Match statistics snapshot
- Hammarby created the clearer chances on xG (0.12 vs 1.99, Δ 1.87).
- Hammarby fired more attempts (19 vs 3 shots).
- Hammarby held more of the ball (70% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Kif Örebro | Statistic | Hammarby |
|---|---|---|
| 0.12 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.99Lead |
| 1 | Offsides | 1 |
| 0 | Shots inside the box | 10Lead |
| 2 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4Lead |
| 1 | Shots on target | 7Lead |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 9Lead |
|---|
| 3 | Total shots | 19Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Kif Örebro | Statistic | Hammarby |
|---|---|---|
| 30% | Ball possession | 70%Lead |
| 54% | Pass accuracy | 83%Lead |
| 115 | Accurate passes | 524Lead |
| 213 | Total passes | 634Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Kif Örebro | Statistic | Hammarby |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Corner kicks | 9Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Kif Örebro | Statistic | Hammarby |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Blocked shots | 6Lead |
| 6Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Kif Örebro | Statistic | Hammarby |
|---|---|---|
| 12 | Fouls | 9Lead |
| 0 | Red cards | 0 |
| 1 | Yellow cards | 0Lead |