Rivalry with the script flipped: Liverpool kept the ball, Fulham the edge — 0-0

Rivalry and the surprise: who felt better about 0-0

In a classic Liverpool usually controls (13-4-5 across 22 meetings), the headline isn’t the 0-0: it’s that the 17th-placed side put more shots on target at Anfield. Fulham posted 4 shots on target to 3 and 8 corners to 5, not because they hid the ball: they gave it up (44% possession) and chose where to strike.

The easy read says the hosts pushed: 56% possession, 494 total passes (411 accurate), 14 shots. The scoreboard forces a closer look: that was only 4 more attempts than Fulham, and with less accuracy on target. Goalless games live in the box, not in the middle: there, it was nearly even (9-8 in shots inside the area).

Waves and a breakthrough that never came

Momentum draws it clearly: a game of waves. Fulham from 0-15’, Liverpool 15-30’, the visitors again 30-45’, hosts back 45-60’. From 60-75’ Fulham surged, from 75-90’ Liverpool pressed. Ten swings overall, 12 minutes of pressure by the hosts versus 7 by the visitors, and a final red spike exactly at 90’ (the white one at 14’). The draw was born from that alternation: nobody sustained control long enough to break the deadlock.

Sub windows matched the ebb and flow: changes at 63’, 72’ and 77’ refreshed legs and reinforced caution. Liverpool finished attacking more by inertia than by clarity: 5-3 in shots blocked, and numbers that validate the feel — more attempts, less real damage.

Possession without penetration

If the plan was to cook the chance slowly, the data kills the tale: with 56% possession, 13 key passes and 6 successful dribbles, Liverpool produced 1.13 xG. On the other side, with 44% possession and 9 key passes, Fulham generated 0.71 xG but finished with more shots on target (4-3). Both logged similar volume near goal (9-8 in shots inside the box), but the visitors picked their moments better.

The detail that explains why the game stayed shut: friction suited Fulham. More tackles (15-12), more free kicks won (10-8), and a rhythm boxed in by fouls (Liverpool 11, Fulham 8) and symmetrical interceptions (11-11). Liverpool won more duels (39-34) and still ran into a wall: 5 blocked shots and only 3 on target is the stamp of possession without payoff.

The figure who exposes the symptom

The most disruptive player wasn’t a striker or a No. 10, it was a center-back: J. Jacquet. His 7.54 rating tops the sheet and sends a message: when the standout in a home 0-0 is a defender, something was missing up front. His attacking numbers mirror the issue: 0 key passes and 1 dribble. Alongside him, V. van Dijk was also high (7.08) and Alisson made 3 saves: the structure held; the thrust never came.

At the other end, Joshua King was the liveliest: 4 shots and a 7 rating. There wasn’t much wing end-product either: Kenny Tete was booked at 81’. The split is fair on the scoreboard and harsh on expectation: it was 6th in the table against 17th, at Anfield. The table still reads them as they came in: Liverpool 6th with 6 points (DWDD), Fulham 17th with 1 (DLLL).