Match statistics snapshot
- Mjallby AIF created the clearer chances on xG (2.26 vs 0.19, Δ 2.07).
- Mjallby AIF fired more attempts (16 vs 6 shots).
- Mjallby AIF was more accurate in front of goal (56% on target vs 0%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Mjallby Aif | Statistic | If Elfsborg |
|---|---|---|
| 2.26Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.19 |
| 1 | Offsides | 0Lead |
| 13Lead | Shots inside the box | 2 |
| 6Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3 |
| 9Lead | Shots on target | 0 |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 4Lead |
|---|
| 16Lead | Total shots | 6 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Mjallby Aif | Statistic | If Elfsborg |
|---|---|---|
| 54%Lead | Ball possession | 46% |
| 82%Lead | Pass accuracy | 80% |
| 382Lead | Accurate passes | 325 |
| 468Lead | Total passes | 404 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Mjallby Aif | Statistic | If Elfsborg |
|---|---|---|
| 12Lead | Corner kicks | 6 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Mjallby Aif | Statistic | If Elfsborg |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blocked shots | 3Lead |
| 0 | Goalkeeper saves | 6Lead |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Mjallby Aif | Statistic | If Elfsborg |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Fouls | 18 |
| Red cards | ||
| 1Lead | Yellow cards | 2 |