Match statistics snapshot
- Rosenborg created the clearer chances on xG (1.61 vs 1.19, Δ 0.42).
- Viking fired more attempts (12 vs 10 shots).
- Viking held more of the ball (57% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Rosenborg | Statistic | Viking |
|---|---|---|
| 1.61Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.19 |
| 4 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 9 | Shots inside the box | 9 |
| 4 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 6Lead |
| 3 | Shots on target | 4Lead |
|---|
| 1 | Shots outside the box | 3Lead |
|---|
| 10 | Total shots | 12Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Rosenborg | Statistic | Viking |
|---|---|---|
| 43% | Ball possession | 57%Lead |
| 75% | Pass accuracy | 80%Lead |
| 261 | Accurate passes | 380Lead |
| 350 | Total passes | 477Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Rosenborg | Statistic | Viking |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Corner kicks | 5Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Rosenborg | Statistic | Viking |
|---|---|---|
| 3Lead | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 3Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 0 |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Rosenborg | Statistic | Viking |
|---|---|---|
| 15Lead | Fouls | 16 |
| Red cards | ||
| 4 | Yellow cards | 2Lead |