Liverpool reportedly made one final attempt to bring Chelsea right-back Malo Gusto to Anfield on deadline day, only for the two clubs to fail to find common ground over the structure of a deal.

According to the information attributed to French journalist Fabrice Hawkins, Liverpool explored taking the 23-year-old on loan with a mandatory purchase clause. Chelsea, however, preferred an immediate permanent transfer, leaving negotiations at an impasse.

It represents a frustrating end to Liverpool’s pursuit of a player who could have provided a solution on the right side of their defence.

Interest in Gusto had been building throughout August. Reports earlier in the window claimed Liverpool were monitoring the France international, while Manchester City had also been credited with an interest. Chelsea’s valuation has previously been reported at around £75million, making a permanent move an expensive proposition. 

Gusto’s numbers demonstrate why Liverpool were tempted. He made 34 Premier League appearances for Chelsea during 2025/26, starting 26 times and contributing two goals and three assists. Across his Premier League career with Chelsea, he has now recorded 10 assists in 94 appearances.

Under Andoni Iraola, Gusto’s athleticism could have been particularly valuable. Liverpool’s aggressive approach demands defenders capable of playing on the front foot, pressing high and recovering quickly when opponents break through the first line.

Gusto ticks many of those boxes. Quick, energetic and comfortable carrying the ball forward, he is naturally suited to an adventurous full-back role. He also has experience moving into central areas: 

Chelsea have previously deployed him as an inverted full-back, while the Frenchman has spoken about his willingness to operate at right-back, left-back, midfield or further forward. 

That versatility would have been particularly useful given Liverpool’s issues at right-back. Conor Bradley’s injury situation has left the Reds requiring greater depth, while Gusto could have competed directly with Jeremie Frimpong rather than merely arriving as emergency cover. 

There is also proven Premier League experience. Gusto would not have required the same adaptation period as a player arriving from overseas, and at only 23, Liverpool would have been buying someone with considerable room to develop.

The deal ultimately appears to have fallen victim to finances and structure rather than a lack of admiration.

Liverpool wanted flexibility. Chelsea wanted certainty. And on deadline day, that difference was enough to leave Gusto at Stamford Bridge and Liverpool wondering whether a potentially perfect defensive reinforcement had slipped through their fingers.

Follow LFC Transfer Room On: X | Instagram | Facebook | Threads | Youtube