Sportra logo
LiveLeaguesNewsGameplayProfile
LiveLeaguesNewsGameplayProfile
HomeLive ScoresLeaguesNewsAboutSportra IntelligenceContactPrivacyCookiesTermsDMCAAttribution

© 2026 Sportra. All rights reserved.

Built by TwinForge · TwinsLegacy

Slovan Bratislava vs Žilina Match Statistics & xG

SBSlovan BratislavaSlovan Bratislava
0 — 1FT…
ŽIŽilinaŽilina
OverviewLineupsStatisticsStandingsEventsPlayersPredictionsOdds (pre)Odds (live)FormInjuriesH2HNews

Slovan Bratislava vs Žilina match statistics

xG, possession, shots, and full match statistics for Slovan Bratislava vs Žilina in Super Liga.

Updated 2026-05-21T04:34:26.004131Z

Match statistics snapshot

  • Slovan Bratislava created the clearer chances on xG (0.90 vs 0.87, Δ 0.03).
  • Slovan Bratislava fired more attempts (14 vs 11 shots).
  • Žilina was more accurate in front of goal (27% on target vs 0%).
SBSlovan BratislavaSlovan BratislavavsŽilinaŽIŽilina

Attacking

Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.

Slovan BratislavaStatisticŽilina
0.90Lead
Expected goals (xG)Quality of chances created — not just shot count.
0.87
1Lead
OffsidesTiming of runs — high counts can mean aggressive lines.
2
8Lead
Shots inside the box
6
8Lead
Shots off target
7
0
Shots on target
3Lead
6Lead
Shots outside the box
5
14Lead
Total shotsAll attempts including blocked and off-target.
11

Possession & passing

How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.

Slovan BratislavaStatisticŽilina
59%Lead
Ball possession
41%
81%Lead
Pass accuracy
77%
394Lead
Accurate passes
258
484Lead
Total passes
336

Set pieces

Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.

Slovan BratislavaStatisticŽilina
2
Corner kicks
2

Defensive & goalkeeping

Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.

Slovan BratislavaStatisticŽilina
6Lead
Blocked shotsDefensive actions — also counts as part of attacking pressure faced.
1
2Lead
Goalkeeper saves
0
Goals preventedKeeper performance vs expected — positive is above average.

Discipline

Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.

Slovan BratislavaStatisticŽilina
18
Fouls
16Lead
Red cards
2
Yellow cards
1Lead

Tactical insights

Scouting-style duels — each row compares both teams, shows share of the pie, and who had the edge. Categories summarize who won more signals.

Slovan BratislavaŽilina
◎

Shooting efficiency

How clinical and dangerous each attack was — not just how often they shot, but where and how good those chances were.

Žilina leads this block

1Slovan Bratislava
duels won
2Žilina

Žilina leads shot quality (+23% vs Slovan Bratislava)

  1. 1

    Shot accuracy

    Share of attempts that tested the goalkeeper — accuracy vs volume.

    Slovan Bratislava0%0% share
    vs
    Žilina27%100% share

    Žilina leads (27% vs 0%).

  2. 2

    xG per shot

    Average danger per attempt. Higher means better chances, not just more shots.

    Slovan Bratislava0.06445% share
    vs
    Žilina0.07955% share

    Žilina leads shot quality (+23% vs Slovan Bratislava)

  3. 3

    Inside box ratio

    How often attacks reached the penalty area — proxy for box penetration.

    Slovan Bratislava57%51% share
    vs
    Žilina55%49% share

    Slovan Bratislava leads (57% vs 55%).

⇄

Tactical identity

Playing style signals: whether chances came from patient possession or direct vertical play.

Žilina leads this block

0Slovan Bratislava
duels won
2Žilina

Žilina leads possession efficiency (+39% vs Slovan Bratislava)

  1. 1

    xG per possession %

    Chance creation per share of the ball — separates sterile possession from threat.

    Slovan Bratislava0.01542% share
    vs
    Žilina0.02158% share

    Žilina leads possession efficiency (+39% vs Slovan Bratislava)

  2. 2

    Passes per shot

    Build-up length before shooting. Higher = more patient circulation; lower = direct vertical play.

    Slovan Bratislava3553% share
    vs
    Žilina3147% share

    Slovan Bratislava — slower buildup (more passes per shot)

↑

Pressure & control

Territorial dominance built from box presence, set pieces, and sustained threat.

Slovan Bratislava leads this block

1Slovan Bratislava
duels won
0Žilina

Slovan Bratislava leads territorial pressure (+33% vs Žilina)

  1. 1

    Attack pressure score

    Weighted territorial score: in-box shots (×2) + corners + on-target efforts + blocks forced.

    Slovan Bratislava2457% share
    vs
    Žilina1843% share

    Slovan Bratislava leads territorial pressure (+33% vs Žilina)

⛨

Defensive

How well each side limited chance quality and how demanding the keepers’ workload was.

Žilina leads this block

0Slovan Bratislava
duels won
1Žilina

Žilina — stronger shot quality allowed

  1. 1

    xGA per shot conceded

    Quality of chances allowed per opponent shot — lower means a compact, limiting defence.

    Slovan Bratislava0.07955% share
    vs
    Žilina0.06445% share

    Žilina — stronger shot quality allowed

  2. 2

    Save difficulty (xG faced ÷ saves)

    xG faced divided by saves made — higher means the keeper faced tougher stops.

    Slovan Bratislava0.4350% share
    Žilina—50% share
◈

Gameplay profile

Archetype ratings you can map to card modifiers, AI behaviour, or match narratives.

Slovan Bratislava leads this block

4Slovan Bratislava
duels won
2Žilina

Slovan Bratislava had the edge in 4 of 6 signals in this block.

  1. 1

    Aggression rating

    Fouls and cards combined — physical intensity and risk.

    Slovan Bratislava22.055% share
    vs
    Žilina18.045% share

    Slovan Bratislava leads (22.0 vs 18.0).

  2. 2

    Control rating

    Possession blended with pass accuracy — control without chaos.

    Slovan Bratislava47.860% share
    vs
    Žilina31.640% share

    Slovan Bratislava leads (47.8 vs 31.6).

  3. 3

    Siege pressure

    Corners plus in-box shots — sustained pressure around the box.

    Slovan Bratislava10.056% share
    vs
    Žilina8.044% share

    Slovan Bratislava leads (10.0 vs 8.0).

  4. 4

    Clinical index (xG/shot)

    xG per shot — finishing threat independent of volume.

    Slovan Bratislava0.06445% share
    vs
    Žilina0.07955% share

    Žilina leads (0.079 vs 0.064).

  5. 5

    Defensive compactness

    Inverse of xGA per shot faced — higher means opponents got worse chances.

    Slovan Bratislava92.150% share
    vs
    Žilina93.650% share

    Žilina leads (93.6 vs 92.1).

  6. 6

    Chaos factor

    Fouls, cards, and blocks — how stop-start and disruptive the match felt.

    Slovan Bratislava26.059% share
    vs
    Žilina18.041% share

    Slovan Bratislava leads (26.0 vs 18.0).