Emotion trumps reason: Liverpool make a mistake Ferguson would never make for Salah

For Liverpool, there are many problems that need to be solved right now, but one of them has been around for a long time - even going back further than this season and this century. That is the ability to successfully defend the league championship, and it can even be said to be the "know-how".

This sounds incredible for England's most successful club. They have 20 top league titles and 6 Champions League trophies. However, Liverpool have not successfully defended the league title since the 1983-84 season, and that season was the peak of their consecutive championships.

Recently, they had to watch Guardiola do just that. The Manchester City boss looked full of fighting spirit after his 3-0 victory over Liverpool on Sunday. This focus battle also marks another shift in the narrative direction of the Premier League this season. As Guardiola himself said, it feels like we have gone from "Liverpool will definitely win the championship" to "Arsenal is unstoppable" to now "Manchester City will definitely catch up with Arteta's team." Let's wait and see.

But it is true that there has not been a truly stalemate "championship chase" in the Premier League for some time. And Liverpool had to watch one man master it so well that he became the most outstanding representative of the defending champions: Ferguson. He knows better than anyone that this kind of sustained success requires tough decisions; you can't let the glow of victory soften your team -- or some of the decisions for that matter.

Considering one of the main talking points in City's victory - another disappointing performance from Salah - it's hard not to be reminded of this philosophy of Ferguson.

Just three weeks ago, I thought Slott should have benched the Egypt star. And now, it goes further: Liverpool should have let him go this summer.

This is not to "target" a star who, until just a few months ago, was arguably the best player in the world.

Salah may finally prove how ridiculous articles like this are by using his sudden outburst in the coming months to win Liverpool a seventh Champions League. But for now, the Premier League title looks to be out of their reach.

However, it is precisely the title defense itself and the question of how to become a team that can win consecutive championships that makes this matter of greater significance.

Salah may have been one of the best players in the world, but he is already 33 years old. Each downturn in form now raises more urgent questions about whether he can maintain, or even regain, his former level. In other words, how much more value can he deliver on that massive new contract?

Liverpool's recruitment operations over the past decade have been hailed as one of the smartest in football, and rightly so. But as I always say, it's hard not to feel like this time they're "turning right" when they should be "going left."

The smarter approach would be to let Salah go—perhaps even to not be swayed by emotions.

This is not only about his own state trajectory and potential cost, but also about Liverpool's investment.

If there's ever a time to sell a beloved club legend, it's probably when you're once again a jubilant champion and have spent more than £400 million on a raft of dazzling new signings. These new signings are the best way to appease the fans who are hurt by losing their superstar.

Ferguson has done similar things at far more unfavorable moments than this. At the end of the 2005-06 season, he sent away the team's top scorer Ruud van Nistelrooy. That season was often described as a "catastrophic year" due to Roy Keane's acrimonious departure from the team and many other events. The result? Manchester United immediately won three consecutive titles.

That's why it's hard not to feel that, by contrast, Liverpool just feel like they can't let Salah go. Because he was too good in the past, and maybe too popular. Is there some emotional factor interfering with judgment? Did the glow of victory influence the decision-making process?

This is undoubtedly a very "un-Fergusonian" decision. It can even be said to be a very "non-boot room" decision - think back to how Liverpool's great championship teams in the 1970s and 1980s decisively abandoned meritorious veterans and replaced them with newcomers. In this regard, Paisley was as ruthless as Ferguson.

An obvious counterargument to almost every point made in this article is that Liverpool are actually in the midst of a major transition, which is why we are seeing what we are seeing.

However, if this is the reason, it only makes the decision to keep Salah seem more illogical, not more reasonable.

The club spent an unprecedented amount of money to build a new striker, but they are still unable to play the expected tactics because the core star is still on the team. More realistically, the way Salah plays - especially in the modern football environment of 2025 - has a disproportionate impact on the rest of the team. As long as the Egyptian star is on the field, the entire tactical system will inevitably be built around him. This will only slow down the potential transformation process.

It can be said that this has brought greater difficulties to coach Slott, who now almost has to work between two team concepts: a system with Salah, and a system after he leaves.

It’s no wonder we haven’t seen players like Wirtz perform at their best.

Sources close to Liverpool have provided some insight. One is that there is a belief within the club that they could sell Salah to the Saudi Professional League at almost any time, especially given that the other side has also shown continued strong interest in Nunez.

For Liverpool, this new contract means that they are likely to still be able to recover considerable cash from Salah in the future, which they cannot guarantee in the summer. This could obviously make a significant difference in the medium term and help fund future title campaigns.

However, this may still mean that a season - which in itself can bring huge value and revenue - may be wasted. It may even have delayed the acclimation process for the likes of Wirtz and Isaac, while inadvertently ensuring that they will be under greater pressure.

Of course, this could all change. You only have to look at the few shifts in narrative momentum this season. You only have to look at Salah's own career. He was looked down upon at Liverpool but has come back strongly - back to the level he was last season, for example.

Salah still has that ability. Today, many players are able to maintain their excellent scoring form into their mid-30s.

The problem is, even as the final stages of that new contract are being discussed, there are already signs that this decline in form is coming.

So until Salah can return to something close to his former level, the feeling will persist: Liverpool should have made bolder changes in the summer and chosen to let go.