Match statistics snapshot
- Shelbourne fired more attempts (29 vs 12 shots).
- Sligo Rovers was more accurate in front of goal (33% on target vs 21%).
- Shelbourne held more of the ball (53% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Sligo Rovers |
|---|---|---|
| Expected goals (xG) | ||
| 2 | Offsides | 0Lead |
| 14Lead | Shots inside the box | 8 |
| 14 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3 |
| 6Lead | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 15Lead | Shots outside the box | 4 |
|---|
| 29Lead | Total shots | 12 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Sligo Rovers |
|---|---|---|
| 53%Lead | Ball possession | 47% |
| 83%Lead | Pass accuracy | 78% |
| 399Lead | Accurate passes | 335 |
| 479Lead | Total passes | 432 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Sligo Rovers |
|---|---|---|
| 8 | Corner kicks | 9Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Sligo Rovers |
|---|---|---|
| 9Lead | Blocked shots | 5 |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 3Lead |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Sligo Rovers |
|---|---|---|
| 9 | Fouls | 9 |
| Red cards | ||
| 3 | Yellow cards | 3 |