Jamie Carragher is entitled to ask why Florian Wirtz is not doing more for Liverpool. The harder question is whether 55 appearances are enough to decide how much more he can give.
That distinction matters in the debate following Liverpool’s 1-0 win at Bournemouth. Wirtz’s performance prompted another pointed assessment from Carragher, while a comparison with Martin Ødegaard’s first 55 Arsenal appearances offered supporters an argument for patience.
The comparison deserves scrutiny. The version circulating on X understates Ødegaard’s output, and correcting it changes the argument considerably.
There is still a reasonable case for giving Wirtz time. But Ødegaard’s early Arsenal career also shows why patience needs to be supported by signs of progress.
What Carragher said
Carragher’s criticism went well beyond one disappointing afternoon at Bournemouth. Speaking after Liverpool’s victory, the former defender questioned whether Wirtz was simply struggling for form or whether what Liverpool have seen so far is closer to his present level.
🗣️ "I don't think Florian Wirtz is in poor form, what we're seeing is what he is"
Jamie Carragher says he is worried for Florian Wirtz and doesn't see how he will hurt teams ⤵️ pic.twitter.com/umgZ0ZgfzK
— Sky Sports Premier League (@SkySportsPL) September 20, 2026
“I actually think what we’re seeing is what he is.”
Carragher’s wider argument on Sky Sports was about impact. He described Wirtz as neat and tidy but questioned how often he hurts opponents, given the expectations that accompanied his move from Bayer Leverkusen.
He also raised the knock-on effect elsewhere in Liverpool’s midfield. Using Wirtz as a No 10 moves Dominik Szoboszlai into a deeper central role which Carragher does not believe suits him, while Carragher argued that Wirtz should not start against Manchester City after the international break.
There are really two questions here. It is reasonable to ask whether Wirtz is currently doing enough to justify his place in Liverpool’s strongest side. It is harder to conclude, after 55 appearances, that what Liverpool are seeing now establishes the limit of what a 23-year-old can become.
What the first 55 appearances show
The X post gives Wirtz seven goals and nine assists in his first 55 Liverpool appearances, against five goals and three assists for Ødegaard at Arsenal. That produces an apparent 16-8 advantage in direct goal involvements.
.
The Ødegaard figures do not withstand checking.
FBref’s all-competitions records show two goals and two assists in his 20 appearances during the 2020/21 loan spell. He followed that with seven goals and five assists in 40 appearances in 2021/22.
The chronological appearance record places his 55th Arsenal game at the 3-1 victory over Manchester United on 23 April 2022. He played in all five remaining fixtures that season, contributing one further goal and no assists.
Subtracting those final five matches leaves eight goals and seven assists after 55 appearances: 15 direct goal involvements.
For Wirtz, LFChistory records seven goals and nine assists through the Bournemouth match on 20 September 2026.
| Player | Goals | Assists | Goals + assists |
|---|---|---|---|
| Florian Wirtz, Liverpool | 7 | 9 | 16 |
| Martin Ødegaard, Arsenal | 8 | 7 | 15 |
Sources: LFChistory for Wirtz; FBref season totals and match logs for Ødegaard, with the appearance cut-off cross-checked against 11v11. Totals include substitute appearances. Wirtz’s record includes the Community Shield. Assist totals come from separate providers and should not be treated as a fully standardised comparison.
That qualification matters. Reports of the debate have also credited Wirtz with 11 assists. Without reconciling the individual events behind the different counts, choosing the lower figure does not automatically make the comparison more accurate.
What can be said firmly is that Ødegaard’s record was substantially better than the screenshot suggests. On these figures, the two players are separated by one direct goal involvement, rather than Wirtz producing twice as many.
Ødegaard was already showing where Arsenal were heading
There is a temptation to remember Ødegaard’s arrival as an unremarkable beginning followed, eventually, by a dramatic transformation. The contemporary evidence is more interesting.
On 9 March 2022, before his 55th Arsenal appearance, Premier League analyst Adrian Clarke examined his growing influence. His chance creation had risen from 1.8 per 90 minutes across his first 12 league appearances that season to 3.1 across his next 12.
The analysis identified a developing partnership with Bukayo Saka, greater involvement in attacking areas and substantial work without the ball. Ødegaard was operating on the right of midfield, where his movement and passing helped bring Arsenal’s attack together.
Those were observable improvements. Arsenal had reasons to believe that a player whose headline numbers were still relatively modest was becoming increasingly valuable.
This is the more useful comparison for Liverpool. Wirtz does not need to reproduce Ødegaard’s exact goal total at an arbitrary milestone. He needs to become more influential in the team around him.
Are his combinations with Liverpool’s forwards improving? Is he receiving possession in areas where he can threaten opponents? Does his presence help the midfield function, and is that contribution becoming more consistent?
Those questions tell us more about his prospects than a one-point difference in combined goals and assists.
Different fees, different starting points
Both players were 22 when they first joined their respective English clubs. Their circumstances, however, were different.
Ødegaard arrived on loan before Arsenal committed an initial £30 million to his permanent signing. Arsenal had already watched him work within Mikel Arteta’s team before making that decision.
Liverpool made a very different investment. Wirtz cost an initial £100 million, with a further £16 million potentially payable in add-ons.
He also arrived with substantial achievements behind him, including a central role in Bayer Leverkusen’s unbeaten Bundesliga title campaign and domestic double in 2023/24.
Expectations of an immediate attacking contribution therefore had a sound basis. Liverpool were not buying a relatively inexpensive player after first assessing him on loan. They were making one of the biggest investments in the club’s history in a footballer who had already performed at an elite level in Germany.
The fee raises a legitimate question about Liverpool’s recruitment and the return on their investment. It cannot, by itself, establish the limit of Wirtz’s ability.
His previous performances matter when assessing what he might become in England. So does the difficulty he has had reproducing them.
Bournemouth offered evidence for both sides
Wirtz’s afternoon at Bournemouth illustrates why the argument cannot be settled by a simple choice between statistics and observation.
He struggled to establish himself and was replaced after 71 minutes. Carragher was particularly critical of his first-half performance, when his passing accuracy fell to 63 per cent, the lowest of any Liverpool player.
Yet Wirtz also had a part in the decisive goal.
Liverpool’s match report describes Cody Gakpo driving down the right and crossing into the area. Wirtz met the delivery under pressure before the ball looped to Alexander Isak, who finished.
That involvement belongs in an assessment of his performance, even though it does not make the preceding difficulties disappear.
A contribution to a winning goal can matter without demonstrating control of a match. Equally, a disappointing performance can contain a useful contribution.
For a player recruited to carry significant creative responsibility, Liverpool will expect those contributions to become more frequent and less isolated.
Patience needs evidence of progress
The Ødegaard comparison provides a sensible warning against treating a young midfielder’s early period in England as a final verdict. It does not establish that Wirtz will follow the same course.
Ødegaard’s later success was preceded by changes that could already be seen in his early Arsenal performances: better combinations, greater responsibility and increasing creative influence.
Liverpool need comparable evidence from Wirtz. His place in the side must also be judged on what the team needs now. Giving a player time to develop does not require selecting him regardless of form or tactical balance.
Carragher’s concerns about Wirtz’s present contribution deserve consideration. His much more pessimistic assessment of what Wirtz can ultimately become is harder to establish.
Fifty-five appearances are enough to ask demanding questions. They are not enough to answer every question about the rest of a 23-year-old’s career.
