Virgil Van Dijk Was a Liverpool Bargain at £75m. What Would He Cost Now?

 Liverpool’s Virgil van Dijk is at the moment probably the most marketable property in the Premier League. Photograph: Simon Stacpoole/Offside via Getty Images
Liverpool’s Virgil van Dijk is at the moment probably the most marketable property in the Premier League. Photograph: Simon Stacpoole/Offside via Getty Images
TT

Virgil Van Dijk Was a Liverpool Bargain at £75m. What Would He Cost Now?

 Liverpool’s Virgil van Dijk is at the moment probably the most marketable property in the Premier League. Photograph: Simon Stacpoole/Offside via Getty Images
Liverpool’s Virgil van Dijk is at the moment probably the most marketable property in the Premier League. Photograph: Simon Stacpoole/Offside via Getty Images

Speculative stories are beginning to emerge about Virgil van Dijk’s future, which is no real surprise since – to paraphrase Jane Austen – a 28-year-old defender with the world at his feet must be about to make someone a fortune.

In point of fact the Netherlands international would find it difficult to make a step up from Anfield right now, what with Liverpool poised to add the Premier League title to the Champions League crown they hold and may well successfully defend in the next few months.

There is no actual need for Van Dijk to go anywhere and quite possibly he won’t, especially if Liverpool are willing to practically double his money by offering an early contract extension, though suggestions that Pep Guardiola might be about to turn up at Juventus next season and wave a cheque for £150m under the Merseyside club’s nose are an amusing way of passing the time until the full fixture programme returns.

While that scenario sounds like wishful thinking on the part of the 18 Premier League clubs who would not mind seeing Liverpool and Manchester City hit by a double whammy, it is surely no accident that Van Dijk finds himself the centre of attention. Should the financial giants of Italy or Spain decide to launch an irresistible attack on Premier League talent, who else would they go for?

Van Dijk at the moment is probably the Premier League’s most marketable property, one of the very few players who might be worth £150m. It is only two years since eyebrows were raised when Liverpool shelled out £75m for a player who had been hiding in plain sight at Celtic and Southampton, though it was quickly acknowledged that far from going out on a limb Jürgen Klopp and his staff had got themselves a bargain. When one considers how good Liverpool have been since then, the standards that have been set, what has been achieved and the fact that the player is better for the experience and hitting his prime, it does not seem unreasonable for an already high price to have doubled.

The feeling with Van Dijk is that a player who can make a £75m price tag seem insignificant can probably do the same for twice the amount.

Van Dijk deservedly won the award for PFA player of the season last year, was predictably and somewhat unluckily pipped by Lionel Messi at the Ballon d’Or and – with Liverpool now champions of the world in addition to Europe and most likely England – he is bound to be in the running for all the individual gongs this season. To stand out in the present Liverpool lineup is some feat, especially for a defender, but Van Dijk might just be the most transformative signing made in recent seasons in English football.

Although Kevin De Bruyne stands out at Manchester City, he arrived when Manuel Pellegrini was in charge and had to wait a couple of seasons for success. Eden Hazard won European and domestic honours with Chelsea and was unquestionably a standout asset, though it is hard to transform a club that keep changing their managers. The same could be said of Manchester United, where to suggest big-money signings such as Ángel Di María, Romelu Lukaku, Paul Pogba and Alexis Sánchez have not really worked out would be an understatement. Harry Maguire is doing rather better, without providing the instant backbone Van Dijk brought to Liverpool. John Stones appears to be finding it difficult to live up to Guardiola’s expectations at City, and though Aymeric Laporte inspires more confidence his long-term injury this season has cost his club points.

Liverpool’s miserly defensive record over the past two seasons does not quite tell its own story, since Alisson arrived half a season after Van Dijk and the goalkeeper not only fixed a problem area but went on to prove a model of consistency. Statistics show Alisson has one of the best shot-stopping ratios around, though they also indicate he faces fewer shots per game than most Premier League goalkeepers.

However the credit is apportioned, Liverpool’s goals‑conceded column has become seriously impressive in the past two seasons, particularly for a club that sometimes had a habit of giving goals away cheaply. This season the defence has been breached 15 times in 25 games. For purposes of comparison, second-placed City have conceded 29 times, just over a goal a game, exactly the same as Manchester United. The meanest defence in the Premier League outside Anfield belongs to Sheffield United, with 24 goals against after 26 matches. Last season, though City were champions by a point, they conceded 23 goals to Liverpool’s 22 with Chelsea and Spurs joint next best on 39.

When Van Dijk arrived mid‑season Liverpool finished with 38 goals conceded, 10 more than José Mourinho’s Manchester United. The centre-half might not have improved Liverpool’s defensive efficiency all by himself – he obviously has teammates around him to help – though if you had to pick a one-man defence from the options available there is no doubt where most would look. Van Dijk plays with authority, plays every minute, and sets a tremendous example. He has been a wonderful signing, even at a record‑breaking price, and you don’t need to hire Guardiola to spot that. He is the player Liverpool fans would least like to see leave, precisely because he would not only walk into any team in the world but improve them.

The Guardian Sport



Algeria and Austria Clash Revives Memories of the ‘Disgrace of Gijon’

Algeria face Austria on Saturday, 44 years on from the "Disgrace of Gijon". (Getty Images/AFP)
Algeria face Austria on Saturday, 44 years on from the "Disgrace of Gijon". (Getty Images/AFP)
TT

Algeria and Austria Clash Revives Memories of the ‘Disgrace of Gijon’

Algeria face Austria on Saturday, 44 years on from the "Disgrace of Gijon". (Getty Images/AFP)
Algeria face Austria on Saturday, 44 years on from the "Disgrace of Gijon". (Getty Images/AFP)

When Algeria and Austria meet in their last group game in Kansas City on Saturday, it will not only be key to both countries’ hopes of progressing at the World Cup but will also revive memories of one of the tournament’s darkest moments.

The only previous time the sides shared a group, Austria were accused of conniving with West Germany to ensure both teams advanced in the tournament and Algeria were eliminated.

The game was later dubbed the "Disgrace of Gijon" after the Spanish city where the 1982 World Cup proved an eventful debut for the North Africans, who upset West Germany in their first match with a shock 2-1 victory.

There were 24 teams in the tournament for the first time in ‌1982, divided into ‌six groups of four with the top two advancing to a second ‌round ⁠of group matches.

Algeria ⁠lost their second group game to Austria and beat Chile 3-2, leaving them with four points from their three games at a time when two points were awarded for a win.

NEIGHBORS CONTRIVED RESULT TO BOTH GO THROUGH

The group concluded 24 hours later in Gijon with Austria playing neighbors West Germany and a 1-0 win for the Germans would send both sides through.

West Germany went ahead after 10 minutes through Horst Hrubesch, after which both teams passed the ball around with no intention of adding to the score and contrived a ⁠result that squeezed Algeria out on goal difference.

“Even though we had somewhat ‌expected it, we were all angry, outraged and stunned,” said ‌Rabah Madjer, Algeria’s former African Footballer of the Year.

“That two major football nations could agree to eliminate a small ‌country like Algeria, playing in its first World Cup and just emerging on the international stage, ‌was shocking.”

German sports magazine Kicker described the proceedings as “after about 20 minutes, the attacking intensity faded”.

“The Austrians, for their part, made no effort to exploit the additional space going forward. Suddenly, nobody seemed interested in playing serious football anymore. What followed was an endless exchange of passes, with few challenges and almost no urgency. Possession was ‌lost mainly through misplaced passes.”

French daily L’Equipe said there should have been 22 red cards shown to the players of both sides.

SPECTATORS WAVED WHITE ⁠SCARVES TO PROTEST

Spanish spectators ⁠waved white scarves in a traditional sign of disapproval while on Austrian television, commentator Robert Seeger told his viewers: "Turn it off!"

German defender Paul Breitner, a World Cup winner in 1974, saw little wrong.

"The public is stupid if it doesn't understand that qualification was all that mattered here,” he said, and FIFA ruled the teams were within their rights to play as passively as they did, in response to an Algerian protest.

The Germans won their three-team second-round group, ahead of England and hosts Spain, and advanced to the semi-finals, where they beat France on penalties before losing to Italy in the final. Austria finished behind France in their second group.

A direct result of the "Disgrace of Gijon" was FIFA changing the rule to ensure the final matches in World Cup group stages are played simultaneously to prevent teams having advance knowledge of what they require to advance and the possibility of manufacturing the outcome of games.

“Many people apologized afterwards. It's good to acknowledge the harm you've caused, but it didn’t change anything for us,” Madjer said.


Ghana Draw Cools England Hype and Revives Familiar Questions

 England head coach Thomas Tuchel listens to the national anthem ahead the World Cup Group L soccer match between England and Ghana in Foxborough, Mass., near Boston, Tuesday, June 23, 2026. (AP)
England head coach Thomas Tuchel listens to the national anthem ahead the World Cup Group L soccer match between England and Ghana in Foxborough, Mass., near Boston, Tuesday, June 23, 2026. (AP)
TT

Ghana Draw Cools England Hype and Revives Familiar Questions

 England head coach Thomas Tuchel listens to the national anthem ahead the World Cup Group L soccer match between England and Ghana in Foxborough, Mass., near Boston, Tuesday, June 23, 2026. (AP)
England head coach Thomas Tuchel listens to the national anthem ahead the World Cup Group L soccer match between England and Ghana in Foxborough, Mass., near Boston, Tuesday, June 23, 2026. (AP)

Thomas Tuchel's England were riding a wave of optimism at the World Cup after their opening 4-2 demolition of Croatia, but Tuesday's 0-0 draw against Ghana served as a reminder that progress at major tournaments is not always straightforward.

The victory over Croatia had showcased England at their best, with fluid attacking football, goals and a sense that Tuchel's methods were taking hold.

Against Ghana, however, they encountered an entirely different challenge. Carlos Queiroz's side defended deep, remained organized and physical, and frustrated England for much of the ‌night as they ‌emerged with a valuable point.

England remain top of Group L ‌and ⁠are still firmly ⁠on course for the knockout stages, but the stalemate raised fresh questions about whether Tuchel's side possess the creativity and variety required to break down stubborn opponents.

Ghana appeared content to sit back and absorb pressure, surrendering possession but denying England space in dangerous areas.

"It is difficult to find a way through when someone plays a 4-5-1 and completely deep and is committed to it," Tuchel said afterwards. "They celebrated a 0-0 like a win. You cannot ⁠lose your head about it."

For all of England's dominance on the ‌ball, the Three Lions struggled to create clear ‌chances. Harry Kane, who scored twice in the opening victory over Croatia, was largely isolated and ‌tightly marked.

His frustration was summed up in stoppage time when he blazed his shot ‌over the bar from six yards after Nico O'Reilly's header had struck the crossbar.

The performance also reignited debate about England's attacking options. Anthony Gordon again struggled before being replaced by Bukayo Saka, whose introduction injected some urgency and unpredictability into England's play, forcing a save from Ghana goalkeeper ‌Benjamin Asare late on.

Marcus Rashford may also be pushing for greater involvement after England's lack of penetration against a compact defense.

Declan ⁠Rice and Elliot Anderson ⁠provided control but little creativity in midfield, allowing Ghana to remain comfortable for long stretches.

Rice insisted there was no cause for concern.

"We have one more group game to top the group, so we have to be positive," he said.

England's emphatic win over Croatia had sparked talk of momentum, belief and the possibility that Tuchel's new-look side might be finding its stride early.

Ninety minutes against Ghana quickly cooled that enthusiasm.

For the fourth major tournament in succession, England failed to win their second group game, exchanging the exhilaration of a four-goal display for a frustrating stalemate.

The surge of optimism generated by the Croatia victory has been checked, at least temporarily.

And while England remain well-placed to reach the knockout stages, the sense of optimism that followed their opening performance has been replaced by familiar questions about flare, consistency and whether they can break down organized opposition when space is at a premium.


Infantino: World Cup Hydration Breaks Purely Sporting, Not Commercial

Soccer Football - FIFA World Cup 2026 - Group K - Colombia v DR Congo - Estadio Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Mexico - June 23, 2026 Colombia coach Nestor Lorenzo gives instructions to his players during a hydration break REUTERS/Raquel Cunha
Soccer Football - FIFA World Cup 2026 - Group K - Colombia v DR Congo - Estadio Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Mexico - June 23, 2026 Colombia coach Nestor Lorenzo gives instructions to his players during a hydration break REUTERS/Raquel Cunha
TT

Infantino: World Cup Hydration Breaks Purely Sporting, Not Commercial

Soccer Football - FIFA World Cup 2026 - Group K - Colombia v DR Congo - Estadio Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Mexico - June 23, 2026 Colombia coach Nestor Lorenzo gives instructions to his players during a hydration break REUTERS/Raquel Cunha
Soccer Football - FIFA World Cup 2026 - Group K - Colombia v DR Congo - Estadio Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Mexico - June 23, 2026 Colombia coach Nestor Lorenzo gives instructions to his players during a hydration break REUTERS/Raquel Cunha

FIFA president Gianni Infantino has defended the introduction of hydration breaks at the World Cup, insisting that for football's governing body they are driven purely by sporting considerations and not commercial interests.

Mandatory three-minute breaks, introduced in the 22nd and 67th minutes of every match at the tournament, have drawn criticism from players, coaches and fans since the opening round of fixtures.

The breaks, introduced to help players cope with high temperatures across North America, have opened up additional advertising windows for broadcasters, Reuters reported.

This has fueled debate over their impact on the game, with some viewers complaining about being exposed to commercials during the three-minute stoppages.

"There is no ⁠additional revenue for ⁠FIFA, as all commercial agreements were signed well in advance. So, this is not a financial issue for us. For us, it is purely a sporting matter," Infantino said in a statement on Wednesday.

The breaks allow coaching staff to give in-game tactical instructions, a shift critics say disrupts match momentum and fundamentally alters the nature ⁠of the game.

England manager Thomas Tuchel said the additional break "interrupts and changes the identity of the football match,” while Uruguay coach Marcelo Bielsa said dividing matches into shorter segments takes away the fundamental characteristic of the game.

Spain coach Luis de la Fuente and Netherlands captain Virgil van Dijk have supported the intent behind the rule in extreme heat, but questioned the need for it in cooler conditions and at covered venues.

"The main reason is the heat, but we also have to understand that in a competition like the (FIFA) ⁠World Cup, played ⁠over 39 days, with teams potentially playing eight matches in those 39 days, having a moment to rest is extremely important,” Infantino said.

"What matters even more to us is ensuring that all teams, in every match, are playing under the same conditions.

"It's very difficult to accept that a coach might have the opportunity to influence a match by making adjustments simply because it's hotter, while in another match, where the temperature is slightly lower, the same coach doesn’t have the same opportunity."

Infantino added that the breaks had not reduced the intensity of matches, suggesting players were able to maintain a high level of performance throughout games.