Match statistics snapshot
- Mjallby AIF created the clearer chances on xG (0.80 vs 1.35, Δ 0.55).
- Mjallby AIF fired more attempts (15 vs 11 shots).
- Degerfors IF was more accurate in front of goal (45% on target vs 27%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Degerfors If | Statistic | Mjallby Aif |
|---|---|---|
| 0.80 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.35Lead |
| 0Lead | Offsides | 1 |
| 4 | Shots inside the box | 10Lead |
| 3 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 5Lead |
| 5Lead | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 7Lead | Shots outside the box | 5 |
|---|
| 11 | Total shots | 15Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Degerfors If | Statistic | Mjallby Aif |
|---|---|---|
| 50% | Ball possession | 50% |
| 80% | Pass accuracy | 82%Lead |
| 353 | Accurate passes | 378Lead |
| 442 | Total passes | 460Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Degerfors If | Statistic | Mjallby Aif |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Corner kicks | 6 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Degerfors If | Statistic | Mjallby Aif |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Blocked shots | 6Lead |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 4Lead |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Degerfors If | Statistic | Mjallby Aif |
|---|---|---|
| 9Lead | Fouls | 14 |
| Red cards | ||
| 1Lead | Yellow cards | 2 |
Statistics is not available yet.