Match statistics snapshot
- Crystal Palace created the clearer chances on xG (0.92 vs 1.19, Δ 0.27).
- Nottingham Forest fired more attempts (12 vs 10 shots).
- Nottingham Forest was more accurate in front of goal (42% on target vs 30%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Crystal Palace |
|---|---|---|
| 0.92 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.19Lead |
| 4 | Offsides | 0Lead |
| 6 | Shots inside the box | 6 |
| 3 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 6Lead |
| 5Lead | Shots on target | 3 |
|---|
| 6Lead | Shots outside the box | 4 |
|---|
| 12Lead | Total shots | 10 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Crystal Palace |
|---|---|---|
| 58%Lead | Ball possession | 42% |
| 84%Lead | Pass accuracy | 76% |
| 461Lead | Accurate passes | 300 |
| 547Lead | Total passes | 397 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Crystal Palace |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Corner kicks | 6Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Crystal Palace |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 4Lead |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Crystal Palace |
|---|---|---|
| 14 | Fouls | 12Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 1 | Yellow cards | 1 |