Match statistics snapshot
- Hammarby created the clearer chances on xG (0.45 vs 3.74, Δ 3.29).
- Hammarby fired more attempts (20 vs 5 shots).
- Hammarby held more of the ball (69% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Alingsås W | Statistic | Hammarby |
|---|---|---|
| 0.45 | Expected goals (xG) | 3.74Lead |
| 2Lead | Offsides | 3 |
| 3 | Shots inside the box | 17Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4Lead |
| 3 | Shots on target | 11Lead |
|---|
| 2 | Shots outside the box | 3Lead |
|---|
| 5 | Total shots | 20Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Alingsås W | Statistic | Hammarby |
|---|---|---|
| 31% | Ball possession | 69%Lead |
| 67% | Pass accuracy | 83%Lead |
| 187 | Accurate passes | 533Lead |
| 279 | Total passes | 641Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Alingsås W | Statistic | Hammarby |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Corner kicks | 4Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Alingsås W | Statistic | Hammarby |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Blocked shots | 4Lead |
| 9Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Alingsås W | Statistic | Hammarby |
|---|---|---|
| 13 | Fouls | 7Lead |
| 0 | Red cards | 0 |
| 0 | Yellow cards | 0 |
Statistics is not available yet.