It’s one of the talking points of the summer thus far and now, details of where the Reds went wrong in their Van Dijk efforts are being brought to light. 

Like me, you’re probably sick of all this Virgil Van Dijk talk by now. Personally, I shudder every time I read his name on Twitter, frustrated at how a club like Liverpool could’ve got it all so wrong.

Jamie Carragher seemingly confirmed this week that Southampton were more upset by Liverpool’s willingness to leak details to the media than by the actual tapping up of the player. However, with new information being brought to light about the interactions between the Dutch centre-back and Jürgen Klopp in particular, you can see just why Southampton were able to make such a strong case to the Premier League.

In a report published by Yahoo UK last night, it is claimed that Jürgen Klopp did indeed engage in numerous bouts of contact with the player before seeking permissions from the south coast club.


Yahoo claim that Van Dijk:

  • Staged one-on-one talks with Klopp
  • Received video messages detailing how he would be utilised in the Reds system
  • Had already agreed personal terms with Liverpool
  • Has now ‘kicked up a fuss’ in an attempt to force a move away from Southampton

That final dot point may look like a positive for us Reds supporters, as it implies that a move to Merseyside could be back on for Van Dijk. Sadly, however, just when you thought the mood around this saga couldn’t be soured any further, Yahoo have sought to banish any hope that a move to Liverpool could still occur.

Embed from Getty Images

They report that Southampton are desperate to keep Van Dijk unless “silly money,” is offered for his services and that they have told the player as much. They claim that the Dutchman hoped to “kick up enough fuss that he’d be sold for £50m,” but that due to the Reds efforts to court him behind his current employers back for “months,” then there is “no way he will be sold to Liverpool at this stage.”

It still remains interesting that Southampton chose to only take action against Liverpool, despite Yahoo claiming they were aware of Manchester City and Chelsea attempting to take the same approach.

Have something to tell us about this article?