Match statistics snapshot
- Sunderland created the clearer chances on xG (0.90 vs 1.91, Δ 1.01).
- Sunderland fired more attempts (17 vs 9 shots).
- Sunderland was more accurate in front of goal (35% on target vs 11%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Port Vale | Statistic | Sunderland |
|---|---|---|
0.90 | Expected goals (xG)Quality of chances created — not just shot count. | 1.91Lead |
0Lead | OffsidesTiming of runs — high counts can mean aggressive lines. | 2 |
6 | Shots inside the box | 14Lead |
4 | Shots off target | 10Lead |
1 | Shots on target | 6Lead |
3 | Shots outside the box | 3 |
9 | Total shotsAll attempts including blocked and off-target. | 17Lead |
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Port Vale | Statistic | Sunderland |
|---|---|---|
31% | Ball possession | 69%Lead |
58% | Pass accuracy | 80%Lead |
121 | Accurate passes | 362Lead |
207 | Total passes | 452Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Port Vale | Statistic | Sunderland |
|---|---|---|
5 | Corner kicks | 9Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Port Vale | Statistic | Sunderland |
|---|---|---|
4Lead | Blocked shotsDefensive actions — also counts as part of attacking pressure faced. | 1 |
5Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 0 |
| Goals preventedKeeper performance vs expected — positive is above average. |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Port Vale | Statistic | Sunderland |
|---|---|---|
12 | Fouls | 10Lead |
| Red cards | ||
2 | Yellow cards | 1Lead |
Scouting-style duels — each row compares both teams, shows share of the pie, and who had the edge. Categories summarize who won more signals.
How clinical and dangerous each attack was — not just how often they shot, but where and how good those chances were.
Sunderland leads this block
Sunderland leads shot accuracy (+218% vs Port Vale)
Sunderland leads shot accuracy (+218% vs Port Vale)
Sunderland leads (0.112 vs 0.100).
Sunderland leads box penetration (+24% vs Port Vale)
Playing style signals: whether chances came from patient possession or direct vertical play.
Port Vale leads this block
Sunderland — slower buildup (more passes per shot)
Port Vale leads (0.029 vs 0.028).
Sunderland — slower buildup (more passes per shot)
Territorial dominance built from box presence, set pieces, and sustained threat.
Sunderland leads this block
Sunderland leads territorial pressure (+100% vs Port Vale)
Sunderland leads territorial pressure (+100% vs Port Vale)
How well each side limited chance quality and how demanding the keepers’ workload was.
Sunderland leads this block
Sunderland — stronger shot quality allowed
Sunderland — stronger shot quality allowed
Archetype ratings you can map to card modifiers, AI behaviour, or match narratives.
Sunderland leads this block
Sunderland had the edge in 4 of 6 signals in this block.
Port Vale leads (16.0 vs 12.0).
Sunderland leads (55.2 vs 18.0).
Sunderland leads (23.0 vs 11.0).
Sunderland leads (0.112 vs 0.100).
Sunderland leads (90.0 vs 88.8).
Port Vale leads (18.0 vs 12.0).