Arne Slot has insisted external criticism is not what makes the job difficult at Liverpool FC — instead pointing to the challenge of winning matches with key players unavailable.
“It hasn’t been hard for me because of criticism, that isn’t what makes this job.
What makes it hard is trying to win the next game with so many players unavailable. That is hard.”
A fair point — to a degree
Injuries and absences can derail any manager’s plans. Missing key players affects:
- Team balance
- Consistency
- Tactical execution
Slot is right that navigating those issues is one of the toughest parts of the job.
But the counter-argument is clear
Where frustration begins to build among supporters is in how the available squad is being used.
Even with injuries, Liverpool still have options — yet several players have seen limited involvement:
- Joe Gomez
- Federico Chiesa
- Rio Ngumoha
- Curtis Jones
- Trey Nyoni
- Calvin Ramsay
That raises a valid question:
If players are unavailable, why aren’t more squad members being trusted?
Selection vs availability
There’s a difference between lacking players and choosing not to use the ones you have.
Critics argue that:
- Opportunities for rotation have been limited
- Younger or fringe players aren’t being given chances
- Tactical rigidity may be restricting squad use
That can make the “unavailable players” argument feel incomplete.
A balancing act
To be fair, every manager has to weigh:
- Trust in certain players
- Tactical understanding
- The risk of throwing others into high-pressure games
But over a long season, depth only matters if it’s actually used.
Final thought
Slot is right — injuries make the job harder.
But the debate isn’t just about who’s missing.
It’s about who’s being overlooked.
And until more of the squad is consistently involved, questions around selection will continue to follow his comments.
Jamie (The Kopite View)
The Kopite View 
Leave a comment