Match statistics snapshot
- Cukaricki created the clearer chances on xG (2.48 vs 1.24, Δ 1.24).
- Cukaricki was more accurate in front of goal (67% on target vs 44%).
- Železničar Pančevo held more of the ball (69% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Cukaricki | Statistic | Železničar Pančevo |
|---|---|---|
| 2.48Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.24 |
| 2 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 7Lead | Shots inside the box | 6 |
| 1 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3Lead |
| 6Lead | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 2 | Shots outside the box | 3Lead |
|---|
| 9 | Total shots | 9 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Cukaricki | Statistic | Železničar Pančevo |
|---|---|---|
| 31% | Ball possession | 69%Lead |
| 62% | Pass accuracy | 87%Lead |
| 143 | Accurate passes | 432Lead |
| 230 | Total passes | 499Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Cukaricki | Statistic | Železničar Pančevo |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Corner kicks | 6Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Cukaricki | Statistic | Železničar Pančevo |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 3Lead |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Cukaricki | Statistic | Železničar Pančevo |
|---|---|---|
| 13 | Fouls | 11Lead |
| 0Lead | Red cards | 1 |
| 3 | Yellow cards | 3 |