Match statistics snapshot
- Amazonas created the clearer chances on xG (0.81 vs 0.51, Δ 0.30).
- Amazonas fired more attempts (17 vs 10 shots).
- Novorizontino was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 18%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Amazonas | Statistic | Novorizontino |
|---|---|---|
| 0.81Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.51 |
| 3 | Offsides | 2Lead |
| 8Lead | Shots inside the box | 3 |
| 6Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3 |
| 3 | Shots on target | 5Lead |
|---|
| 9Lead | Shots outside the box | 7 |
|---|
| 17Lead | Total shots | 10 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Amazonas | Statistic | Novorizontino |
|---|---|---|
| 55%Lead | Ball possession | 45% |
| 69% | Pass accuracy | 71%Lead |
| 227Lead | Accurate passes | 200 |
| 329Lead | Total passes | 282 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Amazonas | Statistic | Novorizontino |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Corner kicks | 4 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Amazonas | Statistic | Novorizontino |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 5Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Amazonas | Statistic | Novorizontino |
|---|---|---|
| 17Lead | Fouls | 20 |
| Red cards | ||
| 1Lead | Yellow cards | 2 |