Match statistics snapshot
- Viking created the clearer chances on xG (3.41 vs 2.25, Δ 1.16).
- Viking fired more attempts (30 vs 8 shots).
- Rosenborg was more accurate in front of goal (63% on target vs 20%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Viking | Statistic | Rosenborg |
|---|---|---|
| 3.41Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 2.25 |
| 1Lead | Offsides | 2 |
| 19Lead | Shots inside the box | 7 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 1 |
| 6Lead | Shots on target | 5 |
|---|
| 11Lead | Shots outside the box | 1 |
|---|
| 30Lead | Total shots | 8 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Viking | Statistic | Rosenborg |
|---|---|---|
| 71%Lead | Ball possession | 29% |
| 88%Lead | Pass accuracy | 68% |
| 488Lead | Accurate passes | 152 |
| 553Lead | Total passes | 223 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Viking | Statistic | Rosenborg |
|---|---|---|
| 11Lead | Corner kicks | 3 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Viking | Statistic | Rosenborg |
|---|---|---|
| 16Lead | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 0 | Goalkeeper saves | 5Lead |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Viking | Statistic | Rosenborg |
|---|---|---|
| 8 | Fouls | 7Lead |
| 0Lead | Red cards | 1 |
| 5 | Yellow cards | 4Lead |