Match statistics snapshot
- Wycombe created the clearer chances on xG (0.87 vs 2.80, Δ 1.93).
- Wycombe fired more attempts (24 vs 7 shots).
- Reading was more accurate in front of goal (57% on target vs 42%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Reading | Statistic | Wycombe |
|---|---|---|
| 0.87 | Expected goals (xG) | 2.80Lead |
| 1 | Offsides | 1 |
| 7 | Shots inside the box | 20Lead |
| 2 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 5Lead |
| 4 | Shots on target | 10Lead |
|---|
| 0 | Shots outside the box | 4Lead |
|---|
| 7 | Total shots | 24Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Reading | Statistic | Wycombe |
|---|---|---|
| 34% | Ball possession | 66%Lead |
| 63% | Pass accuracy | 80%Lead |
| 159 | Accurate passes | 368Lead |
| 253 | Total passes | 458Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Reading | Statistic | Wycombe |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Corner kicks | 8Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Reading | Statistic | Wycombe |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blocked shots | 9Lead |
| 8Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Reading | Statistic | Wycombe |
|---|---|---|
| 15 | Fouls | 9Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 3 | Yellow cards | 2Lead |