Match statistics snapshot
- Nottingham Forest created the clearer chances on xG (1.20 vs 1.09, Δ 0.11).
- Nottingham Forest fired more attempts (10 vs 6 shots).
- Chelsea was more accurate in front of goal (33% on target vs 20%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Chelsea |
|---|---|---|
| 1.20Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.09 |
| 5 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 8Lead | Shots inside the box | 4 |
| 4Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 2 |
| 2 | Shots on target | 2 |
|---|
| 2 | Shots outside the box | 2 |
|---|
| 10Lead | Total shots | 6 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Chelsea |
|---|---|---|
| 52%Lead | Ball possession | 48% |
| 84%Lead | Pass accuracy | 80% |
| 352Lead | Accurate passes | 327 |
| 420Lead | Total passes | 409 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Chelsea |
|---|---|---|
| 7Lead | Corner kicks | 4 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Chelsea |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 1 | Goalkeeper saves | 2Lead |
| 0.12 | Goals prevented | 0.12 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Chelsea |
|---|---|---|
| 10Lead | Fouls | 11 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 2 |