Match statistics snapshot
- Keçiörengücü created the clearer chances on xG (1.86 vs 1.16, Δ 0.70).
- Keçiörengücü fired more attempts (14 vs 8 shots).
- Amed held more of the ball (53% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Keçiörengücü | Statistic | Amed |
|---|---|---|
| 1.86Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.16 |
| 3 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 8Lead | Shots inside the box | 7 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 1 |
| 4Lead | Shots on target | 2 |
|---|
| 6Lead | Shots outside the box | 1 |
|---|
| 14Lead | Total shots | 8 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Keçiörengücü | Statistic | Amed |
|---|---|---|
| 47% | Ball possession | 53%Lead |
| 83%Lead | Pass accuracy | 80% |
| 307 | Accurate passes | 329Lead |
| 372 | Total passes | 411Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Keçiörengücü | Statistic | Amed |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Corner kicks | 5Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Keçiörengücü | Statistic | Amed |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Blocked shots | 5Lead |
| 0 | Goalkeeper saves | 2Lead |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Keçiörengücü | Statistic | Amed |
|---|---|---|
| 12 | Fouls | 12 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 1Lead |