Match statistics snapshot
- Como created the clearer chances on xG (1.38 vs 1.48, Δ 0.10).
- Como fired more attempts (20 vs 8 shots).
- Como held more of the ball (69% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Torino | Statistic | Como |
|---|---|---|
| 1.38 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.48Lead |
| 3 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 5 | Shots inside the box | 13Lead |
| 3 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 6Lead |
| 2 | Shots on target | 6Lead |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 7Lead |
|---|
| 8 | Total shots | 20Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Torino | Statistic | Como |
|---|---|---|
| 31% | Ball possession | 69%Lead |
| 75% | Pass accuracy | 88%Lead |
| 212 | Accurate passes | 551Lead |
| 281 | Total passes | 626Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Torino | Statistic | Como |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Corner kicks | 3Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Torino | Statistic | Como |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Blocked shots | 8Lead |
| 6Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
| 0.09 | Goals prevented | 0.09 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Torino | Statistic | Como |
|---|---|---|
| 13 | Fouls | 12Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 3 | Yellow cards | 3 |