Match statistics snapshot
- SHANGHAI SIPG created the clearer chances on xG (1.16 vs 2.82, Δ 1.66).
- SHANGHAI SIPG fired more attempts (22 vs 8 shots).
- Shenzhen Ruby FC was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 36%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Shenzhen Ruby Fc | Statistic | Shanghai Sipg |
|---|---|---|
| 1.16 | Expected goals (xG) | 2.82Lead |
| 0Lead | Offsides | 1 |
| 4 | Shots inside the box | 17Lead |
| 2 | Shots off target | 13Lead |
|---|
| 4 | Shots on target | 8Lead |
|---|
| 4 | Shots outside the box | 5Lead |
|---|
| 8 | Total shots | 22Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Shenzhen Ruby Fc | Statistic | Shanghai Sipg |
|---|---|---|
| 42% | Ball possession | 58%Lead |
| 80% | Pass accuracy | 87%Lead |
| 309 | Accurate passes | 436Lead |
| 385 | Total passes | 503Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Shenzhen Ruby Fc | Statistic | Shanghai Sipg |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Corner kicks | 8Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Shenzhen Ruby Fc | Statistic | Shanghai Sipg |
|---|---|---|
| 2Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 5Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Shenzhen Ruby Fc | Statistic | Shanghai Sipg |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Fouls | 9 |
| Red cards | ||
| Yellow cards |
Statistics is not available yet.