Sportra logo
LiveLeaguesNewsGameplayProfile
LiveLeaguesNewsGameplayProfile
HomeLive ScoresLeaguesNewsAboutSportra IntelligenceContactPrivacyCookiesTermsDMCAAttribution

© 2026 Sportra. All rights reserved.

Built by TwinForge · TwinsLegacy

Accrington ST vs Tranmere Match Statistics & xG

ASAccrington STAccrington ST
1 — 1FT…
TRTranmereTranmere
OverviewLineupsStatisticsStandingsEventsPlayersPredictionsOdds (pre)Odds (live)FormInjuriesH2HNews

Accrington ST vs Tranmere match statistics

xG, possession, shots, and full match statistics for Accrington ST vs Tranmere in League Two.

Updated 2026-06-10T12:11:44.887461Z

Match statistics snapshot

  • Accrington ST fired more attempts (15 vs 9 shots).
  • Tranmere held more of the ball (60% possession).
ASAccrington STAccrington STvsTranmereTRTranmere

Attacking

Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.

Accrington StStatisticTranmere
Expected goals (xG)Quality of chances created — not just shot count.
4
OffsidesTiming of runs — high counts can mean aggressive lines.
0Lead
9Lead
Shots inside the box
5
5Lead
Shots off target
3
4Lead
Shots on target
3
6Lead
Shots outside the box
4
15Lead
Total shotsAll attempts including blocked and off-target.
9

Possession & passing

How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.

Accrington StStatisticTranmere
40%
Ball possession
60%Lead
47%
Pass accuracy
60%Lead
130
Accurate passes
252Lead
275
Total passes
421Lead

Set pieces

Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.

Accrington StStatisticTranmere
4Lead
Corner kicks
2

Defensive & goalkeeping

Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.

Accrington StStatisticTranmere
6Lead
Blocked shotsDefensive actions — also counts as part of attacking pressure faced.
3
2
Goalkeeper saves
3Lead
Goals preventedKeeper performance vs expected — positive is above average.

Discipline

Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.

Accrington StStatisticTranmere
5Lead
Fouls
13
Red cards
1Lead
Yellow cards
2

Tactical insights

Scouting-style duels — each row compares both teams, shows share of the pie, and who had the edge. Categories summarize who won more signals.

Accrington StTranmere
◎

Shooting efficiency

How clinical and dangerous each attack was — not just how often they shot, but where and how good those chances were.

1Accrington St
duels won
1Tranmere

Tranmere leads shot accuracy (+25% vs Accrington St)

  1. 1

    Shot accuracy

    Share of attempts that tested the goalkeeper — accuracy vs volume.

    Accrington St27%44% share
    vs
    Tranmere33%56% share

    Tranmere leads shot accuracy (+25% vs Accrington St)

  2. 2

    Inside box ratio

    How often attacks reached the penalty area — proxy for box penetration.

    Accrington St60%52% share
    vs
    Tranmere56%48% share

    Accrington St leads (60% vs 56%).

⇄

Tactical identity

Playing style signals: whether chances came from patient possession or direct vertical play.

Accrington St leads this block

1Accrington St
duels won
0Tranmere

Tranmere — slower buildup (more passes per shot)

  1. 1

    Passes per shot

    Build-up length before shooting. Higher = more patient circulation; lower = direct vertical play.

    Accrington St1828% share
    vs
    Tranmere4772% share

    Tranmere — slower buildup (more passes per shot)

↑

Pressure & control

Territorial dominance built from box presence, set pieces, and sustained threat.

Accrington St leads this block

1Accrington St
duels won
0Tranmere

Accrington St leads territorial pressure (+78% vs Tranmere)

  1. 1

    Attack pressure score

    Weighted territorial score: in-box shots (×2) + corners + on-target efforts + blocks forced.

    Accrington St3264% share
    vs
    Tranmere1836% share

    Accrington St leads territorial pressure (+78% vs Tranmere)

◈

Gameplay profile

Archetype ratings you can map to card modifiers, AI behaviour, or match narratives.

Tranmere leads this block

1Accrington St
duels won
3Tranmere

Tranmere had the edge in 3 of 4 signals in this block.

  1. 1

    Aggression rating

    Fouls and cards combined — physical intensity and risk.

    Accrington St7.029% share
    vs
    Tranmere17.071% share

    Tranmere leads (17.0 vs 7.0).

  2. 2

    Control rating

    Possession blended with pass accuracy — control without chaos.

    Accrington St18.834% share
    vs
    Tranmere36.066% share

    Tranmere leads (36.0 vs 18.8).

  3. 3

    Siege pressure

    Corners plus in-box shots — sustained pressure around the box.

    Accrington St13.065% share
    vs
    Tranmere7.035% share

    Accrington St leads (13.0 vs 7.0).

  4. 4

    Chaos factor

    Fouls, cards, and blocks — how stop-start and disruptive the match felt.

    Accrington St12.040% share
    vs
    Tranmere18.060% share

    Tranmere leads (18.0 vs 12.0).