Match statistics snapshot
- Clermont Foot created the clearer chances on xG (1.58 vs 1.98, Δ 0.40).
- Nice fired more attempts (23 vs 13 shots).
- Clermont Foot was more accurate in front of goal (38% on target vs 17%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Nice | Statistic | Clermont Foot |
|---|---|---|
| 1.58 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.98Lead |
| 1 | Offsides | 0Lead |
| 12Lead | Shots inside the box | 10 |
| 13Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3 |
| 4 | Shots on target | 5Lead |
|---|
| 11Lead | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 23Lead | Total shots | 13 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Nice | Statistic | Clermont Foot |
|---|---|---|
| 58%Lead | Ball possession | 42% |
| 87%Lead | Pass accuracy | 79% |
| 475Lead | Accurate passes | 330 |
| 549Lead | Total passes | 418 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Nice | Statistic | Clermont Foot |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Corner kicks | 1 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Nice | Statistic | Clermont Foot |
|---|---|---|
| 6Lead | Blocked shots | 5 |
| 5Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 4 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Nice | Statistic | Clermont Foot |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Fouls | 12 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 1Lead |
Statistics is not available yet.