Match statistics snapshot
- Montpellier created the clearer chances on xG (1.28 vs 1.14, Δ 0.14).
- Montpellier fired more attempts (18 vs 13 shots).
- Lens was more accurate in front of goal (38% on target vs 22%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Montpellier | Statistic | Lens |
|---|---|---|
| 1.28Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.14 |
| 0Lead | Offsides | 1 |
| 9 | Shots inside the box | 10Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4 |
| 4 | Shots on target | 5Lead |
|---|
| 9Lead | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 18Lead | Total shots | 13 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Montpellier | Statistic | Lens |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Ball possession | 65%Lead |
| 64% | Pass accuracy | 84%Lead |
| 187 | Accurate passes | 479Lead |
| 291 | Total passes | 567Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Montpellier | Statistic | Lens |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Corner kicks | 3 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Montpellier | Statistic | Lens |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Blocked shots | 4 |
| 5Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 4 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Montpellier | Statistic | Lens |
|---|---|---|
| 16 | Fouls | 11Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 2Lead | Yellow cards | 3 |