The Virgil van Dijk Problem.

Virgil van Dijk is great isn't he? He's composed on the ball... he's barely ever dribbled past... he scores towering headers...

...until a certain Alexander Isak came along. Being a centre back in the modern era isn't half the job it used to be. Fewer long balls get pumped into your box to deal with, zonal marking gets you off the hook from corners, and of course, there's the fact you usually only play against one out-and-out striker... let alone two of them in the good ol' days. Poor Trent and Robertson have to deal with the inverted wingers... Virgil can have a leisurely stroll around his 18-yard box for the vast majority of the game.

So when Alexander Isak, a forward with pace, trickery, skill, and an incredible finish on him has come up against van Dijk in recent times, the Dutchman has had a rather unfortunate problem; he simply can't live with him. And in the last two trips to St James' Park, Isak hasn't just exposed van Dijk's shortcomings as a defender, but as a person as well.

To put it simply, Virgil van Dijk has behaved like a coward, a thug, and an egotist during his last two trips to Tyneside, and it hasn't gone unnoticed among the Geordie faithful, even if the Red half of Merseyside are keen to turn a convenient blind eye.

Van Dijk's ego meant he simply refused to leave the pitch when red-carded at SJP last year

Van Dijk's brush with Isak in 2023 lasted precisely 28 minutes. One through-ball was enough to bamboozle the Dutchman and (more characteristically) his teammate Trent Alexander-Arnold. Isak had timed his run perfectly and had given the big Dutchman the slip, meaning van Dijk had to go through Isak to get any of the ball. He was the last man. Red card. That was that.

Except it wasn't. Van Dijk took an age to leave the pitch, and spent an uncomfortable amount of time in the referee's face; an intimidation tactic that didn't pay off. Van Dijk was fined £100K and his red card was upheld. It was the behaviour of a man who simply refused to acknowledge the professional judgment of a referee; it was the disdain from a celebrity who felt his name was too big to be accused of a professional foul. Not a good look. But hey, everyone makes mistakes.

Round Two: Virgil's head had gone again, and he didn't feel like picking on someone his own size

But just over twelve months later, and van Dijk's ego took another hit, this time when his team shipped three at SJP. While ultimately, you'd have a hard time finding him culpable for the final two goals, van Dijk was stumbling around like Bambie on ice for Isak's opener. The Swede spun him one way and then the other to find the space to unleash a rocket into the top corner. Much like Kyle Walker with Manchester City, those who have the bravery to actually go at these 'respected' defenders can often find some joy. They simply aren't used to it.

But van Dijk wasn't having it. The Dutchman could be seen barking frustratedly at his teammates throughout the match as things threatened not to go Liverpool's way. But the moment the mask really slipped in a moment of cowardice and petulance was when Gordon's pace had again exposed the Liverpool defence's shortcomings. Gordon shot tamely at the keeper, who collected the ball. With the ball now safe, van Dijk make it his one-man mission to catch Gordon in the jaw... with his shoulder... with no one else in the vicinity.

Something tells me van Dijk wouldn't have tried the same stunt against someone like Joelinton or Dan Burn.

But Andy Madley and VAR saw nothing doing. You get the feeling if this thuggish behaviour had been done by a player of say... Ipswich or Southampton... there might have been a different outcome. Southampton's Jack Stephens actually did receive a red for an off-the-ball incident in which it looked like he pulled Marc Cucurella's hair during the exact same evening of fixtures as van Dijk's red mist. But sending off a celebrity like Virgil van Dijk for an off the ball incident just creates more negative press... more paperwork... and extra fuel to the fire for Scousers who already feel like the refs are against them after the recent David Coote scandal. if it had been Erling Haaland throwing his shoulder into the face of Trent, I wonder what the Liverpool response would be...

The Liverpool Echo published a story that confirmed van Dijk would face no retrospective action for his thuggery - and the comments were as predictable as you can imagine...

Pundits and fans alike agreed that van Dijk should have walked for a second time in two games at SJP. When notorious hothead Roy Keane admits he should have gone, you know it's bad. But Liverpool fans aren't having it. Instead, they're doubling down. The comments section of the Liverpool Echo's article on the incident would be hilarious if it wasn't such a shameful demonstration of victim-blaming and rose-tinted spectacles. We get it, everyone is a little bias when it comes to their side; I can't write an article like this without acknowledging that.

But when comments like "Gordon is after (British Olympic Diver) Tom Daley's crown" and "Gordon should watch where he's going next time" rear their heads, it really does highlight the lack of objectivity in almost any aspect of the sport. For a start, I would like to see anyone stand their ground if shouldered in the head by someone a head taller than them...

And then there are the 'diving' comments. If this was a Sean Dyche rough-and-ready team like Everton, fair enough. But Liverpool? A team that fields the likes of Mo Salah? It's absolutely comical. This is also the team that employs Diogo Jota, who during a match with Newcastle in January, felt contact with Nick Pope, took enough forward steps to do a quick salsa, and then hilariously flumped to the floor.

On one hand, I get it. We all back our team, football runs deeper than blood in some fanbases. And the Reds, to their credit, are one of the few fanbases that are probably just as vocal as ours. And to be fair, they actually have the clout of winning trophies to back it all up. But all this constant clamour and support of Virgil van Dijk, despite video evidence of him harassing referees, refusing instructions and clattering players off the ball to vent his toxic frustration isn't a good look. And this week's game highlighted just another instance of Virgil van Dijk showing the world that he is a good defender, not a world-class one.

Rio Ferdinand and John Terry were not without their off-field issues. But no one can doubt their ability on it. Van Dijk always seems to have that question mark to his name, and in 30 years time, I'm not sure how often his name will come up in pub conversations about the great centre backs of the Premier League era.

If that pub is the Strawberry, it's likely his name will only be remembered for losing his head when the going got tough against Alexander Isak.