Match statistics snapshot
- Amazulu created the clearer chances on xG (0.54 vs 1.11, Δ 0.57).
- Amazulu fired more attempts (8 vs 4 shots).
- Amazulu was more accurate in front of goal (38% on target vs 25%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Stellenbosch | Statistic | Amazulu |
|---|---|---|
| 0.54 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.11Lead |
| 0Lead | Offsides | 5 |
| 2 | Shots inside the box | 4Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 5Lead |
| 1 | Shots on target | 3Lead |
|---|
| 2 | Shots outside the box | 4Lead |
|---|
| 4 | Total shots | 8Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Stellenbosch | Statistic | Amazulu |
|---|---|---|
| 48% | Ball possession | 52%Lead |
| 65% | Pass accuracy | 69%Lead |
| 242 | Accurate passes | 293Lead |
| 375 | Total passes | 423Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Stellenbosch | Statistic | Amazulu |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Corner kicks | 5Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Stellenbosch | Statistic | Amazulu |
|---|---|---|
| 1Lead | Blocked shots | 0 |
| 2Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
| 0.42 | Goals prevented | 0.42 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Stellenbosch | Statistic | Amazulu |
|---|---|---|
| 14Lead | Fouls | 19 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2Lead | Yellow cards | 4 |
Statistics is not available yet.