup:
- Both full-backs pushing high at the same time
- A No. 10 (Szoboszlai) prioritising attack over defensive duties
- An overall philosophy that prioritises offensive output at the expense of stability
These habits, he warned, make Liverpool too easy to exploit when possession is lost.
A Pattern, Not a One-Off
Carragher argued that the Bournemouth game fits a wider trend, citing collapses against:
- AC Milan (4-2 defeat)
- Athletic Club (conceded on the counter)
- Crystal Palace (Community Shield struggles)
For him, these repeated lapses prove the issues are ingrained, not circumstantial.
Clash of Philosophies: Carragher vs Slot
The debate cuts to the core of Liverpool’s footballing identity. Slot defended his approach, insisting:
“That’s who we were and who we are,”
likening his Liverpool side to PSG’s attack-first mentality.
Carragher, however, warned that such an approach, while entertaining, is “tactically unsustainable” for a team with title ambitions:
“If Liverpool continue like that, I don’t think they will win the league.”
The Search for Balance
Slot suggested that Ryan Gravenberch’s absence contributed to the defensive fragility, stressing the importance of a defensive midfielder in protecting against transitions. This hints at a partial solution through personnel choices rather than a wholesale tactical shift.
Carragher, though, is calling for better “risk management” — not defensive football, but smarter decision-making to ensure Liverpool aren’t consistently outnumbered when countered.
The Bigger Picture
Liverpool’s attacking verve under Slot is undeniable, but Carragher’s warning is clear: without defensive discipline, elite opponents will ruthlessly exploit their openness. Over a 38-game season, that could make the difference between excitement and silverware.
At the heart of this debate is a fundamental question:
Can Liverpool stay true to their attacking identity while developing the tactical balance required to win the Premier League?
