Match statistics snapshot
- Bodo/Glimt created the clearer chances on xG (0.82 vs 1.76, Δ 0.94).
- Bodo/Glimt fired more attempts (8 vs 5 shots).
- Ham-Kam was more accurate in front of goal (20% on target vs 0%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Ham-kam | Statistic | Bodo/glimt |
|---|---|---|
| 0.82 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.76Lead |
| 1 | Offsides | 1 |
| 3 | Shots inside the box | 4Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 2 |
| 1Lead | Shots on target | 0 |
|---|
| 2 | Shots outside the box | 4Lead |
|---|
| 5 | Total shots | 8Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Ham-kam | Statistic | Bodo/glimt |
|---|---|---|
| 23% | Ball possession | 77%Lead |
| 74% | Pass accuracy | 88%Lead |
| 100 | Accurate passes | 419Lead |
| 136 | Total passes | 477Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Ham-kam | Statistic | Bodo/glimt |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Corner kicks | 6Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Ham-kam | Statistic | Bodo/glimt |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Blocked shots | 6Lead |
| Goalkeeper saves | ||
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Ham-kam | Statistic | Bodo/glimt |
|---|---|---|
| 7 | Fouls | 3Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 3 | Yellow cards | 0Lead |