Match statistics snapshot
- Ferencvarosi TC created the clearer chances on xG (2.03 vs 1.53, Δ 0.50).
- Ferencvarosi TC fired more attempts (21 vs 14 shots).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Ferencvarosi Tc | Statistic | Genk |
|---|---|---|
| 2.03Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.53 |
| Offsides | ||
| 12Lead | Shots inside the box | 10 |
| 9Lead |
| 7 |
| 7Lead | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 9Lead | Shots outside the box | 4 |
|---|
| 21Lead | Total shots | 14 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Ferencvarosi Tc | Statistic | Genk |
|---|---|---|
| 51%Lead | Ball possession | 49% |
| 79% | Pass accuracy | 83%Lead |
| 333 | Accurate passes | 337Lead |
| 422Lead | Total passes | 407 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Ferencvarosi Tc | Statistic | Genk |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Corner kicks | 4 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Ferencvarosi Tc | Statistic | Genk |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Blocked shots | 3 |
| 3 | Goalkeeper saves | 6Lead |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Ferencvarosi Tc | Statistic | Genk |
|---|---|---|
| 16 | Fouls | 16 |
| Red cards | ||
| 1Lead | Yellow cards | 4 |