Match statistics snapshot
- Barnet created the clearer chances on xG (0.41 vs 1.01, Δ 0.60).
- Barnet fired more attempts (11 vs 9 shots).
- Barnet was more accurate in front of goal (36% on target vs 11%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Cambridge United | Statistic | Barnet |
|---|---|---|
| 0.41 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.01Lead |
| 2Lead | Offsides | 5 |
| 7Lead | Shots inside the box | 6 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3Lead |
| 1 | Shots on target | 4Lead |
|---|
| 2 | Shots outside the box | 5Lead |
|---|
| 9 | Total shots | 11Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Cambridge United | Statistic | Barnet |
|---|---|---|
| 48% | Ball possession | 52%Lead |
| 67%Lead | Pass accuracy | 64% |
| 197 | Accurate passes | 207Lead |
| 295 | Total passes | 323Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Cambridge United | Statistic | Barnet |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Corner kicks | 7Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Cambridge United | Statistic | Barnet |
|---|---|---|
| 6Lead | Blocked shots | 4 |
| 4Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Cambridge United | Statistic | Barnet |
|---|---|---|
| 17 | Fouls | 7Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 0Lead |