Liverpool’s Chance Creation Problem Laid Bare Against Leeds
xG, shot maps, and defensive workrate explain why Liverpool could not break Leeds down
Liverpool opened 2026 with a goalless draw against newly promoted Leeds United at Anfield, a result that felt flatter than the scoreline suggested. The stadium was full, the expectation unmistakable, yet the evening drifted by with little to stir the crowd. By the final whistle, the quiet had become its own verdict.
It was an insipid attacking display from the hosts, one that extended a worrying trend rather than breaking it. This match also marked the end of Liverpool’s run of free midweeks, bar one final full rest day between fixtures against Barnsley and Burnley. Extra preparation time has not translated into attacking fluency. If anything, the forward play now feels more laboured than before.
From a purely statistical analysis perspective, Liverpool can feel unfortunate not to have won. The underlying numbers suggest a narrow advantage in chance quality, driven largely by one moment. Hugo Ekitiké’s first half opportunity was valued at 0.36 expected goals by Wyscout. When one side generates roughly 1.0 xG more than the other, victory is usually justified.
Yet football games are rarely decided by averages alone.
Match numbers paint a familiar picture
Outside of Ekitiké’s chance, Liverpool’s attacking output was underwhelming. The Reds finished with 16 shots, but only three tested the goalkeeper. An average chance quality of 9% is well below what is required to win consistently in the Premier League. The average shot distance remained high, with too many efforts taken from outside the penalty area.
This is where the contradiction becomes clear. Liverpool recorded significantly more touches inside the opposition box and completed far more deep passes than Leeds. The territorial dominance was there, but it did not translate into high value opportunities. It was control without incision.
