Red Co.
Slot is out at Liverpool. This is normally the part where one says “the writing was on the wall.” In this case, it very much was not. Despite growing fan discontent and a historically poor title defense, FSG was steadfast that Arne Slot would be trusted to turn things around. Arne Slot himself was quite insistent that, as far as he knew, he was in charge next season. Apparently, the news that he was sacked was as much a surprise to him as it was to the world. He only found out hours before the public announcement. I feel for him, not just because this is the finale of a brutal public flogging. The manner of his firing was also extremely unfair and unprofessional. More than that, the timing, the process, and the chatter around the sacking have me deeply concerned about the future of the club.
READ MORE: Hard Work Fallacy by Jack Champagne
SUBSCRIBE & FOLLOW: YouTube / X (Formerly Twitter) / Instagram / TikTok / Patreon / BlueSky
My resistance to a managerial change has always been primarily rooted in one major concern. What we’re seeing on matchday is a symptom of problems so deep in the way that the club is being managed that simply changing the man in the dugout is not going to fix them. It’s at least debatable whether Slot could have turned things around had he been given another season. What’s not debatable is that, given how the club is currently being run, anyone brought in to replace Slot is going to have an extremely difficult task ahead of them. One can’t help but ask the question: why does Richard Hughes still have a job if Slot does not?
Caution: Construction
Perhaps the most serious issue is the matter of contracts. Already last season, there were signs of a very troubling failure to manage contract negotiations very well. Virgil van Dijk and Mohamed Salah received no clarity on their futures while the club vainly tried to retain Trent Alexander-Arnold.
It wasn’t until Salah publicly embarrassed them that they made moves. When Salah’s discontent became terminal, they did not negotiate a sale; they negotiated an abrupt termination that leaves us out a huge amount of money with no transfer fee to show for it. Ibou Konate is set to leave for free, despite having earlier reported that he was close to coming to terms on an extension. Losing a senior center back who, on his best days, is one of the only peers to Virgil is a huge setback. Doubly so that he’s leaving for free.
Curtis Jones, a man who should be vice captain right now, has apparently been planning to leave for Italy for months, with there being no apparent interest in his retention. You’ve got to wonder at some point what the hell is going on. Slot’s been accused of driving players away, but in at least some of these cases, unhappiness with the head coach is not explanatory. Konate’s case is especially egregious. Going from close to renewal to a Bosman in just a few months is insane. We’re told that the club was too distracted by the tumultuous end of the season. But wasn’t the whole point of separating the duties of the head coach and the sporting director to avoid splitting attention like this? Something is clearly not working with this setup.
Empty Spending
Sacking the manager after breaking the transfer record twice is also a massive embarrassment for the club. It suggests a transfer policy based on big numbers rather than sporting wisdom. As the season has played out, this has only been confirmed further.
Jeremie Frimpong, on paper an extraordinary attacking fullback to replace Trent, was completely unsuited for Arne Slot’s game plan. Well-utilized as a wide midfielder in Xabi Alonso’s 3-4-3, Slot’s more centrally-focused 4-3-3 left Frimpong isolated and ineffective. The failure to reinforce the center back position was a huge error. Palace pulling the rug out on the Guehi transfer certainly didn’t help, but we shouldn’t have bet the farm on a single marquee signing in the first place.
Having lost that race, why didn’t we find another center back in January? Had the club already lost faith in Arne Slot at that point? If so, what was the point of the media blitz with Hughes and Slot? Hughes descending from his ivory tower to reassure the fans of his confidence in his servant was already a disturbing image, a visible crisis of authority if ever there was one. Hopefully the club is done with this head coach nonsense for the sake of whoever comes next. Data can help a transfer, but the man who actually selects the players needs to be on even footing in those decisions. But even ignoring that, the whole affair has an unmistakably bitter aftertaste now. It smacks of dishonesty, of asking fans to trust a process that even the suits weren’t sure about.
Troubled Waters
Speaking of which, the notion that the club had privately lost faith in Slot before they publicly announced it throws the timing and purpose of the sacking into serious question. Most fans are distraught because they perceive a missed opportunity in Xabi Alonso, who instead went to Chelsea.
I care significantly less, because 1) it’s been clear for a long time that the club has never been seriously interested in Alonso and 2) it’s not all that clear that Alonso has ever been seriously interested in Liverpool. He’s expressed an abstract interest, though it’s entirely possible that the prospect of following Klopp was too intimidating. He instead took the much easier task of following Liam Rosenoir. More to the point, I don’t see Alonso as an upgrade over Slot, at least not when you compare records.
Slot at Feyenoord had experience balancing a successful domestic season with Champions League competitiveness, and even at AZ he was punching well above his weight in European competition. Impressive as Alonso’s near-invincible season with Leverkusen was, he doesn’t have the same resume. A desire for Alonso was driven by nostalgia, not strategy. But with the knowledge that Slot was apparently out of favor as early as March, the question becomes, why was the club so disinterested in Alonso?
There are a couple of possibilities; neither reflects well on the club. The official reason is seemingly that his tactics represent too drastic a change from Klopp. This is also why Oliver Glasner is not even being considered, despite him objectively being a better choice than all of the current front-runners. I personally think this is a stupid reason, especially for a summer sacking.
AMERICAN SCOUSER TAKES ANFIELD
The summer is precisely the time to introduce radical changes in direction if they’re needed. This also seems unnecessarily conservative. Is the plan to play a 4-3-3 high press in perpetuity? I could see the point of doing this last season, when you had a squad built by Klopp. But now that squad is almost entirely dismantled. You’ve got young players to bed in, plenty of whom are perfectly at home in a three-back formation, all of whom are eager to learn and take direction.
Then there’s the possibility that Alonso would have demanded too much control, insisting on being manager rather than head coach. There’s no way of knowing if this is true, especially considering that reports of approaches to Alonso were complete nonsense. However, it is entirely plausible in the face of an administration that is seen to be prioritizing control over the club over competitive success. I could see refusing Alonso out of commitment to a particular rebuild plan, but that plan was apparently abandoned a year and a half in. The club can no longer hide behind the excuse that they’re thinking in the long term. They clearly aren’t and have been lying when they said they were. Whatever vision they might have had, it crumbled after its very first true stress test.
FOR STEPH’S SAKE
Up and down, the word was that this was simply a transitional season, but apparently FSG didn’t really believe that. If Slot had been given another season and failed, it would be disappointing, but at least coherent. Panic-firing him after secretly doubting him for half a season is bizarre. Slot’s disinterest in academy prospects apparently played a role, despite his management at Feyenoord being well known for sending out younger players on loan. Slot’s more controlled style of play played a role, despite that being one of the reasons he topped the candidate list in the first place. Are we changing direction or sacrificing a scapegoat? If these were decisive factors, why was he hired in the first place?
The Next Man In
Which brings me to Andoni Iraola. I actually really love the idea of Iraola as a manager. His Basque roots and history with Athletic and Rayo could make him potentially a perfect cultural fit. I think his commitment to implementing his ideas has paid dividends at Bournemouth. He was a one-club man as a player. I like that he’s a limb of Marcelo Bielsa’s coaching tree. That said, the circumstances of his appointment are a huge red flag.
Hughes already has a personal relationship with Iraola, and he just so happens to be out of contract with Bournemouth this year. This comes across less as a strategic appointment and more as a last-minute Hail Mary to get someone appointed quickly before the preseason. Notably, Iraola wasn’t mentioned in the initial search for Klopp’s successor. Suddenly, he’s all but confirmed. It sounds like an appointment of convenience. It’s also worth noting that Iraola is a practitioner of gegenpressing. Coupled with the club’s public statements, it carries the stench of pandering. It seems like the club is capitulating to external pressure to play Klopp-ball forever. In the end, Salah’s tantrum achieved its desired result.
And the result isn’t pretty.
Another Roll Of The Dice
Much as I like Iraola personally, putting him in charge of Liverpool is a massive gamble. Despite overachieving at Bournemouth, he is completely untested at this level. He’s never managed a Champions League season, never won a domestic title, and has only finished as high as 6th in the Premier League. But hey, he plays Rock n Roll football, so clearly none of that matters, right? What happens if he gets a slow start? Will there be patience, or will we decide that his style of play is too reckless? Will we acknowledge the need for a transition or call him a small-club manager unsuited for Liverpool?
If Iraola does come in, I’ll back him with the same fervor that I’d back any Liverpool gaffer. Same goes for anyone else brought in. But I fear for his success with the club as it is currently being run. At this point, it’s completely unclear what the vision is supposed to be. We’re starting to look a lot like Chelsea or United, a grinder that destroys the reputation of talented managers by shifting blame for strategic confusion. Tactical identity means nothing for a club without a strategic identity, and that’s quickly what we’re becoming.
SHOP THE AMERICAN SCOUSER COLLECTION TODAY
Supposedly, the sack decision was made because a change in manager was easier than a vigorous rebuild in the summer transfer window. Where have we heard that before? Fan impatience caused the timeline to accelerate, heedless of the consequences of such a major disruption. Where have we heard that before? Salah’s outburst online apparently was the final nail in Slot’s coffin. Where have we heard that before? What is emerging is a picture of a club where any manager will struggle to succeed. It would be tragic if Iraola became a casualty of club mismanagement originating from higher up.
He’s going to inherit problems that he didn’t create and be judged by his ability to fix things outside his remit. If he does struggle out the gate, it will be because he was set up to fail. It’s eerily similar to the task that has plagued every manager at Chelsea since 2022. If FSG doesn’t want to become the red version of BlueCo, they’ve got some serious questions to ask themselves. One hopes Richard Hughes and Michael Edwards also have an end-of-season review coming their way.
Slot should leave with his head held high. Winning the League in his debut season and keeping us in the Champions League are not minor achievements. Liverpool FC, on the other hand, has a reckoning ahead that will not be easy for anyone. If they actually do have a plan for the post-Klopp era, they need to show it yesterday.