Match statistics snapshot
- Hertha BSC created the clearer chances on xG (1.97 vs 1.02, Δ 0.95).
- Hertha BSC fired more attempts (19 vs 11 shots).
- Hertha BSC was more accurate in front of goal (47% on target vs 27%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Hertha Bsc | Statistic | 1. Fc Heidenheim |
|---|---|---|
| 1.97Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.02 |
| 1Lead | Offsides | 2 |
| 9Lead | Shots inside the box | 8 |
| 5 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 7Lead |
| 9Lead | Shots on target | 3 |
|---|
| 10Lead | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 19Lead | Total shots | 11 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Hertha Bsc | Statistic | 1. Fc Heidenheim |
|---|---|---|
| 51%Lead | Ball possession | 49% |
| 81%Lead | Pass accuracy | 78% |
| 301Lead | Accurate passes | 270 |
| 370Lead | Total passes | 345 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Hertha Bsc | Statistic | 1. Fc Heidenheim |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Corner kicks | 3 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Hertha Bsc | Statistic | 1. Fc Heidenheim |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 4Lead |
| -2.04 | Goals prevented | -2.04 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Hertha Bsc | Statistic | 1. Fc Heidenheim |
|---|---|---|
| 12Lead | Fouls | 17 |
| 1 | Red cards | 0Lead |
| 1Lead | Yellow cards | 2 |