Jamie Carragher reveals Liverpool's problem this season - why it is the difference between them and Manchester City

Former Liverpool player turned pundit Jamie Carragher has revealed the difference between the Reds and Manchester City.

Crystal Palace put in a stern battling performance to take a point from Anfield but it could have been more after Darwin Nunez was sent off for a headbutt on Joachim Andersen.

That makes it two draws out of two for Jurgen Klopp's men following their 2-2 draw with Fulham on the opening weekend of the Premier League.

Former Liverpool defender Carragher was quick to reveal the 'big difference' between Liverpool and Manchester City which could decide the title this season.

Jamie Carragher's comments on Liverpool and Man City

On Monday Night Football on Sky Sports, Carragher made the claim that Palace's goal against Liverpool demonstrates the difference between them and Man City.

"That's the big difference between Liverpool and Manchester City. Liverpool are too open to counterattacks." Carragher claimed.

Eze broke past Fabinho before playing in Zaha - who was clean through thanks to Liverpool's high line tactic before slotting an incredibly clinical finish past Alisson.

The Reds were also caught on the counter by Fulham last week and run the risk with their incredible high line which is certainly a high-risk, high-reward situation which has contributed majorly to their success in recent years. However, the blueprint is there for teams to copy when they face the Reds.

Why are Liverpool worse than City at dealing with counter-attacks?

Manchester City also play similar to Liverpool in the fact they defend with a high-intensity pressing system and by also dominating the ball for the majority of the game. But they aren't as susceptible as Liverpool to counter-attacks.

The key is how the two teams are set up; Trent Alexander-Arnold and Andy Robertson are incredibly advanced as full-backs leaving Fabinho and Jordan Henderson along with the two centre-backs as the line of defence should a counter-attack occur.

A poor decision to dive in on Eze resulted in Fabinho being out of position and Nat Phillips's inability to spring an offside trap led to Zaha being able to go through one on one to score.

The difference for City is that their full-backs are inverted, meaning they take up positions in possession almost alongside Rodri (their lone defensive midfielder) while their attackers stay wide. This allows for a better position in which to deal with counter-attacks.

Pep Guardiola, quoted by the Athletic, once claimed: “If you want to play here (high up the pitch) and you don’t control the counter-attack you cannot play in that way. It’s impossible."

They also have someone like Kyle Walker who is perhaps the fastest defender in the league and his recovery runs help City nullify any potential counters - pace which obviously none of the Liverpool midfielders possesses given their full-backs are pushed higher up.

The high-risk high-reward nature has served them well under Klopp and it will continue to do so - it's just the small tactical tweak that sees City slightly better adjusted to deal with those type of threats. It also have something to do with the fact that City play more short passes when compared to Liverpool's crossing/quick switch approach.

As Guardiola claimed, shorter passes means a shorter distance to counter-press - as opposed to long balls which are harder to retrieve with the counter-press. How often do we see Trent or Robertson or Virgil Van Dijk play a searching long ball? These small differences show the difference between City and Liverpool but don't expect Klopp to change what has been a winning formula.