Alexander Isak opened his liverpool account in the 2-2 draw with Nottingham Forest, but several former players and pundits have pointed to underlying problems that mean the Sweden striker is not yet being used in the way that made him prolific at newcastle.
- Isak scored his first goal for Liverpool against Nottingham Forest but had very low involvement earlier in the game.
- Pundits, notably Joe Hart, say Liverpool have not yet learned how to play with Isak and that he is dropping deep rather than being a clear focal point.
- High possession statistics have not yet produced the types of forward service that previously suited Isak at Newcastle.
- Manager Andoni Iraola faces a clear decision: adapt the team to Isak’s strengths or use different attacking patterns; building trust and patterns will take training time.
- Short-term solutions include role-specific training, transitional drills and selective minutes, while rapid transfer responses to short-term struggles are considered unlikely by some commentators.
What the evidence from recent games shows
Isak scored from a Cody Gakpo cross after half-time at Anfield, a goal that both the player and commentators called important for confidence. But that match also produced stark involvement numbers: during the first half he registered just six touches, one accurate pass and no shots, and finished the game with only a handful more touches overall. Those figures—reported by BBC and local coverage—underline the immediate issue: Isak is often peripheral in Liverpool’s build-up play.
Key observations from pundits
- Joe Hart (Match of the Day) argued Isak is dropping deep to receive the ball rather than staying in advanced positions, which he interprets as a sign of low confidence and a symptom of Liverpool not playing to Isak’s strengths.
- Hart and other commentators contrasted Isak’s role at Newcastle—where the team deliberately channeled play through him and teammates ‘knew where he was’—with his current position at Anfield, where that coordination and trust has not yet developed.
Why tactical fit matters for Isak
The core point in the coverage is not a criticism of Isak’s quality but a question of how Liverpool are structuring possession and attack around him. At Newcastle, Isak benefited from a dynamic that made him the clear focal point: midfielders and wide players operated with the striker’s movements in mind, producing regular forward passes and service into his preferred zones.
By contrast, early indications under Andoni Iraola show Liverpool with very high possession figures—70% against Forest, 60% in the week before—but games where they have trailed and needed to chase the match. Pundits note that Isak’s greatest strengths—timed runs behind defenders, finishing from chances created in advanced areas and a central focal role—are harder to exploit when a side dominates possession in and around an opponent’s box without the specific vertical patterns or transitional triggers that fed him at Newcastle.
Managerial dilemma: build round Isak or adapt the system?
Joe Hart framed a practical choice for Iraola: commit the attack to Isak as the primary central reference, or find a different solution within the squad. That is a decision with broader consequences. Committing to Isak means altering positional rhythms, midfield passing lanes and possibly personnel so teammates become accustomed to playing into his strengths. An alternative would be to prioritise a different attacking profile that may make more immediate use of Liverpool’s current shapes and possession tendencies.
The coverage does not claim Iraola has made a definitive choice; instead it presents the tactical conundrum and the need for training-ground work to build the necessary trust and patterns.
Context and constraints that affect short-term solutions
- Timing of the transfer and fitness: Isak had a disrupted first season at Liverpool, and commentators point to a mix of injury recovery and a late transfer window as background to his adaptation issues. Recent international form and pre-season were described as encouraging, but match-level involvement remains low.
- Possession without productivity: Early-season matches show Liverpool controlling possession heavily but still conceding leads and failing to get ahead—situations that change the kinds of chances a striker receives. Isak’s best moments historically came from transitional play and clear forward deliveries rather than extended positional build-up.
- Squad competition: Some outlets referenced other forwards at Liverpool whose form or presence could influence selection decisions, emphasising that Isak is not the only attacking option available to Iraola. That dynamic adds a performance pressure but also gives the manager tactical choices.
Realistic tactical adjustments to get more from Isak
The reporting suggests several plausible, evidence-aligned adjustments Iraola could explore without inventing specifics:
- Re-establish a clear focal structure: train midfield and wide players to anticipate Isak’s runs and prioritise forward passes into those channels so he receives the ball in more dangerous positions.
- Create transitional triggers: use counter-attacking drills and vertical switch play in training so Liverpool can reproduce the transitional patterns that suited Isak at Newcastle.
- Adjust positional instructions: encourage Isak to remain higher and occupy central defenders, while instructing supporting players to move into the half-spaces where he can exploit flick-ons and knockdowns.
- Rotation and minutes management: gradually increase his minutes in combinations that mirror successful Newcastle movements so patterns and trust can develop without exposing the team tactically.
Short-term scenarios and implications
Based on the evidence, three short-term scenarios are plausible (presented as descriptions, not predictions):
- Committed build-around approach: Liverpool alter attacking patterns to make Isak the central reference, which would take time but could restore the service that produced his high scoring at Newcastle.
- Hybrid approach: Iraola rotates tactical plans, using Isak in specific fixtures or phases while prioritising other attacking options when the match requires more intricate positional play inside the box.
- Reassessment without sale: media speculation about selling players quickly is reported by some outlets, but commentators also note Liverpool’s track record of patience with expensive signings. The coverage suggests short-term underperformance is unlikely, on its own, to force an immediate transfer decision.
What to watch next
- Isak’s involvement metrics (touches, passes into the final third, shots) over the next few league games—whether he is given a clear central role or remains peripheral.
- Iraola’s team selection and any tactical statements in match build-up that indicate a commitment to shaping play around a central striker.
- How Liverpool’s possession translates into forward passes behind the defence; an increase would be a sign the team is attempting to recreate the service Isak thrived on.
Conclusion
The available reporting does not dispute Isak’s quality; it highlights a mismatch between the striker’s proven strengths and Liverpool’s current attacking patterns. Pundits have called on Andoni Iraola to decide whether to re-centre Liverpool’s attack around Isak or to adapt selection and tactics to other players. Both choices are legitimate; the critical factor will be how quickly training and match plans can produce the forward deliveries and positional trust that made Isak effective at Newcastle.