Match statistics snapshot
- Banfield fired more attempts (16 vs 15 shots).
- Banfield was more accurate in front of goal (25% on target vs 13%).
- Independ.
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Banfield | Statistic | Independ. Rivadavia |
|---|---|---|
| Expected goals (xG) | ||
| 3 | Offsides | 0Lead |
| 8 | Shots inside the box | 10Lead |
| 7 |
| 11Lead |
| 4Lead | Shots on target | 2 |
|---|
| 8Lead | Shots outside the box | 5 |
|---|
| 16Lead | Total shots | 15 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Banfield | Statistic | Independ. Rivadavia |
|---|---|---|
| 39% | Ball possession | 61%Lead |
| 64% | Pass accuracy | 80%Lead |
| 156 | Accurate passes | 321Lead |
| 244 | Total passes | 401Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Banfield | Statistic | Independ. Rivadavia |
|---|---|---|
| 6Lead | Corner kicks | 3 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Banfield | Statistic | Independ. Rivadavia |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 4Lead |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Banfield | Statistic | Independ. Rivadavia |
|---|---|---|
| 12 | Fouls | 8Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 1Lead |
Statistics is not available yet.