Match statistics snapshot
- Wuhan Three Towns created the clearer chances on xG (1.23 vs 1.62, Δ 0.39).
- Wuhan Three Towns fired more attempts (20 vs 8 shots).
- Hangzhou Greentown was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 30%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Hangzhou Greentown | Statistic | Wuhan Three Towns |
|---|---|---|
| 1.23 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.62Lead |
| 3Lead | Offsides | 7 |
| 7 | Shots inside the box | 12Lead |
| 3 | Shots off target | 9Lead |
|---|
| 4 | Shots on target | 6Lead |
|---|
| 1 | Shots outside the box | 8Lead |
|---|
| 8 | Total shots | 20Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Hangzhou Greentown | Statistic | Wuhan Three Towns |
|---|---|---|
| 50% | Ball possession | 50% |
| 82%Lead | Pass accuracy | 81% |
| 281Lead | Accurate passes | 266 |
| 344Lead | Total passes | 330 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Hangzhou Greentown | Statistic | Wuhan Three Towns |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Corner kicks | 8Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Hangzhou Greentown | Statistic | Wuhan Three Towns |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blocked shots | 5Lead |
| 5Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Hangzhou Greentown | Statistic | Wuhan Three Towns |
|---|---|---|
| 13 | Fouls | 10Lead |
| 1 | Red cards | 0Lead |
| 1 | Yellow cards | 1 |
Statistics is not available yet.