Everton’s 2-2 draw with United was encouraging, but the underlying numbers offer a more interesting picture than the scoreline alone.
Moyes’ side produced plenty of attacking activity while still showing where the new-look team needs work. Everton had only 45% possession at the Hill Dickinson but finished with more shots, more efforts on target and more touches in the opposition penalty area.
For a side playing without the majority of the ball, that is a handy starting point.
Everton 2-2 Man Utd: The key numbers
| Metric | Everton | Man Utd |
|---|---|---|
| Possession | 45% | 55% |
| Expected goals (xG) | 1.03 | 0.72 |
| Shots | 18 | 14 |
| Shots on target | 6 | 3 |
| Opposition-box touches | 31 | 26 |
| Chances created | 14 | 10 |
| Key passes | 13 | 8 |
| Final-third passes | 152 | 112 |
Everton turned limited possession into territory
The encouraging part was not simply the 18 shots. Everton also registered 31 touches inside United’s box and completed considerably more passes in the final third despite having less possession.
That suggests Moyes’ side were reasonably efficient at moving the game into attacking areas. They were not just sitting deep and waiting for sporadic counter-attacks.
The 14 chances created and 13 key passes support that picture too. United had more of the ball, but Everton generated more attacking actions from theirs.
The warning sits inside the xG
Eighteen shots produced only 1.03 xG, which tells us Everton’s volume was better than their average chance quality.
Thierno Barry alone accumulated 0.38 xG, comfortably the highest Everton total. His free header from Merlin Röhl’s first-half cross was exactly the type of chance Moyes will want his striker receiving more regularly.
By contrast, Everton scored from two very low-probability efforts. Tyrique George’s equaliser was valued at 0.04 xG, while Ainsley Maitland-Niles’ spectacular stoppage-time strike carried just 0.03 xG.
Both were superb finishes. Neither is an attacking pattern Everton can reasonably expect to reproduce every week.
United found the weakness on Everton’s right
There was also a clear structural issue without the ball. Luke Shaw and Marcus Rashford repeatedly found space behind Röhl, with United identifying Everton’s right side as an obvious route forward.
The Guardian noted that both were frequently getting in behind the German. Rohl is still learning the position, although his attacking contribution showed why Moyes is prepared to persist with him.
His cross for Barry’s header was one of Everton’s best pieces of attacking play. The problem for Moyes is finding a balance between that technical quality and the defensive protection required against elite wide players.
The changes helped
Everton’s substitutes had a direct influence. Hayden Hackney supplied the pass for George’s goal, while Maitland-Niles scored the second and Jack Grealish gave Everton greater security when carrying and retaining possession.
George’s goal is particularly interesting tactically because Hackney found him in space inside the penalty area. The finish was exceptional, but creating that pocket was more repeatable than the shot itself.
The numbers broadly support what the eye suggested. Everton produced more attacking activity than United and deserved their point, but the two goals slightly flatter the quality of the chances they created.
For Moyes, that is probably the useful conclusion. The structure generated territory and shots; the next job is generating better ones.
For updates on the Toffees throughout the season, take a look at our LIVE! Premier League 2026/27 News, Transfers, Updates & Viral Moments page.
Comments.
Loading comments…