Match statistics snapshot
- Como created the clearer chances on xG (1.56 vs 1.73, Δ 0.17).
- Como fired more attempts (15 vs 10 shots).
- Como held more of the ball (73% possession).
Pisa vs Como
Attacking
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Pisa | Statistic | Como |
|---|---|---|
| 1.56 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.73Lead |
| 2 | Offsides | 0Lead |
| 8 | Shots inside the box | 10Lead |
| 3 | Shots off target | 7Lead |
| 4 | Shots on target | 7Lead |
| 2 | Shots outside the box | 5Lead |
| 10 | Total shots | 15Lead |
Possession & passing
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Pisa | Statistic | Como |
|---|---|---|
| 27% | Ball possession | 73%Lead |
| 67% | Pass accuracy | 88%Lead |
| 147 | Accurate passes | 526Lead |
| 221 | Total passes | 595Lead |
Set pieces
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Pisa | Statistic | Como |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Corner kicks | 5Lead |
Defensive & goalkeeping
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Pisa | Statistic | Como |
|---|---|---|
| 3Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 5Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 4 |
| 0.94 | Goals prevented | 0.94 |
Discipline
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Pisa | Statistic | Como |
|---|---|---|
| 9Lead | Fouls | 13 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 2 |