Match statistics snapshot
- Rosenborg created the clearer chances on xG (0.92 vs 0.70, Δ 0.22).
- Ham-Kam was more accurate in front of goal (18% on target vs 9%).
- Rosenborg held more of the ball (64% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Rosenborg | Statistic | Ham-kam |
|---|---|---|
| 0.92Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.70 |
| 2Lead | Offsides | 4 |
| 5 | Shots inside the box | 8Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4 |
| 1 | Shots on target | 2Lead |
|---|
| 6Lead | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 11 | Total shots | 11 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Rosenborg | Statistic | Ham-kam |
|---|---|---|
| 64%Lead | Ball possession | 36% |
| 81%Lead | Pass accuracy | 64% |
| 408Lead | Accurate passes | 179 |
| 506Lead | Total passes | 280 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Rosenborg | Statistic | Ham-kam |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Corner kicks | 6Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Rosenborg | Statistic | Ham-kam |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Blocked shots | 5Lead |
| 2Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 0 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Rosenborg | Statistic | Ham-kam |
|---|---|---|
| 13 | Fouls | 13 |
| 0Lead | Red cards | 1 |
| 2Lead | Yellow cards | 4 |