Match statistics snapshot
- Amazulu created the clearer chances on xG (0.52 vs 1.08, Δ 0.56).
- Amazulu was more accurate in front of goal (30% on target vs 20%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Durban City | Statistic | Amazulu |
|---|---|---|
| 0.52 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.08Lead |
| 0Lead | Offsides | 1 |
| 6 | Shots inside the box | 7Lead |
| 4 |
| 5Lead |
| 2 | Shots on target | 3Lead |
|---|
| 4Lead | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 10 | Total shots | 10 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Durban City | Statistic | Amazulu |
|---|---|---|
| 49% | Ball possession | 51%Lead |
| 77% | Pass accuracy | 80%Lead |
| 304 | Accurate passes | 332Lead |
| 397 | Total passes | 414Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Durban City | Statistic | Amazulu |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Corner kicks | 5Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Durban City | Statistic | Amazulu |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
| 0.41 | Goals prevented | 0.41 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Durban City | Statistic | Amazulu |
|---|---|---|
| 14Lead | Fouls | 17 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 1Lead |
Statistics is not available yet.