Match statistics snapshot
- Tigres UANL created the clearer chances on xG (2.88 vs 0.91, Δ 1.97).
- Tigres UANL fired more attempts (32 vs 6 shots).
- U.N.A.M.
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Tigres Uanl | Statistic | U.n.a.m. - Pumas |
|---|---|---|
| 2.88Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.91 |
| 2 | Offsides | 2 |
| 24Lead | Shots inside the box | 4 |
| 11Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 1 |
| 7Lead | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 8Lead | Shots outside the box | 2 |
|---|
| 32Lead | Total shots | 6 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Tigres Uanl | Statistic | U.n.a.m. - Pumas |
|---|---|---|
| 68%Lead | Ball possession | 32% |
| 89%Lead | Pass accuracy | 71% |
| 509Lead | Accurate passes | 201 |
| 573Lead | Total passes | 282 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Tigres Uanl | Statistic | U.n.a.m. - Pumas |
|---|---|---|
| 18Lead | Corner kicks | 2 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Tigres Uanl | Statistic | U.n.a.m. - Pumas |
|---|---|---|
| 14Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 3 | Goalkeeper saves | 6Lead |
| Goals prevented |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Tigres Uanl | Statistic | U.n.a.m. - Pumas |
|---|---|---|
| 10Lead | Fouls | 19 |
| 0Lead | Red cards | 1 |
| 3Lead | Yellow cards | 6 |
Statistics is not available yet.