Match statistics snapshot
- Shelbourne fired more attempts (13 vs 10 shots).
- Shelbourne was more accurate in front of goal (38% on target vs 30%).
- Shelbourne held more of the ball (63% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Waterford |
|---|---|---|
| Expected goals (xG) | ||
| 5 | Offsides | 2Lead |
| 11Lead | Shots inside the box | 7 |
| 6 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3 |
| 5Lead | Shots on target | 3 |
|---|
| 2 | Shots outside the box | 3Lead |
|---|
| 13Lead | Total shots | 10 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Waterford |
|---|---|---|
| 63%Lead | Ball possession | 37% |
| 80%Lead | Pass accuracy | 60% |
| 409Lead | Accurate passes | 177 |
| 510Lead | Total passes | 293 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Waterford |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Corner kicks | 4Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Waterford |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Blocked shots | 4Lead |
| 3 | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Shelbourne | Statistic | Waterford |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Fouls | 15 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2Lead | Yellow cards | 4 |