Match statistics snapshot
- Ham-Kam created the clearer chances on xG (2.62 vs 0.77, Δ 1.85).
- Ham-Kam fired more attempts (13 vs 12 shots).
- Ham-Kam was more accurate in front of goal (46% on target vs 17%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Ham-kam | Statistic | Kfum Oslo |
|---|---|---|
| 2.62Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.77 |
| 2 | Offsides | 0Lead |
| 12Lead | Shots inside the box | 7 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4 |
| 6Lead | Shots on target | 2 |
|---|
| 1 | Shots outside the box | 5Lead |
|---|
| 13Lead | Total shots | 12 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Ham-kam | Statistic | Kfum Oslo |
|---|---|---|
| 52%Lead | Ball possession | 48% |
| 87%Lead | Pass accuracy | 85% |
| 473Lead | Accurate passes | 419 |
| 544Lead | Total passes | 491 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Ham-kam | Statistic | Kfum Oslo |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Corner kicks | 3Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Ham-kam | Statistic | Kfum Oslo |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blocked shots | 6Lead |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
| -1.82 | Goals prevented | -1.82 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Ham-kam | Statistic | Kfum Oslo |
|---|---|---|
| 15 | Fouls | 12Lead |
| 0Lead | Red cards | 1 |
| 1 | Yellow cards | 0Lead |
Statistics is not available yet.