Match statistics snapshot
- Mushuc Runa SC fired more attempts (13 vs 6 shots).
- Mushuc Runa SC was more accurate in front of goal (54% on target vs 17%).
- Mushuc Runa SC held more of the ball (60% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Mushuc Runa Sc | Statistic | Manta Fc |
|---|---|---|
| Expected goals (xG) | ||
| 0Lead | Offsides | 3 |
| 10Lead | Shots inside the box | 3 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4 |
| 7Lead | Shots on target | 1 |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 13Lead | Total shots | 6 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Mushuc Runa Sc | Statistic | Manta Fc |
|---|---|---|
| 60%Lead | Ball possession | 40% |
| 80%Lead | Pass accuracy | 67% |
| 364Lead | Accurate passes | 202 |
| 454Lead | Total passes | 302 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Mushuc Runa Sc | Statistic | Manta Fc |
|---|---|---|
| 6Lead | Corner kicks | 1 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Mushuc Runa Sc | Statistic | Manta Fc |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 1 | Goalkeeper saves | 5Lead |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Mushuc Runa Sc | Statistic | Manta Fc |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Fouls | 12 |
| Red cards | ||
| 0Lead | Yellow cards | 2 |