Match statistics snapshot
- Criciuma created the clearer chances on xG (0.03 vs 0.43, Δ 0.40).
- Criciuma was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 0%).
- Nautico Recife held more of the ball (63% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Nautico Recife | Statistic | Criciuma |
|---|---|---|
| 0.03 | Expected goals (xG) | 0.43Lead |
| Offsides | ||
| 1 | Shots inside the box | 2Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 1 |
| 0 | Shots on target | 1Lead |
|---|
| 1Lead | Shots outside the box | 0 |
|---|
| 2 | Total shots | 2 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Nautico Recife | Statistic | Criciuma |
|---|---|---|
| 63%Lead | Ball possession | 37% |
| 72% | Pass accuracy | 74%Lead |
| 23Lead | Accurate passes | 14 |
| 32Lead | Total passes | 19 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Nautico Recife | Statistic | Criciuma |
|---|---|---|
| 1Lead | Corner kicks | 0 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Nautico Recife | Statistic | Criciuma |
|---|---|---|
| 1Lead | Blocked shots | 0 |
| Goalkeeper saves | ||
| 0.00 | Goals prevented | 0.00 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Nautico Recife | Statistic | Criciuma |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Fouls | 1Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| Yellow cards |
Statistics is not available yet.