Match statistics snapshot
- Ceara created the clearer chances on xG (1.12 vs 0.29, Δ 0.83).
- Ceara fired more attempts (14 vs 4 shots).
- Fluminense was more accurate in front of goal (75% on target vs 36%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Ceara | Statistic | Fluminense |
|---|---|---|
| 1.12Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.29 |
| 2 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 6Lead | Shots inside the box | 2 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 0 |
| 5Lead | Shots on target | 3 |
|---|
| 8Lead | Shots outside the box | 2 |
|---|
| 14Lead | Total shots | 4 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Ceara | Statistic | Fluminense |
|---|---|---|
| 44% | Ball possession | 56%Lead |
| 86% | Pass accuracy | 89%Lead |
| 312 | Accurate passes | 409Lead |
| 361 | Total passes | 462Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Ceara | Statistic | Fluminense |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Corner kicks | 5Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Ceara | Statistic | Fluminense |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 3 | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
| -0.17 | Goals prevented | -0.17 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Ceara | Statistic | Fluminense |
|---|---|---|
| 14Lead | Fouls | 15 |
| 0Lead | Red cards | 1 |
| 3 | Yellow cards | 0Lead |