Match statistics snapshot
- FC Tokyo created the clearer chances on xG (2.28 vs 1.41, Δ 0.87).
- Nagoya Grampus was more accurate in front of goal (67% on target vs 58%).
- Nagoya Grampus held more of the ball (65% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Fc Tokyo | Statistic | Nagoya Grampus |
|---|---|---|
| 2.28Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.41 |
| Offsides | ||
| 7 | Shots inside the box | 9Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 2 |
| 7 | Shots on target | 8Lead |
|---|
| 5Lead | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 12 | Total shots | 12 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Fc Tokyo | Statistic | Nagoya Grampus |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Ball possession | 65%Lead |
| 78% | Pass accuracy | 88%Lead |
| 252 | Accurate passes | 550Lead |
| 323 | Total passes | 624Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Fc Tokyo | Statistic | Nagoya Grampus |
|---|---|---|
| 3Lead | Corner kicks | 2 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Fc Tokyo | Statistic | Nagoya Grampus |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 6Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 4 |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Fc Tokyo | Statistic | Nagoya Grampus |
|---|---|---|
| 12Lead | Fouls | 13 |
| Red cards | ||
| 1 | Yellow cards | 1 |
Statistics is not available yet.