Manchester City’s 4-0 win over Liverpool looked decisive on the scoreboard, but the gulf was formed more by avoidable, small mistakes than by overwhelming superiority. Expected-goals models suggested a City edge (around 2.44 to 1.46), yet possession was shared and both teams registered 11 shots. What separated them was attention to detail — or the lack of it from Liverpool.
Arne Slot singled out a basic breakdown after the Etihad defeat: two goals were conceded in quick succession from throw-in situations. He could describe the moments — a throw, a turnover, an instant counter — but struggled to supply a simple remedy, which is concerning given how fundamental the issue is.
Liverpool were once pioneers on this front, recruiting throw-in coach Thomas Gronnemark to exploit set plays and turn short restarts into a reliable part of their possession game. Since his exit, however, those advantages have eroded. Gronnemark has publicly expressed surprise at how little of the original method has stuck, pointing to matches such as last August’s Wembley display where throw-in routines looked unfamiliar. Under pressure, Liverpool’s successful retention from throw-ins has reportedly fallen to roughly 33.3 percent — a startling decline for an area they used to dominate.
The Etihad showed why that matters. A routine sequence began with Joe Gomez taking a throw to Marc Guehi, who fed Nico O’Reilly. O’Reilly quickly turned and released Rayan Cherki into space about 35 yards from Liverpool’s goal; Cherki then set up Antoine Semenyo for the finish. What began as a simple restart cascaded into a scoring chance, illustrating how easily a small error can be magnified by fast, incisive transition play. Klopp’s gegenpressing often served as Liverpool’s defensive catalyst; against City, the opponent’s transition off throw-in lapses performed an equally destructive role.
Gronnemark’s criticism centres on the loss of structured spacing and contingency plans — when an initial movement fails, players apparently lack the follow-up options to recreate space or reset the routine. Personnel changes since his time at the club have altered who takes and receives throws, and with that has gone some of the institutional memory and practice that once lifted Liverpool’s metrics in this niche area.
There are bigger, messier problems at Liverpool — off-field upheaval, a significant squad turnover, aging stars and injury setbacks — many of which are hard to fix quickly. But throw-ins are a micro-problem within the manager’s remit. They are simple, repeatable and coachable. That they are now a recurring source of danger feels symbolic: when basic procedures regress, it’s a clearer sign that standards are slipping rather than a run of bad luck.
If Slot can restore the small, everyday habits — the spacing, the decision-making, the rehearsal of alternatives — he can blunt one of the cheapest ways opponents are currently turning possession into chances. Until then, these tiny failures will continue to compound into big, visible defeats.