Match statistics snapshot
- Coritiba created the clearer chances on xG (0.92 vs 0.53, Δ 0.39).
- Remo fired more attempts (14 vs 8 shots).
- Coritiba was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 7%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Coritiba | Statistic | Remo |
|---|---|---|
| 0.92Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.53 |
| 6 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 8Lead | Shots inside the box | 3 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 11Lead |
| 4Lead | Shots on target | 1 |
|---|
| 0 | Shots outside the box | 11Lead |
|---|
| 8 | Total shots | 14Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Coritiba | Statistic | Remo |
|---|---|---|
| 42% | Ball possession | 58%Lead |
| 78% | Pass accuracy | 86%Lead |
| 224 | Accurate passes | 332Lead |
| 289 | Total passes | 384Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Coritiba | Statistic | Remo |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Corner kicks | 6Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Coritiba | Statistic | Remo |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 1 | Goalkeeper saves | 3Lead |
| 0.38 | Goals prevented | 0.38 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Coritiba | Statistic | Remo |
|---|---|---|
| 13 | Fouls | 11Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 2Lead | Yellow cards | 3 |