There was little point pretending Florian Wirtz played well at Bournemouth.

He did not.

Liverpool struggled for fluency during long periods of their 1-0 victory and Wirtz was part of that problem. He found it difficult to consistently receive possession in dangerous areas, his influence fluctuated and he rarely looked capable of taking control of a game Liverpool desperately needed somebody to control.

Jamie Carragher described it afterwards as one of the poorest performances he had seen from Wirtz and suggested he would leave him out against Manchester City after the international break.

That criticism of the Bournemouth performance was understandable.

The wider conversation around Wirtz is becoming something else entirely.

Five league games into a new season under a new head coach, discussion has already moved from what Wirtz needs to improve to whether Liverpool have a fundamental problem with him.

Those are two very different questions.

There is no escaping the expectations attached to Wirtz.

Liverpool committed a potentially record fee to sign one of Europe’s outstanding young attacking players from Bayer Leverkusen in 2025. The assumption was not merely that he would become an important player.

He was supposed to become decisive.

That has not happened consistently enough.

Wirtz has not produced the volume of goals and assists many expected, and he has acknowledged himself that he wants to “decide games” more regularly.

That part of the criticism is fair.

Liverpool did not make such a substantial investment for somebody who simply circulates possession nicely between the lines.

Eventually, influence has to become output, but numbers alone also flatten the discussion.

Wirtz is not functioning as a conventional No.10 waiting around the penalty area for the final pass.

Under Andoni Iraola, his responsibilities are broader.

He regularly drops towards midfield to help Liverpool progress through pressure. He moves into half-spaces to create passing angles. He receives with opponents behind him and attempts to connect midfield with the front line.

Often, his most valuable contribution comes before the final action.

Against Atletico Madrid, his pass to release Bradley Barcola through on goal was an example of exactly why Liverpool wanted him.

The ball did not become an assist because Barcola failed to score.

Wirtz’s involvement did not suddenly become less valuable because somebody else failed to complete the move.

That distinction matters.

There is a growing tendency to treat every Liverpool attack that does not end with Wirtz scoring or assisting as evidence that he is having no influence at all.

That is too simplistic.

Iraola himself has resisted judging the midfielder solely through his statistical output, arguing earlier this month that Wirtz contributes in several areas beyond goals and assists.

There is another reason the Bournemouth performance requires context.

Almost nobody in Liverpool’s attack played particularly well.

The opening 25 minutes were especially poor, something Iraola admitted afterwards when he criticised his side’s lack of intensity.

Liverpool created very little sustained pressure and spent long spells unable to establish meaningful possession in Bournemouth territory.

Alexander Isak eventually scored the winner, but even that goal came during a performance in which Liverpool’s attacking structure remained disjointed for significant periods.

Wirtz struggled within that.

He did not single-handedly create it.

That does not excuse his performance, but it should influence how it is interpreted.

If Liverpool cannot consistently progress the ball into the areas where Wirtz is most dangerous, asking him to dominate matches from there becomes considerably harder.

The bigger tactical question is therefore not simply whether Wirtz is playing well enough.

It is whether Liverpool are regularly putting him in situations where his best qualities can decide games.

None of this discussion would be happening at the same intensity if Wirtz had cost £40million.

That is inevitable.

Transfer fees alter expectations, even when the player himself has no control over them.

Every misplaced pass becomes more noticeable. Every quiet game becomes evidence. Every comparison with his Bundesliga performances becomes another reminder of what Liverpool thought they were buying.

Wirtz is effectively competing against an imagined version of himself every week.

The player who arrives, immediately dominates the Premier League, scores regularly, creates relentlessly and justifies an enormous transfer fee from day one.

Real adaptation is rarely that clean.

That does not mean Liverpool should accept underperformance indefinitely.

It means five league matches into Iraola’s tenure is far too early to decide what Wirtz can become within it.

The danger with defending Wirtz is going too far the other way.

He does need more.

He needs to become stronger when games become physical and chaotic.

He needs to demand the ball more consistently during difficult periods rather than drifting towards the edge of matches.

He needs to turn promising positions into goals and assists with greater regularity.

And there will eventually be games where Iraola decides Liverpool are better suited by a different midfield combination.

Carragher questioning whether Wirtz should automatically start against Manchester City is therefore a legitimate selection debate.

It does not necessarily follow that Wirtz himself is becoming a failed signing.

That leap is where the conversation loses proportion.

The most interesting question over the next few months is not whether Wirtz can survive criticism.

It is whether Liverpool can maximise him.

Iraola inherited a player signed for a different Liverpool team and is now developing his own attacking structure around several expensive, technically gifted players.

Wirtz, Isak, Barcola and Gakpo are still learning how their movements interact.

That process will occasionally look awkward.

Bournemouth certainly did.

But Liverpool have already seen enough flashes to understand why Wirtz was considered such an important signing in the first place.

The next challenge is making those flashes repeatable.

Wirtz has become the obvious symbol of Liverpool’s uneven attacking performances because his fee and reputation make him impossible to ignore.

Some of the scrutiny is deserved.

The conclusion being drawn from it is far less certain.

Liverpool do not need to pretend Wirtz is playing brilliantly.

They need to work out how to make sure he eventually does.