There is a temptation to make Florian Wirtz and Bradley Barcola the explanation for Liverpool’s attacking problems. They are expensive signings, their technical quality is obvious, and the goals and assists have not arrived with the frequency expected of players recruited to transform a team’s final third.

That scrutiny is inevitable. It is also incomplete.

Liverpool’s difficulty is not simply that two individuals need to play better. It is that Andoni Iraola is still working to establish how his attacking pieces fit together, and how Liverpool can turn their intensity and possession into consistent opportunities in dangerous areas.

Sunday’s 3-0 defeat to Manchester City provided a useful illustration. Liverpool had promising spells before Ryan Gravenberch’s dismissal changed the game, particularly immediately after half-time. Yet their attacking threat too often came from shots outside the penalty area and deliveries from wide positions, rather than combinations that consistently penetrated City’s defensive line.

The red card distorted the second half and made it harder to judge Liverpool’s attacking structure at full strength. But it did not erase the questions that had preceded it.

Wirtz and Barcola must contribute more. Iraola must also ensure that their individual qualities are being used effectively.

Wirtz’s instinct is to find space between the lines, receive on the half-turn and connect midfield with the forwards. His ability to drift towards the flanks can help Liverpool create overloads, particularly when he combines with a winger or an advancing full-back.

The difficulty is ensuring that those movements produce an advantage rather than simply moving the point of attack elsewhere.

Against City, Wirtz frequently drifted towards the wings to link up with Barcola or Víctor Muñoz. One combination with Muñoz in the first half forced Nico O’Reilly to intervene, demonstrating the potential of that relationship. But City’s defensive organisation also offered a lesson in how opponents can limit the German’s influence.

Elliot Anderson tracked Wirtz when he dropped deeper, then passed responsibility to Rúben Dias when the Liverpool player advanced. That handover prevented Anderson from being dragged out of position while making it harder for Wirtz to receive freely between the lines, according to Coaches’ Voice’s tactical analysis of the match.

The solution cannot simply be to ask Wirtz to move more. Liverpool need to create situations in which his movement forces defenders into uncomfortable decisions.

That might mean a runner attacking the space behind the defensive line as Wirtz receives between the lines, or a winger holding the width to prevent the opposition from compressing the centre. It could also require more coordinated movement from the centre-forward, giving Wirtz a passing option beyond the opposition’s midfield rather than asking him to manufacture every opening himself.

There is a balance to strike. Wirtz should retain the freedom to influence games in different areas, but freedom without complementary movement can leave a gifted playmaker with plenty of possession and too few meaningful opportunities to dictate the final action.

Liverpool have to build around what makes him dangerous without making the attack dependent on him solving every problem.

Barcola presents a different challenge. His acceleration and ability to beat defenders give Liverpool a direct attacking outlet, while his experience across the front line makes him useful when injuries restrict Iraola’s options.

The Liverpool head coach has already defended the France international’s early performances, arguing that forwards are often judged too heavily on whether they score.

“I don’t think he’s in a bad moment – the problem with wingers or strikers is if they don’t score a goal, ‘they haven’t played well’,” Iraola said before the City match.

He added that he wanted Barcola to continue arriving in scoring positions, even when those opportunities did not produce goals, and described him as a “super-valuable player” who could cover all three forward positions.

That defence is understandable. A forward’s contribution cannot be reduced to a running tally of goals and assists, particularly during the early stages of a new club career. Barcola’s fitness and limited playing time have also complicated the process of settling into a new team.

But the manager’s faith must eventually be rewarded with more than promising moments.

Against City, Barcola’s runs threatened to stretch the defence, but Matheus Nunes repeatedly managed to contain his bursts on the counter. The challenge for Liverpool is to create more situations in which Barcola can attack a defender facing his own goal, rather than receiving the ball with the opposition already organised and able to double up.

That requires better timing and variation in the delivery. It also requires movement elsewhere to occupy defenders and prevent them from concentrating on Barcola’s individual threat.

His versatility should give Iraola options, not become a reason to keep changing his role without establishing a clear set of responsibilities. Whether deployed on the left, on the right or through the middle, Barcola needs a recognisable route into the game.

Liverpool have recruited a player capable of providing penetration. The next task is to make that quality a regular feature of their attacking play.

The wider context is important. Liverpool went into the City match without Alexander Isak and Cody Gakpo, while Hugo Ekitike was also unavailable. Lewis Koumas was left to lead the line, with the club short of established options in central attack.

Those absences affected more than the choice of striker. They altered the movement available to Wirtz and Barcola, the options Liverpool had when playing through pressure and the number of runners able to attack the penalty area.

A centre-forward’s contribution is not limited to finishing. Movement across the defensive line can create space for a playmaker to receive, while runs into the channels can open central passing lanes. A forward who can hold up the ball also offers an escape route when the press is beaten or Liverpool need to relieve pressure.

Without those options, Wirtz can be left searching for a decisive pass that is not available, while Barcola may have to create an opening through individual dribbling rather than combining with teammates.

It would be too easy to use injuries as an all-purpose explanation. Liverpool must be capable of adapting, especially across a congested schedule. But the absences help explain why the team’s attacking structure has not yet looked settled.

The answer is not necessarily to abandon the system or to demand that Wirtz and Barcola carry the attack themselves. It is to develop alternative patterns that make the most of the players available.

That could mean more direct passes into the channels, greater use of overlapping full-backs, or a more deliberate effort to get midfield runners beyond the ball. The precise solution will depend on personnel, but the principle is the same: Liverpool need several ways to threaten opponents rather than relying on individual quality to unlock every defence.

Wednesday’s Champions League trip to LASK comes at a difficult point in Liverpool’s schedule. The short turnaround after City, combined with the absence of several senior players, leaves Iraola with decisions to make about both selection and attacking balance.

It also offers an opportunity to see whether Liverpool can turn their promising moments into a more coherent performance.

Wirtz needs to influence the game in areas where he can create or finish attacks. Barcola needs to turn his direct running into a more consistent threat, whether through goals, assists or actions that create clear chances for teammates. Both need support from the players around them.

A single match will not settle the debate. Nor should the assessment depend entirely on whether either player scores. What matters is whether Liverpool generate better-quality opportunities, establish more reliable connections between midfield and attack, and give their forwards a clearer platform from which to make a difference.

Iraola’s defence of Barcola suggests he understands the danger of judging attackers solely by their output. But patience must be accompanied by progress, and tactical flexibility must produce a clearer attacking identity rather than simply more positional changes.

Liverpool do not need Wirtz and Barcola to solve every problem themselves. They need a system that makes their best qualities decisive more often.

That is the real test for Iraola: not just whether two talented signings can deliver, but whether he can make them part of an attack that consistently gives them the opportunity to do so.