Match statistics snapshot
- Cardiff created the clearer chances on xG (2.34 vs 1.95, Δ 0.39).
- Cardiff fired more attempts (18 vs 13 shots).
- Cardiff held more of the ball (61% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Cardiff | Statistic | Doncaster |
|---|---|---|
2.34Lead | Expected goals (xG)Quality of chances created — not just shot count. | 1.95 |
0Lead | OffsidesTiming of runs — high counts can mean aggressive lines. | 3 |
12 | Shots inside the box | 12 |
5 | Shots off target | 7Lead |
9Lead | Shots on target | 6 |
6Lead | Shots outside the box | 1 |
18Lead | Total shotsAll attempts including blocked and off-target. | 13 |
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Cardiff | Statistic | Doncaster |
|---|---|---|
61%Lead | Ball possession | 39% |
82%Lead | Pass accuracy | 77% |
450Lead | Accurate passes | 261 |
547Lead | Total passes | 341 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Cardiff | Statistic | Doncaster |
|---|---|---|
4Lead | Corner kicks | 2 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Cardiff | Statistic | Doncaster |
|---|---|---|
4Lead | Blocked shotsDefensive actions — also counts as part of attacking pressure faced. | 0 |
3 | Goalkeeper saves | 4Lead |
| Goals preventedKeeper performance vs expected — positive is above average. |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Cardiff | Statistic | Doncaster |
|---|---|---|
12 | Fouls | 12 |
| Red cards | ||
2 | Yellow cards | 2 |
Scouting-style duels — each row compares both teams, shows share of the pie, and who had the edge. Categories summarize who won more signals.
How clinical and dangerous each attack was — not just how often they shot, but where and how good those chances were.
Doncaster leads this block
Doncaster leads shot quality (+15% vs Cardiff)
Cardiff leads (50% vs 46%).
Doncaster leads shot quality (+15% vs Cardiff)
Doncaster leads box penetration (+38% vs Cardiff)
Playing style signals: whether chances came from patient possession or direct vertical play.
Doncaster leads this block
Doncaster leads possession efficiency (+30% vs Cardiff)
Doncaster leads possession efficiency (+30% vs Cardiff)
Cardiff — slower buildup (more passes per shot)
Territorial dominance built from box presence, set pieces, and sustained threat.
Cardiff leads this block
Cardiff leads territorial pressure (+28% vs Doncaster)
Cardiff leads territorial pressure (+28% vs Doncaster)
How well each side limited chance quality and how demanding the keepers’ workload was.
Doncaster — stronger shot quality allowed
Doncaster — stronger shot quality allowed
Cardiff leads (0.65 vs 0.58).
Archetype ratings you can map to card modifiers, AI behaviour, or match narratives.
Cardiff leads this block
Cardiff had the edge in 3 of 6 signals in this block.
Even on this measure.
Cardiff leads (50.0 vs 30.0).
Cardiff leads (16.0 vs 14.0).
Doncaster leads (0.150 vs 0.130).
Doncaster leads (87.0 vs 85.0).
Cardiff leads (18.0 vs 14.0).