Match statistics snapshot
- Birmingham created the clearer chances on xG (1.16 vs 0.95, Δ 0.21).
- Birmingham fired more attempts (12 vs 8 shots).
- QPR was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 33%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Birmingham | Statistic | Qpr |
|---|---|---|
| 1.16Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.95 |
| 1Lead | Offsides | 4 |
| 11Lead | Shots inside the box | 7 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3Lead |
| 4 | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 1 | Shots outside the box | 1 |
|---|
| 12Lead | Total shots | 8 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Birmingham | Statistic | Qpr |
|---|---|---|
| 54%Lead | Ball possession | 46% |
| 76%Lead | Pass accuracy | 70% |
| 294Lead | Accurate passes | 219 |
| 386Lead | Total passes | 314 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Birmingham | Statistic | Qpr |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | Corner kicks | 7Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Birmingham | Statistic | Qpr |
|---|---|---|
| 6Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 4 | Goalkeeper saves | 4 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Birmingham | Statistic | Qpr |
|---|---|---|
| 13 | Fouls | 13 |
| Red cards | ||
| 3 | Yellow cards | 2Lead |