Gary Neville hailed Virgil van Dijk for not “whingeing” in his post-match interview but having avoided that typical trope, the Liverpool captain still managed to pin the blame on one of his teammates in what might be a very subtle dig at Mohamed Salah but is more likely just him unnecessarily calling out a Reds youngster.

Van Dijk was at the centre of what has been billed in the aftermath as a great injustice which could have changed the course of the game, though in fairness, not by either him or his manager Arne Slot, both of whom accept that while they believe his goal should have stood, it wasn’t the defining moment of a clash in which they were outplayed by Manchester City.

READ:?16 Conclusions from Man City 3-0 Liverpool: Champions slip to eighth and out of title race

After Andy Robertson was deemed to be in an offside position when ducking out of the way of Van Dijk’s header past Gianluigi Donnarumma, Liverpool?‘raised serious concerns’ to the PGMOL after ‘contacting referees’ chief Howard Webb’, claiming the ‘reasoning’ for disallowing the goal ‘doesn’t stack up’.

Asked about the goal after the game, Van Dijk said: “I think the goal should have stood, that is all I will say. But I am not the one who is making the decisions.”

His decision not to comment further was praised by Gary Neville.

“From what van Dijk just said on here, he said he doesn’t really want to talk about it,” he said on his podcast. “That’s the right approach. When you’ve lost 3-0 and you’ve been well beaten, don’t whinge about a refereeing decision.”

But Neville did also criticise Van Dijkfor his role in Nico Gonzalez’s goal for City, when the Liverpool skipper made no real attempt to block his goal-bound shot, but shifted his foot to “kill” Giorgi Mamardashvili behind him.

“Virgil van Dijk was really strange for Man City’s second,” Neville said. “He was just standing there and lets it hit him. There’s a little movement from his right leg and it kills his goalkeeper.”

MORE LIVERPOOL COVERAGE ON F365…
???Premier League winners and losers: Villa, Konate, Soucek, Newcastle, Brentford, Ugarte, Frank and more
???What did Alexander Isak see during Liverpool defeat as ‘crucial reminder’ issued?
???How Guardiola solved Liverpool ‘nightmare’ and accidentally signed potential ‘best’ right-back in the world

Van Dijk predictably made no reference to that error in a post-match interview in which he failed once again to “look in the mirror”, as Roy Keane suggested he might do after his shocker vs Manchester United, instead picking out Conor Bradley as the Liverpool player to blame for this latest harrowing defeat.

“The first half was difficult and they were much more comfortable on the ball and it was difficult for our guys to put pressure on them,” Van Dijk said.

“I don’t think there was a lot of danger, but Doku had a good game and it was difficult for Conor [Bradley] in the one on one at times. I don’t think we were much in trouble but we could have done better.”

It’s by no means a slam of Bradley, but what’s the point of naming and shaming him? And in doing so why did he not then insist that it was on the rest of the team to help him out against Doku? Was it in fact quite a thickly-veiled dig at Mohamed Salah for not bothering to defend at all on his side?

As has been widely suggested this season, Salah is a problem if he’s not scoring and assisting not just because of the lack of attacking contributions but because he refuses, or at least fails, to do anything to help out his right-back.

You may also have noticed that when referring to Liverpool’s failure to press City effectively, Van Dijk referred to “our guys” rather than us. You’re a part of the team even when you’re losing, Virg.