Match statistics snapshot
- Nottingham Forest created the clearer chances on xG (1.76 vs 0.97, Δ 0.79).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Crystal Palace |
|---|---|---|
| 1.76Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.97 |
| 2 | Offsides | 2 |
| 10 | Shots inside the box | 11Lead |
| 5 | Shots off target |
| 6 | Shots on target | 7Lead |
|---|
| 10Lead | Shots outside the box | 9 |
|---|
| 20 | Total shots | 20 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Crystal Palace |
|---|---|---|
| 50% | Ball possession | 50% |
| 82%Lead | Pass accuracy | 80% |
| 362Lead | Accurate passes | 358 |
| 441 | Total passes | 448Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Crystal Palace |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | Corner kicks | 6 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Crystal Palace |
|---|---|---|
| 9Lead | Blocked shots | 6 |
| 7Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 5 |
| 0 | Goals prevented | 0 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Nottingham Forest | Statistic | Crystal Palace |
|---|---|---|
| 9Lead | Fouls | 12 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2Lead | Yellow cards | 3 |
Statistics is not available yet.