Match statistics snapshot
- Shelbourne fired more attempts (28 vs 7 shots).
- Shelbourne was more accurate in front of goal (29% on target vs 14%).
- Shelbourne held more of the ball (68% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Sligo Rovers |
|---|---|---|
| Expected goals (xG) | ||
| 2 | Offsides | 2 |
| 17Lead | Shots inside the box | 6 |
| 11Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3 |
| 8Lead | Shots on target | 1 |
|---|
| 11Lead | Shots outside the box | 1 |
|---|
| 28Lead | Total shots | 7 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Sligo Rovers |
|---|---|---|
| 68%Lead | Ball possession | 32% |
| 84%Lead | Pass accuracy | 63% |
| 515Lead | Accurate passes | 178 |
| 611Lead | Total passes | 281 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Sligo Rovers |
|---|---|---|
| 15Lead | Corner kicks | 3 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Sligo Rovers |
|---|---|---|
| 9Lead | Blocked shots | 3 |
| 1 | Goalkeeper saves | 8Lead |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Sligo Rovers |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | Fouls | 3Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 1 | Yellow cards | 1 |
Statistics is not available yet.