Brentford gave Liverpool something to think about last weekend, even though the two clubs weren’t playing each other.
Against Aston Villa, Brentford turned pressure on Tyrone Mings into a goal. Kevin Schade won possession high up the pitch, found Igor Thiago, and the move eventually ended with Yehor Yarmoliuk scoring after Villa failed to clear.
It was a reminder of how quickly Brentford can punish a mistake. They don’t always need a long spell of possession or an elaborate passing move. Sometimes, forcing one poor decision is enough.
Liverpool visit Brentford on Saturday. And the midfielder who would normally be available to help them handle those moments won’t be there.
Ryan Gravenberch is suspended after receiving a second yellow card in Liverpool’s 3–0 defeat to Manchester City. With Dominik Szoboszlai also dealing with injury, Andoni Iraola has decisions to make about the middle of his team.
The obvious question is who replaces Gravenberch.
But Liverpool’s recent history suggests a more interesting one: how much of the work Gravenberch normally performs can be shared by the players around him?
Liverpool already know they can win without him
There is a temptation after a heavy defeat to treat every missing player as indispensable.
Liverpool have evidence against that idea.
On 15 September, Iraola made ten changes to his starting eleven for the Carabao Cup meeting with Tottenham. Alexis Mac Allister, Trey Nyoni and James McConnell started together in midfield. Liverpool won 3–1, with Mac Allister opening the scoring.
Five days later, Liverpool went to Bournemouth and won 1–0. Gravenberch wasn’t in the starting lineup. He only entered in the 81st minute, replacing Szoboszlai.
Those two results matter now because they show that Liverpool have already found ways to compete and win without Gravenberch starting.
Iraola isn’t facing an entirely unfamiliar situation. He has used different midfield combinations before, and some of those combinations have produced positive results.
Still, neither match gives him a complete answer for Brentford.
The Tottenham game came in a heavily rotated cup lineup. Mac Allister acknowledged afterward that Liverpool had struggled during the closing stages. Against Bournemouth, Liverpool kept a clean sheet, but that doesn’t tell us which particular midfield actions were responsible for preventing chances.
Winning without Gravenberch is one thing. Knowing which parts of Liverpool’s midfield remain reliable without him is another.
And Brentford offer a reason to examine that distinction closely.
Sources: Liverpool’s Tottenham starting XI · Mac Allister’s reaction · Bournemouth match report
The problem starts when Liverpool’s first press doesn’t win the ball
One of Iraola’s most visible changes at Liverpool has been the team’s willingness to press higher and earlier.
According to Opta figures published by Liverpool FC, opponents averaged just 9.1 passes before Liverpool attempted a defensive action across the opening five Premier League matches. That placed the Reds among the division’s most aggressive pressing teams.
It is an approach with obvious rewards.
Win possession near the opposition penalty area, and the distance to goal is short. Force an opponent to play hurriedly, and Liverpool’s forwards can attack before the defence has recovered its shape.
But there is another side to that aggression.
Imagine Liverpool’s centre-forward closing down a Brentford defender. A midfielder follows to block the nearest passing option. Brentford then play beyond those two players, either through a quick forward pass or a longer ball.
Liverpool’s next decision matters enormously.
If another midfielder has stayed in position, he can challenge the receiver, delay the attack or compete for the second ball. If everyone has followed the first press, the space in front of Liverpool’s centre-backs becomes much harder to protect.
This is where replacing Gravenberch becomes more complicated than choosing another player who can operate in central midfield.
Liverpool must still have someone offering a passing option when their defenders build attacks. They need a midfielder who recognises when to press and when to stay. And when the first pressure is beaten, they need the players behind it to respond together.
None of that means Gravenberch single-handedly performs every one of those jobs. Liverpool’s pressing and defensive protection are collective responsibilities, and the available match evidence doesn’t establish that he is individually responsible for every successful recovery.
His suspension simply forces Iraola to reconsider how those responsibilities are distributed.
Brentford’s recent performance against Villa makes the question particularly relevant.
Their opening goal came from forcing an error in Villa’s defensive buildup. Later in the same match, a longer pass from Kristoffer Ajer helped produce another opportunity, with Thiago putting Victor Lindelöf under pressure before Schade forced a save.
Those were two different routes towards goal. One came from pressure high up the pitch; the other developed from a more direct ball and another defensive mistake.
Liverpool will have to be ready for both, regardless of how much possession they enjoy.
Sources: Liverpool’s Opta pressing analysis · Brentford 2–2 Aston Villa
Mac Allister offers one answer. It comes with a cost.
Iraola could ask Mac Allister to operate deeper, giving Liverpool an experienced central option to receive from the defenders and help protect the space behind the press.
There is a practical logic to that arrangement.
Suppose Liverpool are drawing 0–0 and trying to establish control. When one midfielder steps out to challenge a Brentford player, Mac Allister could remain in a position to cover the central passing lane or react to the next ball.
That would give Liverpool a clearer division of responsibilities without requiring a complete change of formation.
But it would also ask something different of Mac Allister.
The more time he spends deeper, the less frequently he may be available to connect attacks further forward. That could affect players such as Florian Wirtz, who benefit from receiving possession in useful attacking positions rather than having to come deep to collect it.
Liverpool might protect themselves better but move the ball into dangerous areas more slowly.
Alternatively, Iraola could preserve Mac Allister’s advanced involvement and use another midfielder in the deepest role.
That brings Nyoni into the conversation.
In a September interview with Liverpool FC, the 19-year-old explained that he had recently been playing mainly as a No.6 under Iraola. He believed that might be the position the manager currently preferred for him, although he remained willing to learn other midfield roles.
It was an encouraging development for a young player seeking a clearer route into the first team.
It wasn’t a declaration from Iraola that Nyoni was ready to take charge of Liverpool’s midfield in the Premier League.
Nyoni has already started alongside Mac Allister and McConnell against Tottenham. That gives him genuine first-team experience, but Brentford would ask different questions.
Could he receive the ball with an opponent closing him down? Would he recognise when a teammate needed support rather than another forward run? If Liverpool lost possession, could he recover his position quickly enough to prevent Brentford attacking the space behind him?
A young midfielder can be technically excellent and still find those decisions difficult. In the deepest position, a small mistake in timing can expose several teammates.
McConnell provides another option, having also featured in that Tottenham midfield. But the cup victory doesn’t establish his current place ahead of other senior alternatives either.
Iraola’s choice will depend on which players are available, how prepared they are for the required roles and what he wants Liverpool to achieve against Brentford.
Source: Trey Nyoni discusses his midfield development
Sometimes the adjustment isn’t another player
There is a further possibility that shouldn’t be overlooked.
Liverpool might not need a dramatic personnel change to manage the space behind their press. They could instead change when they press.
Consider a 0–0 game in which Brentford have repeatedly escaped Liverpool’s first challenge and found a free player through the middle.
Rather than sending midfielders forward at every opportunity, Iraola could ask them to hold their positions until Brentford play into an area where Liverpool have enough support to close the ball down together.
That might mean allowing a Brentford defender more time in possession. It could also mean recovering the ball farther from goal and losing some of the quick attacking opportunities that make Iraola’s approach effective.
It is a trade-off, not a free defensive improvement.
At 0–0, reducing those central openings could be worthwhile if Brentford are repeatedly exploiting them.
At 0–1, with Liverpool chasing an equaliser, allowing Brentford comfortable possession might be the wrong response. Iraola may need to raise the pressure again, while ensuring his midfield and defence move together rather than leaving individual players isolated.
There is no reason to pretend one arrangement suits every scoreline.
Nor is there evidence yet that Brentford will expose Liverpool in exactly this way. Saturday’s match hasn’t happened. These are possible adjustments to observable risks, not repairs to a failure that has already occurred.
That distinction matters because Liverpool’s defeat to City has already encouraged plenty of easy conclusions.
All three City goals came after Gravenberch’s dismissal in the 62nd minute. But the sending-off changed the numbers on the pitch. It doesn’t prove that Liverpool’s original midfield structure was broken, and it doesn’t erase the dangerous moments City created beforehand.
The useful lesson is narrower: Iraola still needs reliable protection when his first press is beaten.
That requirement remains whether Gravenberch plays or not.
One European match before Brentford
There is another decision for Iraola to make before Saturday.
Liverpool travel to Austria to face LASK in the Champions League on Wednesday. Gravenberch is available for that fixture because his suspension applies to the Premier League.
Mac Allister, Nyoni and McConnell are also in the 23-man travelling squad. Szoboszlai, Alexander Isak and Cody Gakpo have not travelled as they continue dealing with fitness problems.
Iraola could use the European match to examine different midfield combinations. He could also select Gravenberch, knowing Liverpool have an immediate result to pursue in Austria.
Neither decision would automatically reveal his plan for Brentford.
LASK and Brentford are different opponents. A midfield combination that works in Europe may face very different pressure in the Premier League. And selecting Gravenberch on Wednesday would not mean Iraola has rejected the alternatives available for Saturday.
What matters is the evidence each match produces, and whether it helps him make a more informed decision.
Sources: Liverpool’s travelling squad · Injuries and suspensions
Brentford will test Liverpool’s midfield choices, not one man’s reputation
Earlier this season, MATCHIQ examined whether Liverpool’s press was becoming more than an aggressive first challenge.
The opening matches provided encouraging evidence. Liverpool were disrupting opposition buildup earlier, recovering possession in advanced areas and beginning to show better collective organisation.
The unresolved concern was what happened when opponents played through that first pressure.
Manchester City were supposed to provide a demanding test. Gravenberch’s red card made the final half-hour much harder to interpret.
Now his suspension creates a different test.
Liverpool have already shown they can win without him starting. What they haven’t yet established is whether the midfield responsibilities can be redistributed reliably against an opponent capable of punishing mistakes in possession and space left behind the press.
That is what makes Brentford interesting.
Perhaps Mac Allister takes on more defensive responsibility. Perhaps a younger midfielder receives an opportunity. Perhaps Iraola keeps a familiar combination but asks the players to be more selective about when they press.
Whatever he chooses, the most revealing moments may come before anyone scores.
Watch what Liverpool do when Brentford escape the first challenge. Who protects the space? Who competes for the second ball? When a midfielder steps forward, does someone else recognise the danger behind him?
Liverpool could win without answering every question. They could also execute those midfield responsibilities well and still lose because of mistakes elsewhere.
But if the players can consistently cover for one another, move the ball forward and prevent Brentford turning one successful pass into a dangerous counterattack, Iraola will have evidence that his approach can survive a change of personnel.
Gravenberch’s absence doesn’t automatically demand a new system.
It demands clarity about who does the work when he isn’t there.
Sources and previous MATCHIQ coverage
Official sources: Liverpool injuries and suspensions; LASK travelling squad; Tottenham starting XI; Mac Allister’s post-match comments; Bournemouth match report; Opta pressing analysis; Nyoni interview; Brentford’s Aston Villa report.
Previously on MATCHIQ: Nyoni’s development towards No.6; Liverpool’s pressing coordination; The Manchester City red card and tactical test.
Evidence cutoff: 14 October 2026, before the LASK and Brentford fixtures. Possible midfield arrangements are editorial tactical scenarios, not confirmed team selections.