Match statistics snapshot
- Chelmsford City fired more attempts (14 vs 10 shots).
- Chelmsford City was more accurate in front of goal (43% on target vs 30%).
- Braintree held more of the ball (53% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Chelmsford City | Statistic | Braintree |
|---|---|---|
| Expected goals (xG)Quality of chances created — not just shot count. | ||
3 | OffsidesTiming of runs — high counts can mean aggressive lines. | 0Lead |
13Lead | Shots inside the box | 6 |
6Lead | Shots off target | 4 |
6Lead | Shots on target | 3 |
1 | Shots outside the box | 4Lead |
14Lead | Total shotsAll attempts including blocked and off-target. | 10 |
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Chelmsford City | Statistic | Braintree |
|---|---|---|
47% | Ball possession | 53%Lead |
64% | Pass accuracy | 64% |
158 | Accurate passes | 182Lead |
246 | Total passes | 284Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Chelmsford City | Statistic | Braintree |
|---|---|---|
3 | Corner kicks | 4Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Chelmsford City | Statistic | Braintree |
|---|---|---|
2 | Blocked shotsDefensive actions — also counts as part of attacking pressure faced. | 3Lead |
2 | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
| Goals preventedKeeper performance vs expected — positive is above average. |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Chelmsford City | Statistic | Braintree |
|---|---|---|
19 | Fouls | 18Lead |
0Lead | Red cards | 1 |
1 | Yellow cards | 0Lead |
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.
Chelmsford City leads this block
Chelmsford City leads shot accuracy (+43% vs Braintree)
Chelmsford City leads shot accuracy (+43% vs Braintree)
Chelmsford City leads box penetration (+55% vs Braintree)
Playing style signals: whether chances came from patient possession or direct vertical play.
Chelmsford City leads this block
Braintree — slower buildup (more passes per shot)
Braintree — slower buildup (more passes per shot)
Territorial dominance built from box presence, set pieces, and sustained threat.
Chelmsford City leads this block
Chelmsford City leads territorial pressure (+68% vs Braintree)
Chelmsford City leads territorial pressure (+68% vs Braintree)
Archetype ratings you can map to card modifiers, AI behaviour, or match narratives.
Braintree leads this block
Braintree had the edge in 3 of 4 signals in this block.
Braintree leads (23.0 vs 21.0).
Braintree leads (33.9 vs 30.1).
Chelmsford City leads (16.0 vs 10.0).
Braintree leads (24.0 vs 22.0).