Match statistics snapshot
- Clermont Foot fired more attempts (15 vs 10 shots).
- Clermont Foot was more accurate in front of goal (40% on target vs 30%).
- Quevilly held more of the ball (53% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Quevilly | Statistic | Clermont Foot |
|---|---|---|
| 1Lead | Offsides | 3 |
| 6 | Shots inside the box | 9Lead |
| 3 | Shots off target | 7Lead |
| Shots on target |
|---|
| 6Lead |
| 4 | Shots outside the box | 6Lead |
|---|
| 10 | Total shots | 15Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Quevilly | Statistic | Clermont Foot |
|---|---|---|
| 53%Lead | Ball possession | 47% |
| 85%Lead | Pass accuracy | 82% |
| 418Lead | Accurate passes | 345 |
| 491Lead | Total passes | 419 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Quevilly | Statistic | Clermont Foot |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | Corner kicks | 8Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Quevilly | Statistic | Clermont Foot |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 4Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Quevilly | Statistic | Clermont Foot |
|---|---|---|
| 12Lead | Fouls | 13 |
| 0 | Red cards | 0 |
| 2 | Yellow cards | 2 |