If there was one Premier League game you should not have watched last weekend, it was Manchester United vs Tottenham Hotspur. Two of the so-called Big Six in the strongest league in the world produced a mind-bogglingly mediocre contest in which neither truly deserved as much as a point.

Kim briefly previewed this highly anticipated fixture in Friday’s newsletter, proclaiming that the Premier League sack race would have a new leader this weekend in the event of a decisive result. What she perhaps failed to consider, though, was that both coaches could be equally sack-worthy.

Both Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur continued to display the very same issues that have been plaguing them throughout the season so far, showing next to no developments to encourage fans. For neutrals, though, this match served as a lovely encapsulation of all that is wrong with these two sides right now.

Tottenham started this match well in the ascendancy, blanking their opponents for over half an hour. While they came out with a well-coordinated high press, the main reason behind its success was Manchester United’s terrible buildup.

Michael Carrick’s side initially looked to play out against the pressure, often seeking their double pivot in midfield. Spurs were happy to let them try this. They set up a pressing trap that left the opposition midfielders with space to receive, which quickly disappeared when they tried to get on the turn. The visitors thus generated a couple of dangerous high turnovers in the opening exchanges, and would go on to create a couple of big chances from such situations.

After receiving plenty of warning shots, United decided to abandon their attempts to play through the middle. They still started their buildups short, but quickly sent a long ball forward when the opposition pressure came. The defenders didn’t even bother offering an option for Senne Lammens at times, clearly indicating that the idea was to go direct. Without any aerial target up front, though, they simply ended up giving the ball away either way.

The stats reflect what was abundantly clear to anyone watching the match. Per Futi, Manchester United’s buildup success was just 56%, down from their seasonal average of 66%. They haven’t been particularly good generally either, as they have the fewest phase-winning passes in the buildup (essentially passes that cleanly take them out of the buildup) among all Premier League teams this term. In simple words, their passing at the back has been no bueno.

For all the turnovers they generated and promising situations they managed to get into, Tottenham just could not score in the first half. This has become a familiar issue for Roberto De Zerbi’s side in the Premier League; they are the only side yet to take a lead at any point this season.

The issue for Spurs isn’t getting into the danger area. In fact, they rank third for passes in the final third, though markstats’ Expected Threat (xT) model places them 11th. In any case, the trouble is that they are terrible at converting promising situations into quality chances and goals. Their xT per 90 is 1.40, but the xG figure drops to 1.04.

Underlying this is, in no small part, a personnel issue. For all the money Tottenham splurged in the summer, they didn’t assemble a particularly formidable attack. Mathys Tel has played four games in the league in spite of his head coach being visibly upset with him on the field after a match last month. His other options don’t inspire a great deal of excitement. Summer signing Sávio is a promising player, but his one-footedness has been limiting his threat. Mohammed Kudus certainly hasn’t lived up to expectations, while Omar Marmoush is not a creator by any means. Injury issues for the creative number 10s only compound the issue.

Besides lacking creators, Tottenham also desperately lack shooters, finishers or scorers – whatever you want to call them. Their team leader in terms of xG this season is Dominic Solanke, who accumulated the majority of his lofty tally of 1.2 last weekend. No one else has more than 1 xG, nor does anyone have multiple goals.

Unsurprisingly, Spurs are woeful in the finishing phase by Futi’s metrics. Their season average success rate in this phase is just around 25%, and they are fourth from bottom when it comes to xG created in open play and transition situations.

As Kim highlighted in last Friday’s newsletter, Manchester United have been a mid block team under Carrick. Typically, such sides prioritise maintaining their shape to contain opponents, congesting spaces behind the ball and making progression into dangerous areas quite difficult. They can look to spring counters from deeper turnovers, though the trade-off is that they generally do not proactively affect turnovers.

There are times when United do none of that. The opening half-hour of this match was one such occasion, as Tottenham had to put in little work to find open spaces in the attacking half. Some simple rotations on their left side easily punctured the hosts’ block, with spaces around Youri Tielemans proving particularly accessible.

This was just one of many examples of Manchester United’s block being easily pulled apart, which surely contributed to Carrick’s decision to send his side higher up the pitch after the half-time break. The weakness ended up proving costly nevertheless when they conceded the equaliser in stoppage time.

When Roberto De Zerbi joined Tottenham in the midst of a serious relegation battle, he made the very sensible decision of not trying to immediately implement his trademark pinball buildup patterns. While very eye-catching and effective when successfully employed, they needed the right personnel and rigorous training. Spurs’ situation meant that any half-baked implementation could well have been disastrous, so the Italian tactician instead resorted to long balls aimed at a target striker to get out from the back.

That call might have saved Tottenham in 2025/26, but it never was a good long-term approach. After completely overhauling their centre-back and central midfield options in the summer by spending massive money on ball-players, Spurs still don’t look comfortable building out in the manner you would expect from a typical De Zerbi team. Per Futi, they ‘won’ (ended up in a better position than they started) less than half of their short goal-kick build-up phases in this match.

What’s worse is that their long balls haven’t been working either. They have completed the fewest such passes in the league so far this term, and have a mediocre completion rate of 42.4%. Tottenham have shown some glimpses of being able to slice through a press on occasion (such as against Newcastle), but against a more positionally fixed high block such as what United produced after half-time, they can end up looking clueless.

On paper, Manchester United’s attack does not look like a problem area. Their tally of nine goals may not be remarkable, but it is not too bad either, and they rank higher by xG. A closer look, however, reveals some concerns. United have the third-furthest average shot distance and fourth-lowest xG/shot average, indicating that their xG figure is inflated by sheer volume rather than quality chances.

True to tradition, United’s attack has been threatening in transition. However, they can have a tougher time against deep blocks. This issue has been laid bare in their last two games, as they have consecutively struggled to create in 11v10 situations. As their opponents collapse into very low blocks, they seem wholly reliant on individual quality to make the difference, showing no collective ideas to find a way through. This cost them all three points in the Manchester derby, and two more this weekend as they only produced a couple of speculative efforts from range after letting the equaliser in.

This one does not necessarily fit in one place in the chronology of this match, but it has been a consistent problem for Tottenham throughout this season.

On this night, Spurs weirdly dropped off around the 25th minute, allowing United a way back into the game, and eventually even ceding a good degree of control in the second half. It has also cost them in previous matches such as against Newcastle and especially Aston Villa, as they had sequences of positive rhythm but could neither make them count nor sustain them long enough.

Of course, this also ties into Tottenham’s final third and finishing issues, since they would be able to make much more of such promising periods if they could create and convert chances.

If you enjoyed this newsletter, we’d appreciate it if you would forward it to a friend. If you’re that friend, welcome! You can subscribe to The Transfer Flow here. We also have a podcast where we go in depth on transfer news and rumours every week. We’re on YouTube here, and you can subscribe on Apple Podcasts or Spotify by searching for “The Transfer Flow Podcast.” If you’re interested in football betting, check out this post on why we started Variance Betting.